I bought a NEC MultiSync FE1250+ from a garage sale a while back, and I'm finally getting a chance to actually use it.. but there are some issues. The entire screen is rotated a bit, and the corners are a bit off, lines aren't exactly straight either. I tried my best with the OSD, but the results still aren't perfect. Does anyone know a decent guide to getting CRTs to look nice?
Okay well take it to the highest point in your city and throw it off and let it smash on the ground. then from there walk down and then walk to the nearest best buy and get a modern day monitor
CRT's has magnets to adjust the lights from the cathodes on the back. Over time, teh magnets gets weaker and weaker... to a point where it shift your image. Some monitors allows full adjustment from the monitor OSD menu, some less options, and some with none (low-end). The models that has some adjustment form the OSD, have the rest of the adjustment system inside the screen. Usually, when the CRT is made, the factory adjust the visuals with these. The "adjusters", (let call them that) can be made of shape or form. From require a small screw driver and you turn something that looks like a screw, other are wheels you can turn by hand. WARNING: CRT monitors contains high capacity transistors, where you can get yourself severally injured, (even death) by the shock if you touch any of them. Be sure that the monitor is unplug, and that you turn it on while unplug to empty some of the energy of the capacitors, and turn it off. Then try and find guides on the net on how to probably manipulate devices with such capacitors. Be careful.
To buy a vomit monitor? I don't think so. CRT's are big, yes. But doesn't mean they suck. - Blacks are pure black (no light). - White is perfect white (assuming you have a descent CRT.. here a decent LCD can't even achieve that) - 8-bit colors (best Buy monitor is 6-bit colors) - All resolutions are essentially native. As it has no grid like LCD or OLED screens, any screen resolutions looks perfect, from 640x480 all the way up to 1600x1200 or even 2560 x 1600 for fancier CRT models. - 0 ghosting - 0 input lag A decent CRT, new, massacre any high-end IPS/PVA monitor in term of image quality and even color accuracy. CRT do flicker, but that may or may not be a problem. High-end CRT monitor support higher refresh rates at higher resolution and also contain better phosphor grade coating, which keeps longer the light it receives (so less flicker, per Hz.. essentially you can have a monitor at 60Hz that looks like looking at a peace of paper, like you can have one that flickers like a bad lamp and give you a headache). Due to people wanting to pay the minimum price possible for monitor, cheap CRT monitors where made, witch ultra cheap phosphor and short life span, with virtually no adjustment possible on the image.. and that gave CRT's a bad name.
The cool thing is that I recall, that some manufacture presenting slim CRTs, a new technology of CRT that makes them drastically thinner (a bit bellow half thickness), adjustable stand, and much lighter. Sadly, LCD came to market, and they were never released on the market.
The only down side of CRT is it tends to degrade faster than CCFL lamps so the white point can go to **** without calibration. There is also radiation off them. The flicker isn't very good either. The backlight off LCDs refresh at excess of 200hz while CRTs don't have backlights. CRTs also need to redraw the image every single time so flicker affects the entire screen which can be painful while LCDs only need to switch the pixels that has changed so even ghosting isn't that bad. CRTs didn't get popular mainly due to their weight. Also because of the weight there were never really large CRTs even among televisions. It would have trouble sitting on your desk. I don't think any CRT was made for 2560x1600 operation. Though CRTs don't exactly have a native resolution, you can technically force a CRT to draw however many pixels you want, if it doesn't break. Many fancier CRTs could easily handle 2560x1600 though at great cost of refresh rates. I think 2560x1600@50hz was the max. I wouldn't exactly recommend 50hz. I personally would take a good CRT over any bestbuy monitor. Not because LCD monitors are bad, just that bestbuy sells ****.
Nha, only the early generation was an issue, the crap CRT that most people were buying.. you know, the 17inch 800x600, 60Hz flicker fest one. As I mentions, good CRT has no flicker at 75-85Hz as they use a high grade phosphor screen. The really high end one, are even better at it. My my knowledge CFL lamps are going at 60Hz. You don't see it flickering as it works differently. As you mentioned, the CRT monitor draws line by line the image on the screen at really fast rate, and you have the phosphor that retain the light. A CFL lamp spreads light everywhere evenly, and as it takes a moment to light down and not go to 0 lumen in 0ms, like a cathode gun, it doesn't show any flickering. My old CRT did that resolution at 60Hz easy. It was hard to read the text on a 17inch screen... but never then less it worked. I am sorry, but that is what most people buy on this forum. So many threads on "Monitor advice: I want a 24inch 1920x1200 monitor and my budget is 50$". And replies follows "Get this unknown brand, zero reputation, iffy website, no contact information LCD for 45$, it has fantastic colors!". Like really... I just give up, unless I see someone brings a close enough budget, for a monitor that is on par with a CRT in term of color reproduction (8-bit colors per channel, accurate or not)
It was $5, you're dumb. Possibly, but the seller is my neighbor and he said that it worked fine.. I wouldn't think that he would con me out of $5. 1920x1440 makes everything too small, and it can only manage 70-something hz at that res. 85hz @ 1600x1200 looks great to my eyes, and calibration is easier at a lower res as well. Thanks all for the help, I don't see anything that I can adjust on the back, so I guess it's all handled by the OSD. I'll just continue to mess around with it until it looks better. It looks fine right now, I fixed the convergence issues and I calibrated the colors decently, the borders and rotation are still a bit off though..
In the CRT vs LCD debate it took a while for me to switch over at work. I always found that the CRT's where better for CAD/3D modelling as the early LCD were grainy, at least the first ones we got at work were.
One of our Sony desktops at home came with a fairly early LCD screen, that thing was grainy as hell.. Not very thin either. +1 to that.
I've seen a lot of monitors in my time, not a single one beats this for picture quality. http://www.computerdisplays.co.uk/21 inch monitors/sun gdm.htm I don't care what anyone says on here, unless you've seen one of these in action. Yes it has some downsides, like size and stuff, but trust me the picture quality in games is amazing.
I seen sony demo their 13" OLED display a few years back. Static contrast ratios better than what most monitors can claim with silly dynamic. Colours better than anything ever made. Of course it was unaffordable but there are things better than CRT. Also some smartphones feature Super AMOLED.
That is because each pixel produces it's own light. So blacks are 100% black (well it's actually transparent, but a pitch black environment is made on the back. They are 8-bit colors per channel, achievable with a IPS and PVA LCD panels type. That is why I call TN LCD (the one that people insist on buying due to their low price and """"gaming performance"""") vomit screens (6-bit colors). Their is a HUGE difference between fake 16.7million colors (taking 2 colors from the 262,144 and switch between them at a really fast rate, and not have any color processor to ensure color reproduction) and true 16.7 million colors, with a color processor. Something that you probably noticed when you did the switch to the fantastic U2711 monitor. Remember that OLED screen that you saw might be of very high end one, made just to show the power of the OLED technology and bring interest. But in the real world, a large 24, 27, 30 inch (with their appropriate resolutions) might cost way more than what you paid as they would be for real professionals.
