It works beautifully, and you no longer need a clunky, heavy, dying CRT. I'm sure the purists will say it's not the same, but I've done sides by side comparisons IRL and it's good enough for me even when pixel peeping. I prefer the emulated CRT look on a modern OLED to the real thing these days.
For that period it even shaped my perception that analog video and specially n64 graphics were always bad, but all that was vindicated by those shaders, it really does make a big difference, and made me find a new appreciation for n64 graphics in particular.
There is some internet misconception that the inherently "blurry" output of an n64 is bad (And sure, some games are just ugly/bad from an artistic standpoint), but it's actually the smoothest image any analog console will ever produce when hooked up to a proper CRT or CRT shader, and it's consistent across all games because of "forced" high quality AA in all games. Even the next generation of consoles seldomly used AA.
I still play Diablo I on the Sony to this day. Wonderful monitor. I will cry when it finally dies.
On the post's notes on the Sonic waterfall effect, the [Blargg NTSC Video Filter](https://github.com/CyberLabSystems/CyberLab-Custom-Blargg-NT...) is intended to recreate that signal artifact, but similar processing is included in a lot of the CRT shaders that are available. I found that RGB had a visual artifact when moving that made the waterfall flicker, but composite didn't, so I played on that setting. Running it with the beam simulator is probably causing some of that.
Maybe I just didn't play games that used tricks to get around the pixels?
---
That being said, I remember that "New Super Mario Brothers" on Wii appeared to use a CRT trick to try and make the background flash in a boss room. I always played my Wii in 480p, so it just looked like there were vertical lines in the boss room.
The NES had a particular quirk with its NTSC output that I always thought was very characteristic of NES. I found this article a few years ago, and was fascinated that work was done to really figure it out - https://www.nesdev.org/wiki/NTSC_video - and it's awesome at at least some emulators (FCEUX) seem to use this info to generate an experience quite similar to what I remember the NES being when I grew up. But I don't think any NES game graphics really depended on this for any visual output. All NES games had jagged vertical lines, for example.
Given their ability to generate a painting that appears identical to a photo, could they depict how the image appears to them, eliminating any loss from mechanical capture.
rendaw•1w ago
They also said the impression is different since it's so close up - what does it look like at the size you'd really see it in game?
dmonitor•2h ago
drougge•1h ago
CrossVR•37m ago
The article mentions later that it's a PVM-20L2MD [1]. This is a professional CRT monitor for medical devices. It uses the same signals as a consumer TV, but comes with a higher quality tube that has a sharper picture.
[1] https://crtdatabase.com/crts/sony/sony-pvm-20l2md