Thread 713315529

>CRTs have the best motion clari-...
https://blurbusters.com/the-stroboscopic-effect-of-finite-framerate-displays/

they do

>>713316172
see >>713315529 (OP)

>>713315529 (OP)
They absolutely do

>>713316701
see >>713316459

>>713315529 (OP)
some people just like them? audiophiles don't justify vinyl by making some argument re: quality, obviouly .flac files are better, but everybody agrees there is an intangible "magic" to analogue sound. same with CRTs. weird thing to seethe about desu

>>713317073
That's not what this thread is about. It's a response to someone saying they have superior motion clarity, which is just simply false.

>you need infinite frames to surpass CRT motion
Grandmas win again

>>713317212
CRTs are further away from infinite frames so they are worse.

>>713315529 (OP)
I didn't see anything in the linked article that contradicted the idea that CRTs having superior motion clarity to other display technologies.

>>713317261
The stroposcopic effect's strength is proportional to the frame times. CRTs have lower refresh rates than OLEDs, so they receive a harsher stroboscopic effect.

>>713317073
It's mostly dynamic range, vinyl requires a higher dynamic-range otherwise the needle skips horribly when playing it, the side effect is that the music generally sounds better.
Beyond that vinyl tends to sound muddier and has poor stereo presence in bass tones (<120Hz tends to be mono on vinyl).
This is a problem purely in poor audio engineering choices though, a high-dynamic range CD will sound better than the same master on vinyl 100% of the time.

>>713317429
Even if there's more of it #3 is still going to look clearer than #2.

LCD got fake frames

>>713315529 (OP)
Ideal motion clarity will be 1000Hz+ OLEDs with high ratio BFI. Will shit on even CRT motion clarity and obviously image quality.

>>713315529 (OP)
You can tell my looking at a CRT monitor that runs at say 75-85-90hz that it has superior motion clarity. Or perceived clarity, i would say perceived clarity is the point that matters here. What is visible to your eyes and you'll notice that your eyes can't actually spot the limits of it's clarity if your CRT monitor has 1ms of persistence. Whilst with an LCD or an OLED you can spot it. You can use blurbusters own UFO tests to come away with that perspective, your eyes won't be fast enough to spot any blur if it is there, the alien eyes on the UFO will appear perfect.
And if that appears without any blur I'd consider that near perfection.

>>713315529 (OP)
TL;DR it's all an optical illusion
No shit. Blurring isn't the solution though, rather it makes more sense to simulate a CRT-like motion by simply blacking out most of the image since the entire problem is that your shitty brain can't handle seeing it all at once and would rather hallucinate a full image.
This wouldn't even be a discussion if retards stopped taking photos of their screen to illustrate motion blur when LCD is literally the only display tech you can take a photo of that's even remotely representative of what it actually looks like to your eyes.