-
I Miss Field Rendering
Is there any way to create motion graphics (or even just moving still images around) these days that look as good as things looked with field renderings displayed on CRT monitors?
I remember hearing a lot of “good riddance” to fields when progressive rendering first hit the scene, but I never understood why people felt that way. I just know that with field rendering (and CRT monitors) I could fly stuff around at any speed and everything was glassy smooth and looked totally crisp. Fast text crawls were always readable. Graphic elements had zero jitter as they moved.
Is there any way to achieve that anymore? Please note I am not talking about motion blur as a “solution”; I’m talking about moving elements looking totally sharp in their clarity, no matter what speed they move, like I could always get with field rendering (and, I’m aware that field rendering is still available, but I think I understand correctly that it had everything to do with the type of monitor that displayed the image, so now it’s an obsolete ability with no more CRTs). I asked this question to an associate friend of mine, and we even did a motion test with various settings. He couldn’t “see” what I was talking about, but I could have showed him if I still had my CRT monitor (R.I.P.).
Does anyone else “see” it? Are totally crisp-looking motion graphics destined to be a thing of the past?
-
1 Reply
-
[Kelly Griffin] “Is there any way to create motion graphics (or even just moving still images around) these days that look as good as things looked with field renderings displayed on CRT monitors?”
Please take my responses as coming from somebody not totally sure of his ground but does have more than a little understanding of how this stuff works or worked (sigh….). Ok, caveats over. Ahem… CRTs had their own Motion Blur. In PAL-land, moving from the clunky 405 scanned interlaced lines to the New super duper 625 scanned interlaced lines we were all mesmerised at this glossy new future. Like so many Minions staring wide-eyed at this new glossy portal to the future …. Like Moths to the Flame, we all gasped at this revelation of clarity. But guess what? It was all ALL done at the expense of screen size and that other magician – EFFLORESCENCE. If I’ve got it right, it was the phosphorus dusting on the internal CRT that had this ability to die back after the scanning on its surface literally faded away. For me this is a kind of Motion Blur. No matter, moving from 405 to 625, the image was a night and day revelation. Then came in a thing that was about to blow this all apart – Screen Size. We wanted a bigger, more impressive, emersive visual experience. We wanted Audio to do the same. Films and videos were being planned and scoped to do just that. The CRT manufacturers kinda quaked in their boots and cane up with Screens that were as big as could be humanly manufactured. They would squat in the biggest corner of a the biggest home dictating the space they would own and consume kilos of kilowatts. The writing was on the wall – you could have seen it if it wasn’t for the fact that the CRT Fatso wasn’t in the way. But yes, we all recognised the CRT was doomed and that the Local Recycling corner would soon burgeon with the carcasses of the Silver Beasts staring blindly at the baking Sun.
Moving on… We now have Flatties of all sorts of sizes and refreshes at some unbelievable rates and, might I say, producing stunning images that were unthinkable to even contemplate back in days of 625 and VHS.
So, Kelly, I’d really like to see a controlled experiment demonstrating the lack of glassiness. Remember, it will also depend on just how the Media was created and how the output device had/has been optimised. When I walk around shops and stare at these OLED 75” flatties I’m truly stunned as I was back with 625. Would I want to return to those days? Would I …….. ! Do I still remember the quality leap? Yes. And here’s the thing: If I’m not seeing now that glasiness quality, then I blame the manufacturer, the science and the originator of the visual. And that IS the difference. I’ve seen how things can be and annoy loved ones and small furry animals who really don’t understand my misgivings. But I won’t change and nor will you, and that’s a good thing. We have standards that we wish or want to pass on. And guess what, they will.
Sorry for the long reply, but the skinny is “ Keep The Faith” and always hold the manufacturers and originators accountable. Why? You/me/us know the difference.
* Grazie
Video Content Creator and Potter
PC 7 64-bit 16gb * Intel® Core™i7-2600k Quad Core 3.40GHz * 2GB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 560 Ti
Cameras: Canon XF300 + PowerShot SX50HS Bridge
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up