this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
535 points (95.9% liked)

Showerthoughts

30863 readers
410 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted, clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts: 1

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
    • If you feel strongly that you want politics back, please volunteer as a mod.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

These days, kids identify them by the aspect ratio.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 74 points 2 years ago (6 children)

And video quality. Watching some historical videos from my childhood, like tv shows on youtube.... the quality is pure potato. Either the archiving is terrible, or we just accepted much worse quality back then.

[–] Hypersapien 31 points 2 years ago (4 children)

People always said that Betamax was better quality than VHS. What never gets mentioned is that regular consumer TVs at the time weren't capable of displaying the difference in quality. To the average person they were the same.

[–] spongebue 18 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/hGVVAQVdEOs

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[–] cokane_88 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Vcr won vs betamax because it was cheaper to make a VCR, then weighed less than betamax so less material costs.

[–] 4am 0 points 2 years ago

VHS won because you could record more than 30 minutes on a tape

[–] jeffw 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

You kinda can tell though. CRTs didn’t really use pixels, so it’s not like watching on today’s video equipment though

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

CRT screens definitely used pixels, but they updated on the horizontal line rather than per pixel. This is why earlier flatscreen LCDs were worse than CRTs in a lot of ways as they had much more motion blur as stuff like "sample and hold" meant that each pixel wasn't updated every frame if the colour info didn't change. CRTs gave you a fresh image each frame regardless.

[–] Psyduck_world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I have heard that pixels in CRTs are round and LCD/LED are square, that’s the reason why aliasing is not too noticeable on CRTs. Is this true or another internet bs?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They're not round persay, but they aren't as sharp so have more light bleed into one another giving a natural alaising effect. This is why some old games where the art is designed to account for this bluring look wrong when played on pixel perfect modern TVs.

[–] toofpic 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ummm..what? How do you think did CRTs show the picture?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

What they're referring to is that analogue CRTs don't really have a fixed horizontal resolution. The screen has a finite number of horizontal lines (i.e. rows) which it moves down through on a regular-timed basis, but as the beam scans across horizontally it can basically be continuous (limited by the signal and the radius of the beam). This is why screen resolutions are referred to by their vertical resolutions alone (e.g. 360p = 360 lines, progressive scan [as opposed to interlaced]).

I'm probably wrong on the specifics, but that gives the gist and enough keywords to find a better explanation.

[EDIT: A word.]

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble 1 points 2 years ago

VHS was capable of not bad quality, people just had a lot bad equipment.

Some TV shows (if they were crazy) were shot on film so you could re digitize them now in 4 or 8k and they’d look amazing. But there was also a lot of junk that was out there.

And as others have mentioned if you do an awful job of digitizing it then you could take something that looked good and throw all of that quality away. But if the tape wasn’t stored in good condition then it could just struggle to be digitized in the first place when done properly.

[–] capt_wolf 21 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There's a lot of archival video that is just terrible. Digital video compression issues have damaged a lot of old footage that's gotten shared over the years, especially YouTube's encoders. They will just straight up murder videos to save bandwidth. There's also a lot of stuff that just doesn't look great when it's being upscaled from magnetic media that's 240x320 at best.

However, there's also a lot of stuff that was bad to begin with and just took advantage of things like scanlines and dithering to make up for poor video quality. Take old games for example. There's a lot of developers who took advantage of CRT TVs to create shading, smoothing, and the illusion of a higher resolution that a console just wasn't capable of. There's a lot of contention in the retro gaming community over whether games looked better with scanlines or if they look better now without them.

For example.

Personally, I prefer them without. I like the crisp pixelly edges, but I was also lucky enough to play most of my games on a high quality monitor instead of a TV back then. Then emulators, upscaling, and pixel smoothing became a thing...

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/vscKaVByjRU

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[–] cokane_88 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It was filmed with poor quality and the films can degrade overtime. It was archived that way because the source was 💩

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I watch a lot of hockey. Just watching hockey games from the 2000s are full on potato. I don't remember them looking that bad back then.

[–] tool 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Hockey is definitely the sport helped the most by HD video.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

All sports have been, also the rise of faster refresh LCD as those early flat screens blurred a lot.

[–] 200ok 3 points 2 years ago

pure potato

Lol