Why do standard definition DVDs look so much sharper on mac screen than CRT TV? - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 03:40 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Why do standard definition DVDs look so much sharper on mac screen than CRT TV?

I've noticed when I compare a standard definition DVD of an old cartoon (these seem to have been made via transfers from old broadcast tapes - there's dot crawl present on them indicating they came from a composite source) played at the default size (not full screen) on my mac, it looks infinitely sharper than it does played on my 13-inch CRT screen.

Is it just because the TV is 12 years old and had heavy use, or is that just how CRTs are in general? I would have expected there not to be that much of a difference in visible detail, since the source itself is 480i. I would have thought all the same detail displayed on the mac when it's not scaled should be displayed on the CRT TV. But there are character faces that we're clearly supposed to see that are just blurs.
90sTVFan is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 07:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 59
I suspect progressive scan vs. interlace scan + much higher resolution.

Floydage is offline  
post #3 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 07:45 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floydage View Post
I suspect progressive scan vs. interlace scan + much higher resolution.
Why would the higher resolution of the display matter when the content itself is only 480i, though? The TV is built to display 480i, after all. And I'd assume the computer's default size is just using as many fixed pixels as the content requires. Of course, if I view it full screen the picture softens because of scaling.
90sTVFan is online now  
post #4 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 07:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,560
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 238
Liquid crystals will always be much sharper than CRT. It's just the physics of how each one works.
Soulburner is online now  
post #5 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 08:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 59
That 13" CRT may be less than 480i, like 240i.

Is the Mac screen CRT or LCD?

Floydage is offline  
post #6 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 08:10 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floydage View Post
That 13" CRT may be less than 480i, like 240i.
I didn't know 240i TVs even existed?

Quote:
Is the Mac screen CRT or LCD?
LCD.
90sTVFan is online now  
post #7 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 08:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Yep, my '93 RCA 27" is spec'ed at 240i and it even has s-video. Pretty common for some old and/or simple sets. Don't know if some could be even lower.

Then there's the DVD output to the screen. I suspect the 13" is only composite or even lowly RF/coax whereas the Mac is the internal drive (data bus).

Floydage is offline  
post #8 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 08:47 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floydage View Post
Yep, my '93 RCA 27" is spec'ed at 240i and it even has s-video. Pretty common for some old and/or simple sets. Don't know if some could be even lower.

Then there's the DVD output to the screen. I suspect the 13" is only composite or even lowly RF/coax whereas the Mac is the internal drive (data bus).
I see no mention of the existence of 240i anywhere when Googling it. How would that even work? The old analog TV signals were 480i...how would the TV even display the picture?
90sTVFan is online now  
post #9 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 09:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 59
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php...0i&redirect=no

Notice the "Low-definition television" redirect. Maybe it was 240p, I don't have the TV's spec anymore. I did notice a few search references for trying to use old video games at 240i and I thought I've seen posts on the subject but... [used Yahoo search]

Floydage is offline  
post #10 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 09:24 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floydage View Post
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php...0i&redirect=no

Notice the "Low-definition television" redirect. Maybe it was 240p, I don't have the TV's spec anymore. I did notice a few search references for trying to use old video games at 240i and I thought I've seen posts on the subject but... [used Yahoo search]
From what I've read, 240p is what old videogames were, and they would display progressively on CRTs with every other line left blank? That seems to be why the retro gamers love CRTs - they want those blank lines in between that result from displaying 240p on a 480i display.

I checked the back of this TV and it only mentions it's 60Hz.

I just can't imagine that actual TVs were built with only 240 scan lines. Then it would have to somehow throw away half the scan lines altogether in the case of a TV broadcast signal, and then interlace the half of the scanlines it kept.
90sTVFan is online now  
post #11 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 09:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Soulburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,560
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floydage View Post
Then there's the DVD output to the screen. I suspect the 13" is only composite or even lowly RF/coax whereas the Mac is the internal drive (data bus).
That's a good point as well. Not only is LCD inherently sharper, it's connected with a digital cable whereas the CRT is connected with analog.
Soulburner is online now  
post #12 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 09:56 PM
Senior Member
 
nx211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90sTVFan View Post
I've noticed when I compare a standard definition DVD of an old cartoon (these seem to have been made via transfers from old broadcast tapes - there's dot crawl present on them indicating they came from a composite source) played at the default size (not full screen) on my mac, it looks infinitely sharper than it does played on my 13-inch CRT screen.

Is it just because the TV is 12 years old and had heavy use, or is that just how CRTs are in general? I would have expected there not to be that much of a difference in visible detail, since the source itself is 480i. I would have thought all the same detail displayed on the mac when it's not scaled should be displayed on the CRT TV. But there are character faces that we're clearly supposed to see that are just blurs.

It's actually normally *the exact opposite*.

A good quality CRT will normally produce the superior image of a 480i sourced video signal. However, since the Mac isn't scaling to full screen, it actually might be pretty close to what you see on a good quality CRT in terms of *sharpness.*

I would guess that your CRT is of poor quality or that it has been used and abused. This is 2015 you know, good luck finding a low hour CRT at this day and age.

All that being said, there is *no way* that your LCD mac would *ever come remotely close* to the color gamut of a CRT. That would be very apparent with non-cartoon type programs.

However, there is a big difference is CRT quality. What is the make and how many hours on it?


nx211

HT:
Speakers L/R - Infinity Prelude Compositions
Center - Infinity Prelude Compositions Center
Rears - Infinity Overture 1s
AVRs - NAD T773s
TVs - Sony 34XBR960/970
nx211 is offline  
post #13 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 10:24 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by nx211 View Post
It's actually normally *the exact opposite*.

A good quality CRT will normally produce the superior image of a 480i sourced video signal. However, since the Mac isn't scaling to full screen, it actually might be pretty close to what you see on a good quality CRT in terms of *sharpness.*

I would guess that your CRT is of poor quality or that it has been used and abused. This is 2015 you know, good luck finding a low hour CRT at this day and age.

All that being said, there is *no way* that your LCD mac would *ever come remotely close* to the color gamut of a CRT. That would be very apparent with non-cartoon type programs.

However, there is a big difference is CRT quality. What is the make and how many hours on it?


nx211
Magnavox, 2003. As for hours...I mean, I've had it for 12 years and it was originally my college TV, which I'd leave on for several hours each day. I've noticed the convergence has gone bad - green and purple areas on the borders of images, especially black and white.
90sTVFan is online now  
post #14 of 28 Old 07-14-2015, 11:50 PM
Senior Member
 
nx211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90sTVFan View Post
Magnavox, 2003. As for hours...I mean, I've had it for 12 years and it was originally my college TV, which I'd leave on for several hours each day. I've noticed the convergence has gone bad - green and purple areas on the borders of images, especially black and white.
A Magnavox CRT would be a "Shadow Mask" type CRT. Those don't age very well. I'm pretty sure with that kind of usage, the display may be pretty dim at this point, which would imply that the color spectrum is somewhat dark and muddy at this point.

Instead of trying to find a low hour CRT, I would consider upgrading to a *LED* based LCD mac, if you don't have one already for 480i video sourced payback. As long as the Mac doesn't upscale a 480i sourced composite signal to full screen, you should be enjoying the video signal pretty close to what a high quality CRT can render, provided that you don't focus to much on any *fast action* or *facial features*.


nx211

HT:
Speakers L/R - Infinity Prelude Compositions
Center - Infinity Prelude Compositions Center
Rears - Infinity Overture 1s
AVRs - NAD T773s
TVs - Sony 34XBR960/970
nx211 is offline  
post #15 of 28 Old 07-15-2015, 08:34 AM
Senior Member
 
nx211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 26
^
Also, you may need to close your eyes for a few seconds if you see a slow pan about to take place.

HT:
Speakers L/R - Infinity Prelude Compositions
Center - Infinity Prelude Compositions Center
Rears - Infinity Overture 1s
AVRs - NAD T773s
TVs - Sony 34XBR960/970
nx211 is offline  
post #16 of 28 Old 07-15-2015, 02:43 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by nx211 View Post
A Magnavox CRT would be a "Shadow Mask" type CRT. Those don't age very well. I'm pretty sure with that kind of usage, the display may be pretty dim at this point, which would imply that the color spectrum is somewhat dark and muddy at this point.

Instead of trying to find a low hour CRT, I would consider upgrading to a *LED* based LCD mac, if you don't have one already for 480i video sourced payback. As long as the Mac doesn't upscale a 480i sourced composite signal to full screen, you should be enjoying the video signal pretty close to what a high quality CRT can render, provided that you don't focus to much on any *fast action* or *facial features*.


nx211
Hmmm...would a Panasonic CRT have been shadow mask or aperture grille? I also have one of those lying around somewhere.

Also, have you ever heard of these 240i sets Floydage was referring to? Just seems like a strange thing to me.
90sTVFan is online now  
post #17 of 28 Old 07-15-2015, 06:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Down-convert. Say your playing a 1080p Blu-ray and set the output to 480i or use an SD output connection...

13" CRT TVs are a dime a dozen out there (actually most are free). I've got all kinds of nice CRT TVs I picked up on the free and two are HD, one has a built-in OTA HD tuner. I've got a little Sony 20FS120 you'd probably love, has a 16:9 mode to even enhance the resolution above 480i (it's a 4:3 TV).

Floydage is offline  
post #18 of 28 Old 07-15-2015, 06:51 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floydage View Post
Down-convert. Say your playing a 1080p Blu-ray and set the output to 480i or use an SD output connection...

13" CRT TVs are a dime a dozen out there (actually most are free). I've got all kinds of nice CRT TVs I picked up on the free and two are HD, one has a built-in OTA HD tuner. I've got a little Sony 20FS120 you'd probably love, has a 16:9 mode to even enhance the resolution above 480i (it's a 4:3 TV).
Yeah, but this is analog. The signal is coming in interlaced. So what's it doing, doing half-half frames? Interlacing interlace? 120 from the first incoming 240 field, then 120 from the second incoming 240 field?

I'm just not buying that 240i TVs existed. Maybe what you were seeing was talking about each field/half frame being 240?

Last edited by 90sTVFan; 07-15-2015 at 08:31 PM.
90sTVFan is online now  
post #19 of 28 Old 07-15-2015, 08:48 PM
Senior Member
 
nx211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90sTVFan View Post
Hmmm...would a Panasonic CRT have been shadow mask or aperture grille? I also have one of those lying around somewhere.

Also, have you ever heard of these 240i sets Floydage was referring to? Just seems like a strange thing to me.

A Panasonic CRT would have been a shadow mask. They never made an aperture grille CRT. The only other company aside from Sony that made aperture grill CRT's was Mitsubishi. However that was mostly for their computer displays. For the living room, I'm pretty sure Mit was exclusively shadow mask.

As for the 240i sets, I'm not that knowledgeable on the smaller 13" tv's processing of the video signal. However, I think that people might be confusing a tv sets rated video resolution with the internal processing of the former standard NTSC video signal.

I thought that smaller 13" tv's processed the full 480i video signal, but as with most tv's back in the 70's, they could only resolve about 240 lines of resolution - a limitation imposed by the sets *grill pitch*, not from any limitation of the sets processing of the video signal. However cheaper video circuitry is all that is needed if your designing for 240 lines of resolution vs. 480 lines of resolution. The monitors internal bandwidth need not be as capable so is much less expensive to make for such situations and I believe that this would be the case for most 13" consumer tv sets.

Back in the late 70's, even 25" tv sets couldn't resolve/display an NTSC analog video signal much above 250 lines of resolution. They didn't have to, at least the standard commodity type consumer fare tv sets. VHS video tape was around 240 lines of resolution when it first came out. For a monitor to eventually display the full limits of the old analog NTSC video signal (480i), it was a slow climb. During the 80's and 90's, higher end CRT's came out with ever increasing sharpness, pushed forward by the Beta format (around 280 lines), then Laserdiscs (above 300 lines), then S-VHS (around 400 lines), then came DVD in the mid 90's (around 500 lines).

Bottom line, that 13" Magnavox of yours isn't a good representation of what a modern high-quality CRT is capable of displaying with a 480i video signal.


nx211

HT:
Speakers L/R - Infinity Prelude Compositions
Center - Infinity Prelude Compositions Center
Rears - Infinity Overture 1s
AVRs - NAD T773s
TVs - Sony 34XBR960/970
nx211 is offline  
post #20 of 28 Old 07-15-2015, 10:10 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by nx211 View Post
A Panasonic CRT would have been a shadow mask. They never made an aperture grille CRT. The only other company aside from Sony that made aperture grill CRT's was Mitsubishi. However that was mostly for their computer displays. For the living room, I'm pretty sure Mit was exclusively shadow mask.

As for the 240i sets, I'm not that knowledgeable on the smaller 13" tv's processing of the video signal. However, I think that people might be confusing a tv sets rated video resolution with the internal processing of the former standard NTSC video signal.

I thought that smaller 13" tv's processed the full 480i video signal, but as with most tv's back in the 70's, they could only resolve about 240 lines of resolution - a limitation imposed by the sets *grill pitch*, not from any limitation of the sets processing of the video signal. However cheaper video circuitry is all that is needed if your designing for 240 lines of resolution vs. 480 lines of resolution. The monitors internal bandwidth need not be as capable so is much less expensive to make for such situations and I believe that this would be the case for most 13" consumer tv sets.

Back in the late 70's, even 25" tv sets couldn't resolve/display an NTSC analog video signal much above 250 lines of resolution. They didn't have to, at least the standard commodity type consumer fare tv sets. VHS video tape was around 240 lines of resolution when it first came out. For a monitor to eventually display the full limits of the old analog NTSC video signal (480i), it was a slow climb. During the 80's and 90's, higher end CRT's came out with ever increasing sharpness, pushed forward by the Beta format (around 280 lines), then Laserdiscs (above 300 lines), then S-VHS (around 400 lines), then came DVD in the mid 90's (around 500 lines).

Bottom line, that 13" Magnavox of yours isn't a good representation of what a modern high-quality CRT is capable of displaying with a 480i video signal.


nx211
Wait a minute...aren't you talking about the horizontal dimension (vertical lines per picture height)? I'm talking about the vertical dimension. From what I've read, VHS was 480i as well. But it's lower in horizontal resolution than professional broadcast tapes, for example.

240i would mean that the display only displays 240 interlaced scan lines. But that would mean half of each field in a 480i signal would have to be thrown out, and any videogames played on that TV would NOT have the blank spaces between the content of the video game, since videogames were 240p.

And from what I've read, in the horizontal dimension it was closer to around 330 "TVL" for broadcast quality and professional formats such as betacam sp. Umatic is listed as 250, though.

Also, the signal is actually supposed to be 525i (NTSC), but it's only 480 that are displayed because of "overscan," i.e. that's where the TV is supposed to constrain it vertically. I'd think the 525 to 480 conversion wouldn't exist if it was actually just 240 being displayed. This 525i translating to 480 visible interlaced horizontal lines is written as having been the case since NTSC was developed in 1941 or whatever it was.

Last edited by 90sTVFan; 07-16-2015 at 03:48 AM.
90sTVFan is online now  
post #21 of 28 Old 07-16-2015, 05:15 AM
Senior Member
 
nx211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90sTVFan View Post
Wait a minute...aren't you talking about the horizontal dimension (vertical lines per picture height)? I'm talking about the vertical dimension. From what I've read...
Yes I am. And I know what you were describing. My point being is that your 13" Magnavox isn't downgrading the 480i NTSC signal in anyway, but that the reason that your noticing blurry detail on smaller animated renderings is because of the limitation of your screens *horizontal resolution*.

That softness of the picture has nothing to do with the internal processing of the NTSC 480i signal inside your 13" tv, but has *everything* to do with the sets rated *horizontal resolution*.

And a CRT's rated *horizontal resolution* value is determined by just one thing: How *tight* the grill pitch was made during manufacturing. ("Grill Pitch" is the appropriate term for a shadow mask CRT. "Slot pitch" is the appropriate term for an aperture grill CRT).

HT:
Speakers L/R - Infinity Prelude Compositions
Center - Infinity Prelude Compositions Center
Rears - Infinity Overture 1s
AVRs - NAD T773s
TVs - Sony 34XBR960/970
nx211 is offline  
post #22 of 28 Old 07-16-2015, 06:15 AM
Senior Member
 
nx211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 26
I didn't invent these terms that were used 20-30 years ago to describe CRT performance. But I am using them correctly.

*Horizontal resolution*, as measured from the test patterns of that era, was directly related to how sharp, how much detail a particular CRT was able to render from the standard NTSC broadcast signal. It was a simple test. You counted how many vertical lines you could make out across the width of the screen.


An example of a basic test pattern:

http://www.ntsc-tv.com/images/tv/test-pattern.gif



nx211

HT:
Speakers L/R - Infinity Prelude Compositions
Center - Infinity Prelude Compositions Center
Rears - Infinity Overture 1s
AVRs - NAD T773s
TVs - Sony 34XBR960/970
nx211 is offline  
post #23 of 28 Old 07-16-2015, 11:19 AM
Senior Member
 
nx211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 26
I would change one word in your description:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 90sTVFan View Post
Wait a minute...aren't you talking about the horizontal dimension (vertical lines per picture height)? ...
I am describing the horizontal dimension, but it's vertical lines per screen *width*. It's how many vertical lines can be counted from one side of the screen to the other side of the screen.

If you don't mind spending a few dollars, purchase a test pattern DVD that includes the older 4:3 aspect ratio test charts. I'd be surprised if your 13" screen could reach much beyond 200 lines. And this is why that picture looks soft and blurry relative to your LCD screen.

nx211

HT:
Speakers L/R - Infinity Prelude Compositions
Center - Infinity Prelude Compositions Center
Rears - Infinity Overture 1s
AVRs - NAD T773s
TVs - Sony 34XBR960/970
nx211 is offline  
post #24 of 28 Old 07-16-2015, 12:37 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by nx211 View Post
Yes I am. And I know what you were describing. My point being is that your 13" Magnavox isn't downgrading the 480i NTSC signal in anyway, but that the reason that your noticing blurry detail on smaller animated renderings is because of the limitation of your screens *horizontal resolution*.

That softness of the picture has nothing to do with the internal processing of the NTSC 480i signal inside your 13" tv, but has *everything* to do with the sets rated *horizontal resolution*.

And a CRT's rated *horizontal resolution* value is determined by just one thing: How *tight* the grill pitch was made during manufacturing. ("Grill Pitch" is the appropriate term for a shadow mask CRT. "Slot pitch" is the appropriate term for an aperture grill CRT).
OK. I was just trying to determine whether or not there were CRTs that only displayed half the horizontal scanlines, as would be the case if there was such a thing as a 240i TV. So it sounds like they were all displaying roughly 480 horizontal scanlines after overscan is accounted for (although I guess after vertical low pass filter was applied to all interlaced video to prevent twittering there's a perceived 30% decrease in vertical resolution), but how much detail there was within those lines going horizontally depended on a number of factors.

I would have thought that the smaller screens would appear sharper, though? One of the complains I frequently have read from people about SDTV on CRTs is that while it looked good on smaller screens, it looks worse on larger screens. That's where a lot of people seem to feel HDTV is important.

Anyway, the quality of the video player at the default size on this mac seems good, but I just wish it didn't have to scale if I wanted to play it full screen. Oh well.
90sTVFan is online now  
post #25 of 28 Old Yesterday, 05:36 AM
Newbie
 
12Bass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90sTVFan View Post
OK. I was just trying to determine whether or not there were CRTs that only displayed half the horizontal scanlines, as would be the case if there was such a thing as a 240i TV. So it sounds like they were all displaying roughly 480 horizontal scanlines after overscan is accounted for (although I guess after vertical low pass filter was applied to all interlaced video to prevent twittering there's a perceived 30% decrease in vertical resolution), but how much detail there was within those lines going horizontally depended on a number of factors.

I would have thought that the smaller screens would appear sharper, though? One of the complains I frequently have read from people about SDTV on CRTs is that while it looked good on smaller screens, it looks worse on larger screens. That's where a lot of people seem to feel HDTV is important.

Anyway, the quality of the video player at the default size on this mac seems good, but I just wish it didn't have to scale if I wanted to play it full screen. Oh well.
Unlike flat panels, CRTs are not fixed pixel displays (where individual lines and pixels can be turned on or off). While NTSC CRT televisions display a 480i signal, they do not necessarily resolve all of those lines clearly. Dot pitch, focus, convergence, and other variables will impact real world resolution. A broadcast monitor like the BVM-20F1U will resolve fine detail from a DVD much better than a cheap 13" consumer set.
12Bass is offline  
post #26 of 28 Old Yesterday, 01:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 59
I think you hit the nail on the head nx211, "lines of resolution" seems to ring a bell. Unfortunately I can't find that spec for my ol' '93 27" GE TV (I wrote "RCA" before, keep mixing up the Thomson sub-brands). I also bought a fancy RCA Home Theater 31" that same year and remember it being touted as "full" 480 resolution.

Floydage is offline  
post #27 of 28 Old Today, 01:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
blue_z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: So Cal
Posts: 1,036
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12Bass View Post
Unlike flat panels, CRTs are not fixed pixel displays (where individual lines and pixels can be turned on or off).
That's a statement that's often made (along with it's corollary "CRTs don't have a fixed resolution"), but that doesn't really apply to color CRTs. It's really meant to describe a monochrome CRT (or the 3 CRTs in a projector). With a color CRT, you can only light up a red pixel where there actually is red phosphor and not green or blue phosphor on the screen, so there is a kind of "fixed pixel" to color CRTs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12Bass View Post
While NTSC CRT televisions display a 480i signal, they do not necessarily resolve all of those lines clearly. Dot pitch, focus, convergence, and other variables will impact real world resolution.
Some of that vertical & horizontal resolution confusion is discussed in Resolution/Timing for Component on CRT?

On this thread's title subject, IMO it's not fair to lump all CRTs into one category. I had two Sony XBR CRT TVs side-by-side, both feed the same ATSC signal converted to 480i S-Video. The widescreen 30" HD CRT TV has a good up-scalar (unlike the typical LCD TV), so the 1080i picture looked okay. The primary issue of the older 27" SD 4:3 set was that the scan lines now looked so obvious when compared to the HD TV.

Last edited by blue_z; Today at 02:24 AM.
blue_z is offline  
post #28 of 28 Old Today, 10:42 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
90sTVFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12Bass View Post
Unlike flat panels, CRTs are not fixed pixel displays (where individual lines and pixels can be turned on or off). While NTSC CRT televisions display a 480i signal, they do not necessarily resolve all of those lines clearly. Dot pitch, focus, convergence, and other variables will impact real world resolution. A broadcast monitor like the BVM-20F1U will resolve fine detail from a DVD much better than a cheap 13" consumer set.
Vertically or horizontally? Because vertically, they didn't have to resolve all 480 clearly given the fact (from what I've read) that content was put through a vertical low-pass filter to prevent interline twitter, reducing the resolution by approximately 30%. And I remember reading something about how it's no accident that there were "330 lines" of horizontal resolution in broadcast TV/professional broadcast tapes, which is about equal to the perceived vertical resolution after the vertical low-pass filter was applied. About equal in both dimensions.

Either way, the DVD content I've been viewing seems to have been transferred from broadcast tape (1 inch), so it was already low-passed when it was telecined and one would think a 2003-manufactured CRT would be readily able to display that typical SD content in good quality. I would expect there to be a hindrance if it was a film-based DVD that was actually scanned at 480 X 720, but an analog tape transfer on a CRT made after decades of developing the CRT technology...I wouldn't expect the CRT to be shockingly inferior to an LCD so long as it's from a name brand, which it is.
90sTVFan is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Direct View (single tube) CRT Displays



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off