The Trinitron originally and for a long time had a coarse grill that would produce terrible moire patterns with 3.58 MHz color subcarrier dots. The video response was strongly filtered to remove any signal above 3 MHz [edit: or maybe less]. The sets, however, did have a very good luminance transient response with carefully phase equalized, equal, preshoots and overshoots. This produced a "sharp," "clean" picture, but not a high-resolution one. TV stations loved them for at least two reasons: they eliminated any video noise above 3 MHz, and, at the time, they had the brightest pictures of any monitors, which facilitated using them for pictures visible to the camera on a set.

As a side note, Tektronix had a program to develop a monitor that had a very small spot size, fine dot pitch, and luma response out to the limit of broadcast cameras (way beyond the 4.2 MHz broadcast signal limit.) The raster lines were clearly visible, much like a monochrome tube. When they showed it to network engineers, the project was shut down, because the studio people hated it.

I'm just a collector/hobbiest. I was never exposed to professional equipment. I was not thinking professional equipment. I was thinking consumer television and in the 1968 era when the Trinitron was introduced and what I saw with my own eyes. It is unfair to compare a consumer television to a professional monitor. That is where I was coming from.

Most people, when seeing CONSUMER Trinitrons for the first time back then were impressed. I too looked at a 1965/66 GE Potracolor in store showrooms. Now that was low resolution.

I saw a 7 inch and 12 inch Trinitron in the NYC Fifth Avenue showroom in 1968. The image quality blew me away. I was so impressed, that I bought one on the spot in 1968.

Speaking of professional studio monitors, I noticed through the decades that televisions control rooms seem to use Sony monitors a lot. I was never in the trade, I worked in real estate, but I base that from watching television and often times, I would see a studio control room shot filled with Sony monitors. One example, the Today Show.

I think we are straying from the original topic of this thread.

A pair of these iconic Tek monitors were auctioned off (cheaply) at last ETF!
They were iconic and ironic in so much as all that money for a soft picture!
I wonder who made the tube for the prototype hi-res Tektronix monitor?
I'm guessing their production monitors used selected standard Sony units.

The consumer version no doubt had edge enhancement at the limits of its res,
-whereas the Tektronix had flat luminance with extra filtering, as was remarked, to eliminate its 3.58/aperture grille beat.

All the Muntz sets, larger than 10" used a 5U4 rectifier.
The Hallicrafters 12" set, shown in a different thread used a 5V4. They built that same set for Sears as a 19" metal roundie. IIRC, that model used a 5U4, but all the smaller models still used a 5V4. The power transformer size was impressive, but seemed strange that they only used a 5V4. :scratch2:

IIRC, later large-screen rack-mount (19-inch rack) Tek monitors (19 inch?) had a special fine pitch Trinitron and chroma dot filter that could be switched off. Eventually, they even produced rack-mount high def monitors.

I had a Sun Microsystems 21" monitor with a Trinitron. It was one of the best monitors I have ever seen. It had better resolution than the first generation flat screen computer monitors by far. It had more convergence adjustments than a 21" round CRT TV. It was a power hog and weighed 65 lbs. I still miss it.

Around what year did these emerge?

I really don't remember. Would have to do some research.

Then there were the consumer market (circa 2002) full HD resolution Super-Fine-Pitch trinitrons that had perhaps the highest resolution (dot pitch wise) tri-color CRTs ever made.

Is the Tek 650HR the fine pitch version?

looking at the illustrations:
http://www.recycledgoods.com/tektron...tor-19869.html

I think this may be the Tek "high-res" one, but I now believe I was confusing this with another brand of monitor that had a larger tube that filled the rack width, so all controls were at the bottom instead of the sides. The stripes appear to be visible in the closeup, and my guess is they are finer than the regular tube, but still not as fine as you would really like.

The photo of its back panel shows a manufacture date of July-1982.
I think they caught a lot of flak in the 1970s for the original versions.

The Coronation took place in June 1953 ... so no NTSC standard let alone a 405 line version was in place.
The experimental system was apparently a field sequential system.

The set is almost certainly a projection set or the image is a slide lit internally from behind.

The later 405 line NTSC tests came about as a result of pressure from ITV which wanted colour for commercial tv. Sir Lew Grade apparently believed colour would mean advertisers would pay more.

The BBC was not too keen but did carry out tests but was more interested in waiting for the 625 line system which first broadcast on UHF in 1962 as BBC2.

Colour arriving after a long debate, using PAL, on July 1 1967 for Wimbledon, although tests had been carried out in 1966.

Ironically 405 line NTSC and 625 PAL would have looked pretty similar given the actual displays ie resolved lines on the sets of the day.

Which was part of the reason BBC did not want 405 line colour.

JUST NOTICED THIS RECENT POST:

"[QUOTE=ceebee23;3171224]The Coronation took place in June 1953 ... so no NTSC standard let alone a 405 line version was in place.
The experimental system was apparently a field sequential system."

TRUE. IT WAS AN EXPERIMENTAL FIELD SEQUENTIAL SYSTEM. IN FACT CHROMATIC LABORATORIES PITCHED THE FACT AT THE FCC TRIALS THAT THE CHROMATRON WOULD NOT ONLY WORK WITH THE RCA THREE GUN SYSTEM, IT WOULD WORK WITH THE CBS FIELD SEQUENTIAL SYSTEM, THEREBY ELIMINATING THE CUMBERSOME SPINNING COLOR WHEEL OR DRUM.

"The set is almost certainly a projection set or the image is a slide lit internally from behind."

POSSIBLY, OR THE PHOTO WAS AN EXPERIMENTAL CHROMATRON FIELD SEQUENTIAL COLOR TELEVISION SET UP AS DESCRIBED ABOVE BY THE VARIOUS POSTERS ON THIS THREAD.

Would a Chromatrom screen be as flat as it appears in the image.. It would be exciting to think it was a Chromatron!

Here is a spec sheet of the 1953 version of the color Chromatron courtesy of ETF. Notice how square and flat it looks.

http://www.visions4.net/journal/wp-c...ds/image11.jpg

A perspective transform and overlay indicates that the Chromatron on the spec sheet would not fit that cabinet.

Interesting, but dose not debunk the fact that the photo may be an experimental Chromatron. You are basing your theory on the mass around the square image surface.

Couple of things. That overlay may not be to scale. The spec sheet states the tube is 221/2 inches. There are at least two sources that say the color Chromatron sets used in the chrildrens hospital were 20 inches. The Chromatron was manufactured in different sizes.

Not to mention that screen surround probably shrank as development progressed.