this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
5 points (100.0% liked)

> Greentext

7911 readers
1 users here now

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Wouldnt this be the reverse, with the prey animal only being able to see a 4:3 with both eyes?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Screens don't require 3d vision

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, they see more of the sides to detect predators. Predators eyes are forward, narrow cone of vision

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I wouldn't call it narrow. It's almost 180 degrees. More than enough for a 16x9 monitor

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The point is how much you can see without moving your eyes.

Yeah we can technically see a pretty wide range but that's mainly peripheral. You can't really make out details unless you move your eyes to look directly at something.

Whereas prey animal eyes aren't supposed to be super detail oriented in the first place. So they can see more without moving their eyes to look directly at something because details aren't important.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

okay but that has nothing to do with field of view, which is what the example is about.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It has everything to do with field of view... the region in which is you can resolve detailed information is very narrow, at only ~15º.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Agreed- the comparison is missing the blind spot in the middle.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Where in the fresh hell does one even get a 4:3 screen these days?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I just took a 16x9 and hacked the sides off with a sawsall. It doesn't work now, but I still feel superior.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Attaboy show em who's boss

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Thrift stores

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The second hand market. I don't think many of them will even be 1080p or 60Hz, and i'm pretty sure you can forget about 4k

I have one listed on craigslist right now, for free because it's broken. No takers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I used to have a CRT screen that was 1600x1200 @60hz, so high resolution ones do exist.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hell yeah man, 4:3 CRT monitors are superior in almost every way. I have a monitor that does up to 1920x1440p@75hz, but the best ones do up to 2048x1536@80hz. Crazy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I grew up with crts. Crts had misconvergence, blooming, pincushion, lack of contrast and flicker like a fluorescent light even at higher refresh rates.

I'm fine with bad latency compared to all the problems of CRT's.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Depends. If you have a quality CRT monitor, the only problem is blooming. Misconvergence and geometry in general is really only a problem with low end models or large tubes. At higher refresh rates, there's absolutely no flicker either.

Where did you get that with the contrast from? They look way better than any LCD, though OLED can come close or even surpass them.

Except when talking about motion clarity of course, which is something that somehow still can't be beaten by modern technologies. Every display that isn't a CRT just looks so blurry during motion. It makes a world of difference for games.

Since I got a nice CRT monitor, I hate playing on LCDs. Kinda regret getting that thing now.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Misconvergence and geometry in general is really only a problem with low end models or large tubes.

From the 1980's to 1990's I had a 13" Seiko Trinitron, then a Mag 15", then ViewSonic 17". None were low end. All had misconvergence and geometry problems at their highest resolution.

If you only game on it you'll never notice. But I coded and played with CAD for fun. There was no adjustment, even with opening up and adjusting the tube chokes (which I did) that could get every corner perfectly converged and have absolutely perfect straight lines on all sides simultaneously.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Maybe just try switching to a 4:3 resolution before investing in an entire monitor.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If you're not gaming on 9:16 you're not a true gamer

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I game on 9:21. I'm seeing every damn cloud in the sky and every blade of grass down to my feet.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I prefer 16:10 but rotated 22°

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This guy games on Linux