Panasonic ST60 & ST50 plasma motion clarity & Persistence?

[Clear Motion Seeker]

I will never get over how we got rid of good CRT displays for all these garbage LCD as replacement and we all accepted it like there was nothing wrong.

Imagine if we supported the CRT industry today we would have 240HZ CRT just imagine the kind of CRT we would be using today

It's not like we had the choice. The average user is not that picky in terms of image quality (clarity for instance).
What made flat screens so desirable is the fact that you could get a much bigger surface that were far less heavy than CRT, which is understandable because otherwise we wouldn't have giant screens today.

I presume that the legendary motion clarity of CRT is more an involuntary good surprise than something actively seeked by engineers.

[Chief Blur Buster]

I presume that the legendary motion clarity of CRT is more an involuntary good surprise than something actively seeked by engineers.

Yes, an involuntary good surprise; it is simply because they had to design a 100% analog display, and the best analog-refresh system was phosphor, which automatically faded -- to be more easily replaced with a new image using a 100% analog mechnism.

There was somewhat of an accidental contribution too -- They sped up the phosphor to prevent ghosting (like a radar scope that kept afterimages), and that had a side effect of reducing display motion blur, when they were trying to avoid the "airplane radar scope" style phosphor ghosting problem in the early days.

[Supermodel_Evelynn]

I presume that the legendary motion clarity of CRT is more an involuntary good surprise than something actively seeked by engineers.

Yes, an involuntary good surprise; it is simply because they had to design a 100% analog display, and the best analog-refresh system was phosphor, which automatically faded -- to be more easily replaced with a new image using a 100% analog mechnism.

There was somewhat of an accidental contribution too -- They sped up the phosphor to prevent ghosting (like a radar scope that kept afterimages), and that had a side effect of reducing display motion blur, when they were trying to avoid the "airplane radar scope" style phosphor ghosting problem in the early days.

wow so radars after image was natural CRT?

I always thought it was purposely made to do that using a software to delay the image to more easily see it.

Are they still using CRT for Radars today? or they upgraded to OLED etc?

[Chief Blur Buster]

wow so radars after image was natural CRT?

I always thought it was purposely made to do that using a software to delay the image to more easily see it.

It was 100% analog in the 1940s.
CRT radar back in those days did not even have a computer.

The radar spun at roughly 1 spin per second, and the CRT tube refreshed at only 1 Hz (one-sixtieth the refresh rate of NTSC). It can be higher or lower, depending on how fast the radar antenna spun in revolutions per second. To allow the CRT tubes to refresh at such a low refresh rate without flickering too much, they used really slow "glow in dark" phosphors that faded slower. Like your glow-in-dark toy.

Eventually when they added a computer, they still relied on the CRT's slowness to keep the afterimages running. The computer buffered the data and the CRT tubes did refresh faster, and some of the software based after images did occur -- but that did not happen originally. It was originally done by glow-in-dark on the CRT tubes themselves.

Remember your childhood glow-in-dark toys? Same phosphor! You shine a fluorescent light on them (or a light with lots of ultraviolet), they glow brightly for a second or two after you suddenly turn off the light, and continue fading and fading (but slower and slower fade).

Are they still using CRT for Radars today? or they upgraded to OLED etc?

Today, now the CRT afterimage effect on a digital panel, is simulated.

But the original CRT radar scope after images definitely was not software -- there was not even a computer at all!

[Supermodel_Evelynn]

wow so radars after image was natural CRT?

I always thought it was purposely made to do that using a software to delay the image to more easily see it.

It was 100% analog in the 1940s.
CRT radar back in those days did not even have a computer.

The radar spun at roughly 1 spin per second, and the CRT tube refreshed at only 1 Hz (one-sixtieth the refresh rate of NTSC). It can be higher or lower, depending on how fast the radar antenna spun in revolutions per second. To allow the CRT tubes to refresh at such a low refresh rate without flickering too much, they used really slow "glow in dark" phosphors that faded slower. Like your glow-in-dark toy.

Eventually when they added a computer, they still relied on the CRT's slowness to keep the afterimages running. The computer buffered the data and the CRT tubes did refresh faster, and some of the software based after images did occur -- but that did not happen originally. It was originally done by glow-in-dark on the CRT tubes themselves.

Remember your childhood glow-in-dark toys? Same phosphor! You shine a fluorescent light on them (or a light with lots of ultraviolet), they glow brightly for a second or two after you suddenly turn off the light, and continue fading and fading (but slower and slower fade).

Are they still using CRT for Radars today? or they upgraded to OLED etc?

Today, now the CRT afterimage effect on a digital panel, is simulated.

But the original CRT radar scope after images definitely was not software -- there was not even a computer at all!

One of the coolest things I have ever read!!

I remember glow in the dark toys I had in the 90's and glow in the dark light switch and a clock.

What an amazing scientific history lesson!!

[Chief Blur Buster]

Today, we still use "phosphors". Like your glow-in-dark toy, except they fade in milliseconds. Almost all the world's LED lightbulbs are blue LEDs with phosphors to add other colors (reds/greens) to create the white light.

Phosphor in LED light bulbs and displays, are not too different in science from glow in dark toys;

Just different time scales!

Basically milliseconds instead of minutes. Or somewhere in between -- like a second or two (try turning off a filament LED lightbulb in a totally dark room, like basement or interior bathroom, you'll see them fade). Some of it is from the capacitors but some of it is due to phosphor behavior.

It's the science of the "phosphor" -- whether in a LED/OLED display, LED lightbulb, the glow-in-dark toy, the CRT TV, or the glow-in-dark toy.

[radeko]

I have Plasma Panasonic th-46py8p . It has 600Hz Sub-Field which gives me motion eqivalent to 240hz(fps) from 60hz(fps) signal. Ufo test with speed 240pixels/s is clear without motion and ghosting. I know That are plasmas with 2500hz and 3000hz Subfield.

[nuninho1980]

I have Plasma Panasonic th-46py8p . It has 600Hz Sub-Field which gives me motion eqivalent to 240hz(fps) from 60hz(fps) signal. Ufo test with speed 240pixels/s is clear without motion and ghosting. I know That are plasmas with 2500hz and 3000hz Subfield.

Ok. Enough or good (not very good) motion clarity at 600Hz sub-field enabled (for 50Hz signal source PAL) but we get microstuttering with few artifacts due to the irregular (eg: net, narrow lines, macro-dots...).

Plasma has 2500~3000Hz!?? Doesn't exist because plasma TV has been discontinued in +/-2010.

But CRT has perfect motion clarity with ZERO any microstuttering and ZERO any artifacts at native 50Hz signal.

[radeko]

Panasonic VT60 has 3000Hz sub-field drive
Panasonic ZT60 has 3000HZ sub- field drive
Panasonic VT50 has 2500hz sub field drive
Users claims that motion clarity in that plasmas is better than in 600hz sub field drive.