Petition for 4:3 LCD displays

[Blanka]

On behalf of all retro gaming lovers, I made a petition for bigger and better 4:3 LCD screens:
http://www.petitiononline.com/43lcdtv/petition.html
If you agree, sign it and spread the word. 

[grantspain]

i have on good advice that there will be 29" 4:3 lcd available soon

[ghettodish]

by law all new tvs and monitors over 25" have to be hi-def and widescreen. that's why 25" vga monitors are being sold as 24.8"

That's what I read anyway...In all honesty I get most of my info from the backs of cereal boxes.

[MonMotha]

by law all new tvs and monitors over 25" have to be hi-def and widescreen. that's why 25" vga monitors are being sold as 24.8"

That's what I read anyway...In all honesty I get most of my info from the backs of cereal boxes.

For about a year (a few years ago), all TVs 25" and larger in the USA had to have digital TV tuners, but smaller TVs did not.  Since digital tuners cost a few dollars, and televisions are rather price sensitive, TV makers changed to 24.8" models to get around this requirement.  This meant a change in tube size, and arcade monitors use the same tubes, so they all became 24.8", too.  Of course, that's all totally irrelevant now, since as of about a year and a half ago, ALL televisions sold in the USA had to have digital tuners.

There's no requirement that they have to be widescreen or HD, though the market for TVs 25" and larger does tend to favor such models.  There are also no requirements on displays sold with no TV tuners whatsoever as "monitors".  You can still buy new 27", 32", etc. 4:3 CRT arcade monitors, for example, but LCDs of that size in 4:3 are somewhat uncommon.  There's not very many companies in the world that make large LCD panels (something like 5), and they're all driven by the television market, which tends towards 16:9 aspect these days, since that's where 99% of their volume on those larger panels is.

[Blanka]

by law all new tvs and monitors over 25" have to be hi-def and widescreen. that's why 25" vga monitors are being sold as 24.8"

What BANANA REPUBLIC has laws like that? 

Hint: mark them as medical displays.

[Level42]

I actually think it's a great law and we should have it here too.

Law's like that make it possible for technology to advance. Remember SCART ? It was a good thing that the French made it a law that every TV set had to have one. Of course, there may have been some wrong reasons behind it (protectionism), but in the end it gave us TV's with RGB inputs, the best you can get


O, and I want a petition to save CRT's and I don't give a damn about LCD's, whatever size.

[richms]

Scart is useless for video work, the colourspace is not converted properly and on old tv's it would bypass everything in it so you couldnt even correct for a useless sat decoder or dvd player that had obscenely saturated colours - component is a much better interconnect for video work since it has a defined gamut in the specs, and thats what probably 99% of people buy tv's for.

The scart connector was crap, there was no standard of cabling so there was crap ones with 20 wires in a single shield so crosstalk between the low impedance higher current video lines and the higher impedance audio lines was massive, add to that the many incompatible extensions for svideo and component that negate the idea of just plug it in and it works, and the problems with a loose spec on what the signalling lines are used for and its not uncommon for people to have to cut pins off plugs to get it working as a sane person would want it to.

Thankfully it never made it here other then on a few cheap imported TVs.

[Level42]

ANY connection type gets harmed by a bad quality cable.

Yes the chosen connector was crap, but at least it _was_ a standard.

And whatever you say, RGB is the closest thing that goes into the CRT and provides the best picture quality because of the total separation of signals.. Blaming bad sources is not the fault of SCART.

[richms]

At no point in the very loose specification do they define the gamut used for RGB over a scart because it was made to overlay captions rather then be the video signal when it was invented. Just like noone cares for accuracy of the colour red in their teletext pages, they would have seen no need for it when making the specification because there was no foreseeable reason that anyone would have anything better then a composite video signal coming in off air or cable back then.

If you take an old CRT tv with a scart, a sat reciever or dvd player with scart, plug them together with a fully wired cable, and use RGB chances are the colours will be wrong, and on a old CRT there is nothing you can do about it since the inputs go straight to the tube electronics. Later tvs seemed to see the problem and would drop it back to component internally and then process it as they do other stuff which would open up the warm, cool, etc whitepoints and in some cases tints and other rudimentary colour decoding controls to get things looking how you like.

If there was a need for adiquite cable that should have being part of the specification that a cable would have less then x dB crosstalk between the signals. The spec didnt cover something that IMO is a fundimental part of an interconnection between 2 devices. Imagine if ethernet had never specified cat-5 or whatever so people would sell ethernet cables which would never work? Seems unthinkable but yet they did it with scart.

Scart made it really hard in the early days of home theatre when you had a mono TV, a stereo VCR and wanted audio to go to a separate system, you had to dick around with scart splitters, and more cables, or else adapt to the RCA plugs that they were intent on replacing, and then run cables to where you wanted them to go - in a way thats no better then HDMI is now, but it was a massive problem before they seemed to wise up and put RCA outs on VCR's as well.

A source has no idea what phosphers are in use on the tube, its up to the colour decoder to dematrix a signal and put the right amounts to each gun or whatever - trivial to do on a PC in software now, but was a total ---smurfette--- to do in the analog domain so generally people just put up with bad colours - look at the old conversions of NTSC stuff for an example of uncorrected colourspace translations, and someone on here was recently posting about obama being green which would have being from something similar.

[Jess--]

I have never come across a tv where the rgb lines from the scart socket didnt feed through the colour / contrast etc to allow the tv set to control how it looked.

component always seems a complete botch job in the way its signals are built and sounds like a disaster waiting to happen with colours
Y carries luma (brightness) information.
PB carries the difference between blue and luma (B − Y).
PR carries the difference between red and luma (R − Y).

as I see it you cannot get purer than rgbhs, nothing more is needed
R carries red video
G carries green video
B carries blue video
H carries horizontal sync
V carries vertical sync

[Level42]

I have never come across a tv where the rgb lines from the scart socket didnt feed through the colour / contrast etc to allow the tv set to control how it looked.

component always seems a complete botch job in the way its signals are built and sounds like a disaster waiting to happen with colours
Y carries luma (brightness) information.
PB carries the difference between blue and luma (B − Y).
PR carries the difference between red and luma (R − Y).

as I see it you cannot get purer than rgbhs, nothing more is needed
R carries red video
G carries green video
B carries blue video
H carries horizontal sync
V carries vertical sync

+1

Keeps nagging about old TV's (I don't use a 20 year old TV for my television/DVD watching, thank you). Also are there actually specifications for the cables with component video ? Sounds like BS to me. I've never seen specs that demanded these kind of things for analogue transmission of signals. Comparing CAT5 to it is apples and pears.

Quote from wikipedia:

YPBPR cables are not physically different from composite video cables and can be used interchangeably. This means that the red, yellow, and white RCA Connector cables commonly packaged with most audio/visual equipment can be used in place of the YPBPR connectors, provided the end user is careful to keep track of the colors (i.e. green should attach to green even if the cord being used is color-coded yellow).

Hah, now that's great quality cabling the one's that come with the equipment ! That's the thing I throw away BEFORE I throw away the packaging, those cables are total POS.

The reason why RGB is better than component is simple. It's EXACTLY the signal required to drive a CRT. Three separate colors and syncing signals. However you turn it, component video needs an encoding and decoding before it is sent to the CRT, thus causing losses in the quality.

About colors, I'm very capable of setting up my TV colors correctly. I've never seen a TV with SCART that didn't allow color controls, even the very first and cheapest TV's that I've had with SCART have it.

All sounds to me like a far-reached try to defend the wrong choice of analogue interfacing the US made.

[richms]

But the sending device has no idea of the colourspace of the display, so cannot convert it, and the recieving device typically will not convert it. Yes, component is still far from an ideal interconnect in that you still only have a triangle in the middle of the colourspace between the 3 primary colours that will be used, but the fact it has defined chromacity rather then the direct to the tube that RGB on a scart normally uses means that you will at least be a lot closer to it.

A PC outputs sRGB normally, if you put that into a TV with a tube with PAL or NTSC phosphors then you will get quite wrong colours - fine for an arcade game, hopeless to get accurate results on video playback.

For a direct transfer of R to R, G to G and B to B, then RGB will of cource be more accurate, but the thing is that unless you have a piece of source material that has the right colour space, then it usually works out better taking it to a known standard and then taking that to the TVs display with something that does the right conversion at each step.

Most TVs I have used that have had RGB and no PIP or other stupid unneeded features have at best done brightness and contrast on the RGB input - no ability to reduce saturation at all, which is pretty much essential on the video coming out a satillite reciever since they seem to over saturate them so that people are wowed by it.

[BASS!]

i have on good advice that there will be 29" 4:3 lcd available soon

Wowie zowie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is there any date or year associated with this awesome news?

[cmoses]

i have on good advice that there will be 29" 4:3 lcd available soon

Wowie zowie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is there any date or year associated with this awesome news?

Also any idea on price?