Screenshot Comparisons 4K

[Deciazulado]

Actually displaying a signal encoded in 2020 straight into P3 primaries undersaturates (most) colors.

From the CIE1931 chart it seems the panel is doing what every panel without color management does: Display the colors of the RGB signal in its color primaries.
So it's blind to that it's a 2020 signal, or it doesn't have 2020 -> P3 color management.
That's kind of disheartening to hear. So according to that site's test it can only display 709 signals or straight P3 signals accurately? (The half-res 3D also is not very encouraging)

< As you can see comparing to the one below the signal's colors are going straight to the P3 primaries of the display
2020toP3.jpg
P3 primaries triangle added to the image ^ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2020 colors into the squares as how they should be displayed in P3 . . . . . Arrows added to show the correct movement of 2020 signal into P3
As you can see the LG P3 primaries are pretty spot on.

The biggest error of displaying 2020 straight into P3 is intended greens and cyans undersaturating quite a bit, with greens shifting to yellow greens too;
and reds and yellows shift slightly towards orange (<With Mad Max and Martian having lots of hues in the red/orange/yellow might explain some of the discrepancies.

Now with correct 2020 to P3 color management/mapping most of the hue/saturation shifts would be corrected,
with only the extreme saturated, purest, greens cyans and reds having to be limited to the P3 gamut but that can't be helped.
They would look as saturated as can be displayed.

One would hope an update could enable that.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

Actually displaying a signal encoded in 2020 straight into P3 primaries undersaturates (most) colors.....

True, and to emphasize that concept, if uncorrected, even less saturated if going from BT 2020 to BT 709, as so….



As a technical learning aside to Blu-ray to any budding color scientists out there reading, simpler gamut mapping is needed when constant luminance signals are used as opposed to the gamut mapping algorithm (more complex) required for non constant luminance.

[imhh1]

4k vs 1080p

[Ace77]

Does anybody know if a person has a 4k laptop if a screenshot from a standard (non-4k) blu-ray if it will still be 1920x1080 or if it would be 3840x2160? Thank you!

[dvdmike]

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/177760

[robgmun]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/177760

If that's anything to go by then it's much much narrower leap then from DVD to Blu-ray. I would even say in motion the difference would be less noticeable

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by robgmun

If that's anything to go by then it's much much narrower leap then from DVD to Blu-ray. I would even say in motion the difference would be less noticeable

That screen shot is cgi. Which is upscaled to 4k. The biggest difference in that particular shot will be HDR, which isn't captured in a screen shot. So basically that exact shot is completely moot. But thanks to Mike on his efforts.

[imhh1]

I watched Now you see me 2 as my first HDR movie yesterday. (samsung k8500 + jvc x550 on 140'' gain 1.0 in a complete dark room)
Picture is a lot darker but it is how we would see this in reality, right ?

[RealorFake4K]

as with all photos of screens... did you lock in the camera settings?

or at the very least does the images you posted SEEM to represent what you saw in real life?

[imhh1]

yes camera settings were the same and it does represent what i see in real life.
I definitively prefer the HDR/4K version even if it's darker. Overall the quality was amazing.
And I didn't import BT2020 profile color in my projector yet. It should look even better.

[srinivas1015]

Originally Posted by imhh1

I watched Now you see me 2 as my first HDR movie yesterday. (samsung k8500 + jvc x550 on 140'' gain 1.0 in a complete dark room)
Picture is a lot darker but it is how we would see this in reality, right ?

I think a calibration may be in order? The HDR image looks completely desaturated and devoid of all color. It's almost like an entirely different color grade!

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by srinivas1015

I think a calibration may be in order? The HDR image looks completely desaturated and devoid of all color. It's almost like an entirely different color grade!

Yeah, but that might actually be what happened here, it's much more common than you'd think. Star Trek Into Darkness has a very similar kind of look whereby the green tinge of the Blu-ray version is completely gone on the UHD.

[srinivas1015]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Yeah, but that might actually be what happened here, it's much more common than you'd think. Star Trek Into Darkness has a very similar kind of look whereby the green tinge of the Blu-ray version is completely gone on the UHD.

But it's not just the tinge in this case. There's an actual lack of color: the windows, the car, the yellow lights..
Even the reflections in the glass are less obvious. Every other HDR comparison has looked better than SDR. Man Of Steel, Oblivion, etc.

[Geoff D]

Well, he is watching on a projector which folks should keep in mind when looking at those pics. You're not gonna see anything like the dynamic range of a direct-view set on a PJ and as for the colour, we could be seeing the effect of a different colour grade (it has happened before, it will happen again) combined with the wrong colour profile or whatever.

[PRO-630HD]

I am amazed we are in Sept. of 2016 and no one has figured out how to capture screenshots from UHD bluray's yet?

[film11]

Originally Posted by robgmun

If that's anything to go by then it's much much narrower leap then from DVD to Blu-ray. I would even say in motion the difference would be less noticeable

See, that's the thing. There really is little-to - no difference in reality. I've seen 6 movies on HDR sets and any differences have been imperceptible. And sometimes the UHD versions are actually worse. It's why I don't even bother buying UHD discs. I'll hold on to my money and use it for when a genuine upgrade comes along. UHD ain't it.

[imhh1]

another one:

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by film11

See, that's the thing. There really is little-to - no difference in reality. I've seen 6 movies on HDR sets and any differences have been imperceptible. And sometimes the UHD versions are actually worse. It's why I don't even bother buying UHD discs. I'll hold on to my money and use it for when a genuine upgrade comes along. UHD ain't it.

nng...mustn't...take...ack....bait

[im.thatoneguy]

The HDR Grade is different from the standard grade by necessity. Sometimes they have the original colorist do both sometimes it's a B-Team done just for the 4k Bluray. Undoubtedly though the everybody spent less time on it and the director spent more time supervising the theatrical release not the HDR release.

Man of Steel's grade for UHD/HDR was particularly terrible in my opinion. And I had it up on two calibrated displays side by side when comparing.

[Oliver K]

There are a bunch of issues with HDR on projectors:

- they cannot get bright enough to throw away most of their light for highlights, at least not under most circumstances

- they cannot fake black by just turning off segments of the screen which means they are left with their native contrast most of the time which also prevents them from devoting most of their dynamic range to highlights

- they lack presets to make the best of HDR under these circumstances

Ideally a movie that has been graded for HDR should add highlights on top of whatever brightness we see in the SDR version of a movie so that the HDR version does not look darker most of the time but as mentioned above this is rather hard to achieve for a projector owner. I am not even sure how often this works out on a TV.