Probably not. Hell, even ten years ago, my mother, who was a custodian for the local school district, was coming across kids who couldn't read an analog clock, and had no idea what, say, "quarter after twelve" meant.
se
I wonder whether any of us have much of a clue of the origin of our language/expressions
True. But what interests me is when we see it in action, so to say.
I wonder if there are still people referring to the TV as 'the tube'?
Jan
I still have a European soccer fan friend that insists on a tube, the big SONY one, can't stand the latency (his claim).
That big Sony must look good on EU scan rate the scan line where annoying to me on USA scan rate . To each his own distractions.
Standard lineman phone every one had one in the field for about 100 years . Yellow so when you drop it on the ground you could find it shock resistant to about 75 ft drop all day.
Well, I haven't really been terribly impressed with the flat screens I've seen. A good Trinitron still looks better to me.
One thing I've particularly noticed...
On my CRT set, material shot on film and material shot on video look distinctly different. I recall noticing this quite a few years ago. But on my sister's big Samsung, everything looks like it was shot on video. She'd be watching a movie shot on film and I'd think she was watching some TV sitcom.
One thing though, I absolutely love the display on my Retina iPad.
se
I once started a thread on that, you need to dig deep into threads on professional cinematographers sites to begin to get a clue on all the things that are going on.
I complained that some circa 1969 films looked like the were shot on a handicam.
That big Sony must look good on EU scan rate the scan line where annoying to me on USA scan rate . To each his own distractions.
I can't watch TV in the UK when on 50Hz.
Ah, so it's not just me.
Another oddity I've noticed, and it's easiest to see with people's favpces, like during an interview, when they move their heads, parts of them don't move at the same time. Eyes for example will seem to take a bit to catch up with the movement if the head. It's like having mild hallucinations.
se
Part of the problem is that the default settings for picture parameters were pretty terrible some years ago, all to impress the tyre kicker in the showroom,
. The latest ones seem a lot better, even in the cheapies.That infamous Aldi TV,
, suffered from lousy settings as well, so I made it a project to sort that out - found how to get into the service menu, and played with the settings for quite some time, first with an alignment DVD, then fine tuned purely by eye. Now it's virtually spot on, the picture always looks 'correct' for what's showing - and makes what the CRT sets show look pretty dismal in comparison.An ideal test item is a straight gardening show, all the subtle variations of green, brown should match the real world, and of course skin tones should never look 'wrong'.
When to school with a bunch of them it is an art performed by men of great vision with some very very expensive eq. and it cost a lot to do well with the needed support and a director that has a clue helps.
I believe its to do with the persistence of phosphor and a lot of stuff was shot at 24 frames per second. LCDs don't have the persistence and work at 30 FPS (2:3 pulldown) so the processing adds some artefacts, most modern TVs have an option to do 24fps I believe. I haven't tried it to see if it makes any difference.
Last edited:
A document? John wrote that here on the forums. His "measurements" have been completely debunked since then.
se
- Status
- Not open for further replies.