Sorry
Cannot get my head round this statement. If you take a magifying glass to a CRT set you see a grid of cloured dots. Once upon a time they were dots arranged in a triangular formation. Lately they were elongated and placed alongside one another.
Now, surely the gun(s) has/have to fire individually at the dots to produce the image. The dots cannot move so surely the resolution of the screen is fixed? In fact if I remember rightly the guns fire through a static grid. (Well they used to in the Sony and Ferguson adverts)
A black and white CRT does not have a shadow mask so the vertical resolution is dependant on the number of scan lines (controlled by the scan circuits), the horizontal resolution is limited only by the upper frequency limit of the beam drive circuit.
With modern colour CRTs the shadow mask is usually formed from vertical fine wires, so the vertical resolution is not limited and is only dependant on the number of scan lines.
The physical horizontal resolution is dependant on the pitch of the sets of 3 colour dots, and matching shadow mask.
With CRT computer monitors the pitch is small, but I assume that standard TV CRTs could be better.
CRTs seem to cope well with various horizontal resolutions, as the beam scans across the sets of 3 colour 'pixels', this is an analogue process and there are no distinct pixels as such as the input pixels are averaged across a few of the 3 colour dots. However, if the horizontal detail is smaller than the 'pixel' pitch then fine detail will be blurred.
I have seen cheap LCD monitors and projectors with a native (physical) resolution of 800x600 and the picture quality at 1024x768 is terrible.
I just want to put my 2p worth in re the discussion of the demise of the CRT. Samsung and Phillips etc have launched new slimline models of CRT television. Samsung has a 32" with a depth of 16" instead of 24". So it seems they are fighting back. They also have plans for even slimmer versions next year.
The Samsung model is also (wait for this!) HD Ready, it has a digital tuner that can display 1080i.
The cost of this about £400. The catch - no HDMI input on this model but they will have a 30" screen available in May for £350 which has an HDMI input.
I would always buy a CRT over a plasma or LCD, the plasma gets screen burn and the LCD picture is jerky.
Saw the link to samsung. To be honest I showed a print out & the cheaper rrp price around and most people said they wanted LCD or Plasma - even though it might cost twice as much. Most people who would consider changing their tv's in the next couple of years said they wouldnt touch a CRT - as it was old technology, and LCD and Plasma was more slimline and took up less space.
Well I hope Samsung have improved the geometary and convergence on this new set because they were awful on their previous slimfit model.
It was one of the tv's I was considerering buying until I saw it in action, straight lines were at best bent and there was a mesh like effect at the sides of the screen.
I think a lot of people post their point of view from a prejudiced stand point, I might too if like one poster in this thread I'd had 3 sets with dead pixels,
but problems like that are not confined to one type of technology,
the previous time I bought a tv I rejected 5 sets for poor geometary until I realised it was going to be almost impossible to buy a flat faced tv which had straight lines.
Its no skin off my nose if people buy or don't buy a tv or agree or disagree with me because of what's said here, but I stand by my previous statement, I have never seen a picture as good on a crt tv as my new Sharp lcd gives when it is fed good inputs,
there are 3 crt tv's in the house as well and I can hardly watch them now I'm used to this set and how good tv can look.
Well, I don't really know about all the technical stuff but I have a Panasonic TX-26LXD500 LCD TV and the freeview and DVD images are gorgeous, sharp never blocky, movement is without blurs and the sound is great too. I'd never want to go back to my old TV.
I would always buy a CRT over a plasma or LCD, the plasma gets screen burn and the LCD picture is jerky.
Not on the TX32LX52 I can assure you! I am very impressed by the picture. It is poorer than CRT on some, particularly low bitrate, pictures but overall the package is superior - for me at least!
Well, I don't really know about all the technical stuff but I have a Panasonic TX-26LXD500 LCD TV and the freeview and DVD images are gorgeous, sharp never blocky, movement is without blurs and the sound is great too. I'd never want to go back to my old TV.
Totally agree.
A bit out of my depth here but it seems to me the image quality depends on both the picture quality of the program and the type of input signal to the tv. Not much you can do about the program but forget uhf signals and input rgb or better.
I go for the plasma any day of the week, I have a had a few bad experiences with LCD, and now don't even entertain the idea of a LCD monitor for the PC. I brought a 32" phillips LCD set and was replaced 3 times due to bad pixels, so for me LCD is an unpredictable & unreliable technology, now I have a 42" panasonic plasma,
i have a 43 inch pioneer plasma and i think it is absolutely ace an enormous improvement on my sony front projector
Comments
Sorry
Cannot get my head round this statement. If you take a magifying glass to a CRT set you see a grid of cloured dots. Once upon a time they were dots arranged in a triangular formation. Lately they were elongated and placed alongside one another.
Now, surely the gun(s) has/have to fire individually at the dots to produce the image. The dots cannot move so surely the resolution of the screen is fixed? In fact if I remember rightly the guns fire through a static grid. (Well they used to in the Sony and Ferguson adverts)
If I am wrong, where is the error in my logic?
David
With modern colour CRTs the shadow mask is usually formed from vertical fine wires, so the vertical resolution is not limited and is only dependant on the number of scan lines.
The physical horizontal resolution is dependant on the pitch of the sets of 3 colour dots, and matching shadow mask.
With CRT computer monitors the pitch is small, but I assume that standard TV CRTs could be better.
CRTs seem to cope well with various horizontal resolutions, as the beam scans across the sets of 3 colour 'pixels', this is an analogue process and there are no distinct pixels as such as the input pixels are averaged across a few of the 3 colour dots. However, if the horizontal detail is smaller than the 'pixel' pitch then fine detail will be blurred.
I have seen cheap LCD monitors and projectors with a native (physical) resolution of 800x600 and the picture quality at 1024x768 is terrible.
I just want to put my 2p worth in re the discussion of the demise of the CRT. Samsung and Phillips etc have launched new slimline models of CRT television. Samsung has a 32" with a depth of 16" instead of 24". So it seems they are fighting back. They also have plans for even slimmer versions next year.
The Samsung model is also (wait for this!) HD Ready, it has a digital tuner that can display 1080i.
Here's a link for you
http://www.samsung.com/uk/products/television/crt/ws32z306vbxxeu.asp?page=Features
The cost of this about £400. The catch - no HDMI input on this model but they will have a 30" screen available in May for £350 which has an HDMI input.
I would always buy a CRT over a plasma or LCD, the plasma gets screen burn and the LCD picture is jerky.
Dave
It was one of the tv's I was considerering buying until I saw it in action, straight lines were at best bent and there was a mesh like effect at the sides of the screen.
I think a lot of people post their point of view from a prejudiced stand point, I might too if like one poster in this thread I'd had 3 sets with dead pixels,
but problems like that are not confined to one type of technology,
the previous time I bought a tv I rejected 5 sets for poor geometary until I realised it was going to be almost impossible to buy a flat faced tv which had straight lines.
Its no skin off my nose if people buy or don't buy a tv or agree or disagree with me because of what's said here, but I stand by my previous statement, I have never seen a picture as good on a crt tv as my new Sharp lcd gives when it is fed good inputs,
there are 3 crt tv's in the house as well and I can hardly watch them now I'm used to this set and how good tv can look.
Not on the TX32LX52 I can assure you! I am very impressed by the picture. It is poorer than CRT on some, particularly low bitrate, pictures but overall the package is superior - for me at least!
Totally agree.
A bit out of my depth here but it seems to me the image quality depends on both the picture quality of the program and the type of input signal to the tv. Not much you can do about the program but forget uhf signals and input rgb or better.
i have a 43 inch pioneer plasma and i think it is absolutely ace an enormous improvement on my sony front projector