>>106010169
>Absolute retard that doesn't understand where his supposed CRT "motion clarity" actually comes from.
Explain to me, how can you reduce frame persistence to something less than the displays maximum refresh rate, using mere software filters?
You can not.
>Cherrypicks bright background where his phosphor decay isn't visible
It's not a real issue. Picrel.
>CRTs can't even display 1920 width resolution at reasonable refresh rates to begin with (120hz)
My CRT can absolutely display 1920x1080 at 120hz. It's 138khz hsync by GTF timings, and the best CRT monitors topped out at around 140khz.
>It's fake!! It has to be!
Yeah the lack of tracking stripes still invalidates it, and it appears to be taken with exposure times too short. The exposure needs to capture at least 4 frames of the display into a single frame of video, which does not appear to be the case here.
The phosphor trail does not appear as a sharp ghost in tracked motion to human eyes, or correctly set up cameras. It looks like a continuous smear, like in picrel.
It still absolutely is a test done in an invalid way, and should not be used for anything.