20% scale
right one looks better
yep kys

im old they both look the same now have you tried drinkiungto get that blurred cell shader look?

>>103931014
since you'll be seeing it the size of the catalogs thumbnail, they are pretty much identical. Unless you game with your face directly in the screen.

>>103931014
Zoomed in comparison is the most retarded kind of comparison.
Those sprite were never intended to be zoomed in and Square Enix tested all their SNES/PS1 on very high TVL count BVM TV and high resolution CRT monitor (those sprites look like the right side on those CRT)

i’m sorry but come on. No need to shill the LCD image when you can literally see the curvature of her ass on the CRT. LOOK AT IT. There is somehow more detail.

>inb4 muh it’s quite simple actually it’s because the CRT blah blah blah

it simply looks better in this example

>>103931014
Yes. But you can also pay like $800 for a retrotink 4k and get pretty close.

context matters
>retro games
SD CRT TV/BVM
>PC gaming, motion heavy
HD CRT Monitor @ 1600x1200
>PC gaming, no motion, eg.strategy, 16:9 priority. Productivity, modelling, text etc.
HD OLED/LCD Monitor

>>103932894
>playing doom at 1600x1200 on a low pitch CRT
disgusting

>>103933002
There are no pixels. Good CRT monitors can go higher than 1600x1200 but it doesn't make enough of a difference to matter.

>>103933048
>n-no, it's phosphors, that isn't the same as pixels...
Shut up with this shit nobody cares and the distinction doesn't matter. You know what they meant.

>>103931105
retarded post by a retarded mongoloid
shut the fuck up and kill yourself retard

>>103933048
>There are no pixels.
Obviously there are on the computer side, otherwise 1600x1200 would be meaningless to mention.

>>103933048
>Good CRT monitors can go higher than 1600x1200 but it doesn't make enough of a difference to matter.
Entirely depends on pitch and TVL.

>>103931014
right looks much better though?

>>103931014
Couldn't we just compress the pixels in horizontally and add a filter so the pixels behave in the same monochromatic way?

>>103931105
>(those sprites look like the right side on those CRT)
No they don't. You also don't know why the left side looks the way it does in the first place.

>>103933667
Left look like this because it's a low TVL consumer TV (no visible horizontal scanline).
Those sprite looked like right (but with horizontal scanline) on the +1000 lines BVM used by squaresoft

>>103931035
>>103931042
>>103931056
>>103933281
>>103933394
right one is clearly pooping

>use CRT filter
Thanks for playing OP

>>103931014
Those sprites were designed around how they come out on CRT. That's all.
Just use an upscaler that'll emulate the effect.

>>103933373
dot pitch doesn't matter as much as you think, the mask limits color resolution, but since dots can be partially illuminated, the maximum detail still goes up(luminance). the effect is like an analog version of chroma subsampling.

>>103931105
>>103933932
Based fact checker, I kneel

They both look like shit

>>103931014
CRT are the wise coomer's choice

>>103931105
>>103933932
This person has never seen a CRT in real life.

>>103931014
right. any day.
t. actually used CRT monitor until college (they were shit)

oh great, another thread full of people who either used the shittiest over used CRT's or never looked at one ever because they were already gone while they were in diapers.

>>103934836
CRT monitors often had far superior color accuracy than LCDs did the longest time. It took until like 2010 before *affordable* LCDs could compare.

>>103931014
>This tired thread again
You can emulate the CRT look with shaders

>>103933373
>>103934161
No color CRT monitor can even resolve 1080p

When it comes to emulating CRTs most issues are solved(pic related one of the Cyberlab presets) the only thing left is the motion
You can do a good job with 1000hz OLED but 15khz refresh rate OLED or MicroLED or QDEL would be required to simulate how the electron gun paint the image line by line for all 60 frames of 320x240ish resolution

If you want to go beyond that and go to the pixel level then it would be 76800(320x240) x 60fps = 4608000hz
Although going that far isn't needed because not even CRTs do that

>>103931105
WTF IS GOING ON HERE

Why not just apply post processing to old games to make them look like the left? Obviously this is workable.

>>103936770
Why make a useless post like this?
1000hz OLED is within reach.

>>103936798
That is already done(works better in OLED because of perfect contrast though)
See pic in >>103936707

OP just loves spamming low-effort threads

4K > CRTroon

>>103933932
>>103931105
So.. (You) honestly think, that somehow by pure coincidence, they designed this artwork on expensive PVM/BVM monitors, without any consideration to what the average player would experience, and it was just a "happy accident" that they ended up looking *better* on consumer TVs than the expensive ones? Why? Because nobody back then knew that expensive monitors looked different than regular ones? It took 35 years for anon to do his own research and realize they wrong the whole time? Or did they expect kids to have $10,000 production monitors in their living rooms? Maybe they just didn't have access to cheap TVs in Japan? Or maybe you were there and they just forgot to check? Or what? 0/10 bait go fuck yourself.

>>103931105
Square like everyone else was making the game for standard consumer CRTs which most of them used RF or Composite cables
The BVMs they used were for editing dumbass

>>103933932
High TVL/Fine pitch looks nasty for 240p games
You get memelines and jaggies

FF7 especially looks rough on high line CRTs
That shit was made to be played on a shit-tier consumer CRT with RF or Composite

Top
Typical 300-350tvl 15 inch consumer set using Component

Bottom
500 line PVM using RGB

If you wanna fap to ass, there's better higher quality porn.

>>103936786
bad deinterlace?

>>103931105
It has nothing to do with resolution. It's the way the different technologies render picture. CRT would slightly blend the image together and developers would make use of this.

>>103933932
that's not what TVL refers to. TVL is a measure of horizontal resolution, not horizontal line count
it's measured by drawing black and white stripes vertically and the highest number of them which can be individually resolved determines the TVL for the system being measured

>>103937008
There was way too many kind of TV, cable,console revision,etc to considerate an average player experience.
For example NES/Famicon games color palette varies depending of the display decoder (Super Mario Bros's sky can apparear blue on some display and purple on other)

90s game dev didn't used low resolution sprite because of CRT...but because they had to deal with hardware and size limitation.
The fact that CRT look "better" when you stick your head on the screen is a pure coincidence because those element weren't supposed to be zoomed.

>>103937030
>CRTs which most of them used RF or Composite cables
Only in muttrica.
RGB SCART/JP21 was standard in europe and japan.

>>103937518
TVL= Television line.

>blur = good
dumb CRTranny

>>103937391
>It has nothing to do with resolution.
It does.
All low dpi color screen do that when you look at it very closely.
Pic related was taken from a Game & Watch: Super Mario Bros. which has a 320x240 LCD screen. (the GBA,DS and 3DS screen also do that)

>>103937850
No, it looks more natural because that's how tvs were reviewed.

You can play modern games on a crt, and it's lovely, give it a go! Especially DARK scenes. Others can be sort of odd.

Another thing is you don't have to like it to be able to tell it looks different.

This btw also relates to early dslrs. The means of judging, back then, was prints. Because resolution couldn't keep up, they were better at color.

>>103937850
>Only in muttrica.
>RGB SCART/JP21 was standard in europe and japan.
This isn't true, nobody in Japan ever owned a JP21 connector for anything, and there was no cable for stuff like the SNES.

By the way, if you actually lived through that era, you'd know that people just used whatever cable came out of the box.

>>103938056
guitars:tube amplifies::video::crt

Both are tubes, and both basically introduce distortion. But somehow it's NICE distortion.

So just do what's done in every DAW with music, fake it. There are tons of vst that do "tube" effects. And, they work pretty well.

>>103937850
>TVL= Television line.
i'm aware, and i agree it's easily confused with horizontal line count, but that's still not what it means
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_lines

>>103938106
>amplifies
*amplifiers

>>103938056
No, retard, you don't even know what that guy is talking about. CRTs render through sub pixel elements, you can clearly see that happening on the girl's ass in that picture, and it's clearly not happening in the pic you just posted.

>>103931014
>>103932894
>blurs the image to 40% precision of original
I had to use that trash 20 years of my life and never again. Only brain dead zoomers love that trash. Cheapest worst LCD from 2007 is better than any $3000 studio Trinitron.

>>103940130
>Cheapest worst LCD from 2007 is better than any $3000 studio Trinitron.
at what? excel?

>>103934031
That only means that LCD is better.

>>103940529
you either haven't seen a cheap lcd from 2007, or you haven't seen a crt, or both

>>103940547
I have 20 years of CRT use and 18 years of LCD use. I have seen them all. You are a delusional zoomer child.

>>103940529
>>103940547
pic related, basic 1996 crt i picked up last year being tested using a 2009 thinkpad with an equally basic lcd
idk about you, but i know what i would call a better static picture

>>103940529
This is shocking, like, I haven't seen this kind of AI generated post seriously attempted on 4chan before. He just asked AI for differences between the two technologies and scripted the output to meme arrows.

>>103940529
ChatGPT no one invited *you* into this conversation.

>>103933135
Damn I hate Mac UI. Disgusting.

>>103933162
Lol. Imagine relying on GPU optimization/ 'AI' doing what CRT did naturally. Lmao even.

>>103934796
This. Its mych easier on the eyes. I hated losing my old TV. The new shit PISSES ME OFF

>>103934796
I do own multiple CRT, just cope harder

>>103938127
Both look the same from the thumbnail which is the size you'll be seeing it when you play FFVI.

I don't think that 90s put that much effort into it considering that 99.9% of SNES game didn't even took account of the SNES 8:7->4:3 aspect ratio conversion.

>>103938092
European SNES, Megadrive and Saturn were bundled with a RGB SCART (at least were I live)


>>103940130
CRT zoomers also don't know the real reason why people stopped using CRT monitor.
CRT tend to cause severe eyestrains especially at low refresh rate (60-70hz) and interlaced flickers tend to worsen it. (a FW900 that run at interlaced 4k is almost unusable at that resolution because of that)

>>103941456
>CRT tend to cause severe eyestrains especially at low refresh rate
The real reason is because it is bulky and heavy. LEDeeznutz causes brain strain because of unnatural sharpness and reckless "optimization" coupled with mid-frame flicker/ contrast. And now AI BULLSHIT

>>103941456
Nah borth don't look the same. I dunno if I am the only person here who actually grew up playing a super Nintendo, but, I can deff tell the

>>103942903
oh shit is this now a candlejack thr

>>103931014
she was literally created for the bcc (big crt cock)
led virgins get filtered

>>103942968
Who tf is candle ja....

Zoomers are just obsessed with CRTs because they didn't grow up with them

>thinly veiled /v/ thread
Hyper gay.

>>103931014
just look at lcd with your eyes crossed
problem solved

>>103931014
oled with proper scanlines beats both. i don't want an oled tho. because it's expensive and burns in.

playing retro games is cringe, stop trying to relive your childhood faggot and grow up

>>103945987
My childhood was the Atari 2600. I'm playing games much later than that.

Just add a filter

I can't wait for you retarded zoomer fucks to get drafted. There is literally no hope for you.

>>103931014
ok now look at something on both which isn't shitty sprites from ancient games. video in high definition sure does look good with all those pixels. CRTs are fucking trash why do you make these threads is it just to trick anons into buying your warehouse full of ewaste or what

>>103945987
Retro games are just better than modern shit. It has nothing to do with childhood you nig.

>>103945969
if i can't have scanlines i'd rather play with bilinear filter and big pixuls.
i don't get the appeal of modern indie games looking even more pixelated than the pic on the left. like if it ever looked blocky on old screens or like if we liked pixels(we didn't). i remember when texture filtering was shown in magazines i was happy that this shit from early 3D was over.

>>103941456
>Both look the same from the thumbnail which is the size you'll be seeing it when you play FFVI.
No they don't, ahahaha

>>103943356
its called the squint filter

>>103931014
LCDs werent adopted becausse they were actually better than CRTs, they were just more convenient.

>>103931014
Okay now tell us what native resolution the LCD is

>>103947174
hmm

>>103931014
it's just blurred image on a grid

>>103949189
mmm butt

>>103931014
CRTs never looked like that when you zoomed in, you retarded shitnigger. The individual R, G and B elements were visible, and the colors weren't mixed between them.

>>103931014
>>103931105
>>103932894
>>103933135
>>103933932
Meanwhile I remember my games looking like ntsc blurry shit

>>103949372
VGH SOVL

>>103949189
You aren't serious are you? Can you not see that the left one is clearer than the middle?

>>103950260
Retards think CRT is just blur.

>>103945969
zero tolerance bros... we can't stop winning

>>103931014
lcd has rgb subpixels too
this image is a BS lie

>>103949372
it's missing the most important part

>>103951487
That actually looks pretty good.

>>103951969
AE isn't exactly a real-time shader.

>>103931014
Yeah, now look at your thumbnail, dumbass. That's about how it will look on your screen. Fucking dipshit.

>>103945987
>embracing nu-shit
enjoy concorde

>>103945969
You're a victim of your own stupidity.

>>103952068
>I'm an impossibly dumb fuck, I need to wear a helmet when I go outside.
Shut the fuck up.

>>103952149
I'm sorry you can't afford a crt

>the art was designed for crts
this is about as stupid as saying bananas are proof of god. not only that, crts aren't a uniform technology, they all behaved and looked different.

>>103952140
>Even in the thumbnail the picture on the right still looks better
KEK dumbass

Just buy an 8K TV and use a filter bro, it's fine.

I play my PC games on a 25 year old 1024x768 dell I got from a thrift store for $10. I'd love a high quality one but I'm not spending $hundreds/thousands on some questionable old stock that requires extreme self-maintenance.
Sell me a brand new CRT with a warranty and I'll drop a few hundred on it easy.

>>103952166
I'm sorry you're fat and grew up without a father figure.

>>103952329
>frog spammer foaming at the mouth for attention
You hate to see it.

>>103952587
actually I had 2 dads

checkm8

>>103952592
>gay retard keeps being retarded and gay
It is what it is, folks.

>>103931035
i bet you use aliased fonts on your computer faggot

hopefully picking up a Dell D1528-LS tomorrow for $100, is it decent?

>>103952243
I tested it on a real CRT and it doesn't blend.
But at a normal viewing distance your eyes will blend it for you.

>>103934031
No u.

>>103931014
It's sad that developers no longer have limitations to overcome. In the early days everything was slow or sucked so they developed so many tricks to improve performance, enhance fidelity, and save space doing it. I always find those little stories interesting.

>>103931014

you are stating a preference for viewing content on a CRT screen, but editing and creating content is far preferable on an OLED or LCD screen where you can see each pixel, unimpeded by analog noise.

>>103953225
Anon, you don't need to lie. We all know you like grapes.

I think what confuses a lot of /g/ zoomies here is that they don't know just how radically different CRTs could be. A lot more variation existed among CRT technology than there is in LCD technology. Everything from the whiny shitty blurry stereotypical CRT TV to silent 2048x1536p+ flat PC CRTs with picture quality rivaling modern OLEDs existed.

>>103937030
Common CRT + Composite was ALWAYS meant to be used. That was the standard. With sharp professional CRTs, Svideo, Scart, RGB and Component you lose the smoothness of Composite.

No Sonic waterfall transparency, no Silent Hill film grain (only a ugly white checkered pattern that shows the dithering wher pixels should blur together), no beautiful FF IX smooth textboxes and backgrounds, the list goes on.

And there were those of us, like me, who saying this ever since pvmemes and rgb became a meme in 2010 or so. It's just people justifying spending $3000 on a trinitranny pvmeme when a free 32" CRT with a composite cable would have done the job proper and better.

>>103940529
can you fucking retarded zoomie contrarians stop commenting on tech you've never used? the average TN panel in 2007 was fucking dogshit, never mind cheaper models
>sharper images without distortion
>smaller, lighter
>no burn in
these were literally the only selling points of LCDs in 2007
>less flicker
only because early LCDs were backlit with CCFLs, as soon as we got LED backlighting the 50hz flicker returned on cheaper models
>muh colours, contrast, black levels
were worse than CRTs. LED backlighting and later IPS panels improved things but it wasn't until OLED that these things felt like a real improvement to CRTs
>response time, motion blur, ghosting
CRTs are still king. maybe your modern sub-1ms input latency LCD feels snappy but this is 15 years after CRTs were considered obsolete
>better viewing angles, contrast when viewed off-centre
you've literally never used a TN panel before you retarded zoomer. pic very much related. you couldn't even use a typical 12-20" TN panel without seeing colour fringing at the edges. it was far worse on laptops as you only had a few degrees of tilt before it was noticeable
>doesn't exhibit color
says it all
>can display multiple resolutions without loss of image quality
retard
>less glare
yes with modern anti-glare coatings, not in 2007
>consumes less power
this simply wasn't true in 2007. the discussion at the time, driven by regulators, was that LCDs would improve in power efficiency per square inch VS CRTs which essentially had a fixed cost per square inch. what actually happened was people bought larger LCDs which consumed more power than the CRTs they were replacing, not to mention plasma TVs. it wasn't until the mid 2010s that this argument had any merit, same for all CRT vs LCD arguments really

What's the cheapest way to watch an sd CRT connected to my PC?

>sperging about technologies older than most posters in this thread

touch grass incels

>>103955485
Either get an old CRT Emudriver compatible GPU or get a MiSTer (either the MisterPi or the QMTech variants) with an ethernet cable and use the GroovyMister core. Note that, while it's very usable as is, updates to the core have stalled since the creator/maintainer died.

>>103954578
Those high quality ones were just as if not more expensive than an OLED thoughbeit.

>>103952140
tech illiterate zoomers will be the demise of the west.

>>103953798
CRT blending isn't enough to really blend those vertical line into an uniform waterfall. (you probably need something as awful as RF to achieve that)

CRT gives me headaches, this thread giving me headaches.

>>103954633
>pvmemes and rgb became a meme in 2010
It was always popular, especially in europe. All european TV has a SCART input because of some french laws that were abrogated in 2015.
Almost everything was bundled with a RGB SCART cable (except the PSX/N64/NGC/PS2/Xbox)...even VCRs (which was overkill).

Murican discovered it in the 2010s because of their TV were stuck with composite or RF input.

>>103951487
A bit too wavy for VHS. It's not film.

>>103957582
Should read "surpassing modern OLEDs"

>>103952516
1024x768 is a really comfy resolution for old content. I wish I didn't sold my olds 4:3 LCD monitor.

>>103952243
You can say that about PC98 game considering that almost all of them used a shitton of ditherings, although dithering doesn't get blended by +31khz CRT VGA monitor...especially at 640x400p which is the most common resolution used by PC98 games.

>>103933135
LMAO CRT SISTERS, OUR RESPONSE?

>>103958110
I forgot to add an image.

>When it comes to emulating CRTs most issues are solved(pic related one of the Cyberlab presets) the only thing left is the motion

It has been solved:
https://blurbusters.com/crt-simulation-in-a-gpu-shader-looks-better-than-bfi/

>>103958127
pantsu

>>103958110
>1024x768
Gods resolution

>>103957582
>>103958109
Yep

>>103956148
Thanks anon

what retrotink 4k filters do i use

If the image was supposed to look deformed like on CRT, modern games with throwbacks to old games with pixel art wouldn't use pixel art. And no I'm not talking about indieshit, I'm talking about when they make a new Fire Emblem or Mario game and the people who were responsible for the old games that were pixelated on the SNES or whatever oversee them. These often have crisp pixelart in some places as a throwback to the originals instead of a CRT-like image. This is the final and irrefutable proof that crisp pixelart was the authors' intention.
Also, CRT image is an alias of the crisp LCD image. LCD -> CRT reconstruction is one way, you can't turn CRT-like image to crisp pixels because information is lost. Therefore crisp pixels are the original non-aliased image.
So arguments for crisp pixels is author's intent and signal theory. The arguments for CRT is "uhhhh it looks smoother and nostalgia".

>>103958582
Good thing the OLED on the right runs at 240Hz and not 60Hz you disingenuous fucking faggot.

>>103958886
1) Most content is 60hz
2) 240hz OLEDs are still blurry as shit
3) Even 120hz BFI doesn't save you

>>103949372
>Gimp
not gonna watch that

>>103931014
Only for old 240p / 480i games. An appropriate CRT is indeed the best for those. Beyond that not really. I mean PC CRT monitors still have the impeccable motion quality typical of the technology itself but beyond that they have way too many disadvantages compared to modern monitors. CRTs are only really good for old stuff that doesn't work in modern resolutions.

>>103938092
>This isn't true, nobody in Japan ever owned a JP21 connector for anything, and there was no cable for stuff like the SNES.
lmao

>>103959652
CRT monitors also have inherent AA and different blacks/contrast/saturation/etc. Modern games can look very VERY good on even a cheap CRT, the main thing holding it back being resolution and

>>103957401
Euros don't cling to 50hz out of le nostalgia, unlike Americans with their dogshit image quality.

>>103958901
A 240hz lcd still helps to deblur a 60fps output

>>103931035
No it doesn't. You wrote that just to be a contrarian.

>>103960004
No it does not. 60fps content on a 240hz panel looks the same as it does on 60hz.
And no, I don't care about the barely marginal improvement in trailing caused by better timed overdrive, your picture is still several orders of magnitude blurrier than on a CRT.

>>103960027
See >>103958127


>>103959942
Muttricans still pretend that their dogshits composite/RF only TVs was the way to go.

>>103938092
>This isn't true, nobody in Japan ever owned a JP21 connector for anything, and there was no cable for stuff like the SNES.
>Me being a 4 year old stuck in my diapers in 1992 means there were no videophiles, hobbyists and enthusiasts let alone people with better sets than the lowest range RCA
Fuck off with this shit.

>>103960092
>See 103958127
Oh this software shit again. You do understand that you will only ever reach 240hz of clarity using this?
And if you try to do _software_ BFI on an LCD, your contrast ratio is proportionally cut. 240hz LCD panel displaying 60hz using software bfi will have your contrast ratio dropped to 250:1, assuming 1000:1 panel.

Also, LCDs such as XG2431 have for a long time had decent hardware strobing implementations. This meme software BFI is in every way inferior to them.

People need to understand that motion clarity of CRT is night and day compared to the basic function of any flat panel. It's not something you can fake away. For me it was an equivalent jump in improvement of going from playing 30hz games to 120hz. Its significant. Problem is nobody can get one of these crt monitors so I do hope they figure out how to make the shmear go away and I can toss my diamondtron.

>>103931014
>CRT > LCD
nobody cares.

>>103931014
but the left looks like shit...

>>103958901
>Most content is 60hz
Not my games.

Why do blurfags use CRTs? Plasma are also emissive displays and are superior to CRTs. All ZOH displays will have motion persistence blur. Most people don't even care about it as they value smoothness above it and CRTs have very limited refresh rate.

>>103962820
Plasma uses bitplanes, it's not proper stroboscopic.

>>103931105
Cope. Sony packed composite cables in the box. It's what everyone was using and they every dev knew it.

>>103958582
>>103958901
Why don't you guys ever post these differences in video? Our eyes don't hold objects in static view like that so this is disingenuous

>>103937850
ESL kun...

>>103953346
>I always find those little stories interesting
Do you have links?

>>103931056
you have no eyes, or only a mobile screen.
>>103931105
this is not about zooming in, retard. crt makes things a bit fuzzy. on lcd garbage you can "zoom in" with your eyes by moving them closer to the screen, revealing the dirty ugly reality of square pixels instead of perfectly rounded buttocks. crt is obviously superior.

>>103956964
>CRT blending isn't enough to really blend those vertical line into an uniform waterfall.
Except it is.

>>103931014
Console CRTfags seem to have this mistaken belief that the purpose of a monitor is to display an image in a visually appealing way, but it's not, the purpose of your monitor is to display an image as accurately as possible, the perfect display has not been mass produced yet, so high-resolution computer CRTs and OLEDs are the best for accuracy in motion, and accuracy in color respectively. CRT televisions are abysmal dogshit.

>>103931014
OLED>>>>>>everything

>>103963646
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4xgLUdQhKA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soH3wnGki0Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abMtc4SaRAg
https://youtu.be/xGluvAAE5RU?si=EgQJN7kLfD6S8wbV&t=1120
https://youtu.be/1KF_1fYT8ZA?si=sZnr2JQQylujPzyi&t=761
You'll find some way to ignore it all anyway

>>103963739
Only because you're using composite

>>103963916
Still has blur

>>103963920
Well it's an LCD trying to emulate what a CRT does, it wont be perfect.

>>103961119
>nobody cares
>191 posts and counting
:^)

>>103963852
>OLEDs are the best for accuracy in [...] color
By accuracy do you mean how the artist intended it to be seen (for drawings and animations) and as close as possible to real life (for photographs and live action video)? If so, do you know if IPS with an LED backlight would be the next best thing after OLED?

>>103963852
>>103963973
I meant the next best thing for color accuracy.

>>103963973
IPS panels have an abysmal contrast ratio, and generally glow up the picture in ways that make darker scenes look like utter dogshit. The visual experience is very inferior compared to OLED or (top-tier) CRT. It doesn't really matter what the colorimeter says, it just sucks.
But IPS is currently the display standard, you better master your content on it if you want an idea what it'll look like on the vast majority of displays people will actually be using.

>>103963903
>shaky cam video of a video
Yeah I don't actually use my screens in that way so this doesn't prove anything. I don't know what to tell you, works on my machine.

>>103964034
You literally asked for it

>>103964024
>IPS is currently the display standard
Hence it's the only one used by professionals? Despite the IPS glow (and/or backlight bleed), inconsistent brightness (being okay in the middle, but dimming towards the edges), and worse blacks, it's still the superior choice for color accuracy when compared to TN or VA?

>>103964102
Yes, among LCDs it's the least shit option

>>103963677
The story on how they fit all the art on the cartridge for chronotrigger is a good one.

>>103963739
NTA. No, it isn't.

>>103963646
that IS the result of following a moving object. that test is specifically designed so that you follow the object with a camera, to capture what it looks like when you follow it with your eye. there are also patterns next to the ufo to confirm that the camera settings are correct and giving an accurate result
there's no need for the result to be a video itself, as a scrolling static image will look the same while you're following it

>>103940840
I hate win11 and the stupid rounded corners, I have an exe file to make them square again.
Rounded corners so gay.

>>103931042
>I'm old
You're blind.

it's about motion, far more than pixelblend.

pixelblend you can emulate with shaders, crt motion clarity you can not.
just look at the 500hz+ screens at rtings. still shows blur.

>>103966216
you can kill a service to make it look like Windows 7

>>103965980
somebody stop that fast fucker!

>>103958127
>It has been solved:
>https://blurbusters.com/crt-simulation-in-a-gpu-shader-looks-better-than-bfi/
Has anyone actually tried this thing on a 240+Hz display? At 120Hz there's too much horizontal banding and dark detail smearing to be usable. Even then, it's not the solution until it's in monitors at a firmware level and source agnostic

>>103931014
bros I'm gooning again

>>103932894
>>103931014
>LCD/LED
Where's the subpixels?

>>103945969
>>103952140
zoomers are retarded

>>103963739
Because you're using RF or composite.
You will get the same result (blended waterfall) if you connect that console to a LCD TV thought composite.

>>103965927
You're sharpness is turned up too high.

>>103951487
I understand how this is visual shorthand to get across the feeling you want.
However, I grew up with VHS. They didn't have wavery image like that and you only had static lines like that on tapes that had been reused multiple times

>>103954578
>picture quality rivaling modern OLEDs existed
motion clarity is the only category where CRTs can compete with modern displays

>>103968509
Nope, it's at the lowest it can possibly be. Adding anything is basically halo city.

>>103969955
That flatscreen tech took 20 years to finally get good is itself laughable. Imagine how good tech like sed and would be today if it wasn't abandoned

Can someone can explain to a retard like me why modern tvs/monitors with millions of pixels can't properly recreate pixel art?

>>103969140
>my early 2000s VHS player and newly purchased disney movies didn't look like this
you don't say

now go back to the 80s and play a tape recorded on your home camcorder that's been recorded over a dozen times in extended mode

>>103931014
>>103933135
displayed on an LCD

>>103931014
Best argument for CT I've ever seen.

>>103937850
Retard kun...

>>103940529
You are one unbelievably retarded gorilla nigger.

>>103941456
>CRT tend to cause severe eyestrains especially at low refresh rate (60-70hz)
I wonder if I keep reading this thread will you be able to continue to one-up yourself in retarded statements.

>>103970952
That's way to sharp a picture for the lowest sharpness setting. Which tv are you using?

>>103956964
>to get the intended effect you have to use the intended connection method
Wow imagine that.

>>103958127
Jesus christ, what game?

>>103973014
この世の果てで恋を唄う少女YU-NO

>>103963903
>You'll find some way to ignore it all anyway
Prophetic.

>>103973093
>この世の果てで恋を唄う少女YU-NO
Ah, thank you. There used to be some site where you could play a ton of old VNs, particularly PC-98 games, through your browser. Any chance you know what I'm talking about?

>>103949189
TV cables only blend horizontally, not vertically. You can replicate the effect by duplicating the layer, offsetting it one pixel to the side, and reducing the opacity to 50%. No blur required.

>>103973198
?
http://tss.asenheim.org/

>>103975285
That's the one. Many thanks.

>>103971650
Kek, I remember recording copies of movies I rented from Blockbuster and they always looked even worse than
>>103951487
some kind of early DRM or something.

>>103975256
Example of this technique

>>103931184
except you're looking at it using an LCD/LED display with 16x the resolution of the original device
Who gives a shit about subpixel effects at that point?

>>103975455
only works with composite, checkerboards are easily visible with component video even on consumer sets

>>103975777
What's your point? If you don't want to see dithering and vertical lines, use composite. If you want a sharp image, use a modern display.

>>103975975
because you people keep attributing things to CRTs which are actually a result of the signal

>>103975975
Who's "you people"? I shared how to easily horizontally blend the image to get rid of dithering without a CRT. The OP is showing subpixel blending techniques that pixel artists employed on low res CRTs in the 90s, but I'm not OP. I was demonstrating something different. Hope you have a wonderful rest of your day, anon.

>>103931014
Just use a shader

>>103976060
Not even remotely the same experience

Which one?

>>103931014
wud fug both

>>103976900
lmao what the fuck did you do to the encode
the keyframes are all fucked up it's like my browser is using VLC

>>103976900
Charmander, dragon girls are always best. Name her Grea.
>>103977438
Works on my machine.

>>103963660
tranime loser...

>>103931014
Right is better, are you people fucking blind?

>>103977467
jump around on the seek bar

>>103977617
Not seeing it. Jumped all over the place.

>>103931014
wow that representation of a CRT on my LCD looks so much better, if only there were some way to make the LCD graphics look like the CRT ones.. oh wait there is and you're a fucking spastic cunt.

>>103977823
man it's a good thing we can upload mp4s now

>>103978088
Crazy, not seeing that at all.

>>103978088
Is this the same for you?

>>103972894
You're probably a zoomer who never used a CRT for 480i content.
Flickers tend to cause eyestrain and headache, this is the reason why it was recommended to set CRT monitor to a progressive resolution at an high enough
refresh rate (75-85hz) if you want to use it for hours.

>>103978719
not him but I'm not seeing that issue
looks like his graphics card is dying. it's a him problem, ignore

>>103978719
Not a him problem unless its purely software of the driver causing it such as AMD.

>>103931014
>applies post processing
heh, nothing personnel

Why do CRT resellers need to post here to try and trick zoomers into buying stuff that was abandoned for good reason?

>>103978042
Congratulations, you just unlocked the "mad because bad" achievement. Maybe dial it down before you pop a capacitor, my dude. If you’re so passionate about CRT accuracy, why not drop some actual tips instead of throwing tantrums?

>>103978042
well maybe if you've got a 4k 240Hz HDR OLED or something maybe you can combine crt royale with that new crt bfi shader which would require quite the impressive gpu i'd imagine
or- i could just use my crt

>>103980467
This is a bait thread to pretend CRTs are good.
Your use case is retro games I assume.
They look fine on modern displays, if you want to apply filters then fine. I wouldn’t even bother. The sharp pixels don’t bother me at all.
At best you get a nostalgia effect. I am glad I got rid of CRTs a long time ago. Enjoy your nostalgia but don’t pretend you are getting anything more than a marginal effect.

>>103978042
>>103980467
and if you're wonder why all that;
4k - to render the colour mask, this is basically a minimum but i'm being generous
240Hz - to use that new bfi shader, also a minimum
HDR - so the bfi shader doesn't make the result too dark
OLED - contrast
crt royale - simulate most of the static appearance of a crt picture
crf bfi shader - simulate the dynamic appearance of a crt picture

>>103980495
i'm not op, and i don't claim they're better at everything or in every way
but i do think they still have their advantages for now.
>Your use case is retro games I assume.
pretty much any kind of media, videos, old games, new games, etc. i don't browse the web on it, mainly because i don't want to put unnecessary hours on it when there's no benefit. lcd's are good for bright static pages of text, they're sharp, flicker-free, and use less power for their size

>>103980421
It was abandoned for economic and practicality reasons faggot anon, nothing wrong with the tech at the consumer level. Lcd has a ton of problems like blur and excessive backlighting that people just got used to over the last 20 years.

what kind of crt can i buy for 300 bux
can i get 60+ hz+
and is it true that they are higher color bit depth

>>103981241
>what kind of crt can i buy for 300 bux
really depends where you live
">60Hz" is a given. that only became the "standard" after lcd's took over. even most dos games ran at 70Hz for one example. my 1996 second monitor syncs up to 160Hz
>and is it true that they are higher color bit depth
they're an analog display device, so they don't have a fixed limit with regards to colour depth. that doesn't mean it's limitless, just that it will display anything your gpu can output. i will say though that they're certainly higher than your average lcd

>>103977467
>>103978719
When I let the video play normally it's fine but if I pause and move the seek bar around then it looks like >>103978088. I assume you're one of those guys who does his own homebrew commandline conversion with ffmpeg? Results are always random when that's the case. Use a standardized program that was made with 4chan in mind.

>>103978719
both work fine for me
>>103981502
>Use a standardized program that was made with 4chan in mind.
huh?

>>103981517
>both work fine for me
Good for you then? A question was asked and answers given.

>>103981539
well me point is that it's a (You) problem rather than a file problem

>>103981552
I'm not one of the same anons you were talking to before dipshit.

>>103981569
ok then it's a (Them) problem rather than a file problem, like my point is any different

>>103981693
i didn't make the files dipshit

>>103980421
Really makes me wonder.

>>103980421
the greater trick was convincing consumers lcd's were good enough

>>103978993
I was born in the 80's and you're a retard.