HDR Discussion Thread

[Ernest Rister]

Solved minor but distracting 3D ghosting issue with the new TV...image is now insanely good and I'm driving my wife crazy going 15 minutes from title to title in library testing it out. How did I solve the minor ghosting issue? Just had to move some furniture back about 10". SNAP!

Cave of Forgotten Dreams and The Last Jedi on their way from the UK. Hugo from Region 1...Bring it on...

[mrtickleuk]

Originally Posted by jibucha

regrettably, an compromised picture (UHD/HDR10) is still an 'overall improvement' to HD/SDR (i engage in comparisons regularly for a variety of reasons, recently specifically with a focus on the relative merits of HD/SDR and UHD/HDR10 as UHD/Dolby Vision is obviously the best possible picture quality (unequivocally)

I agree that a compromised 4k/HDR picture is still a (very large IMHO) overall improvement to HD/SDR, but I'm baffled why anyone would regret that!

[LordoftheRings]

I think he only used that word to say that more improvement is in progress. I wouldn't sweat it.

[jibucha]

Originally Posted by mrtickleuk

I agree that a compromised 4k/HDR picture is still a (very large IMHO) overall improvement to HD/SDR, but I'm baffled why anyone would regret that!

simple

Dolby Vision is so much better picture quality that I find HDR10 intolerable.

In my personal viewing experiences, extensive picture adjustments are required to mitigate the issues encountered enough, to not return my UHD/HDR10 discs; at least at this moment in time.

I have to admit that I was surprised that UHD/HDR10 was an unexpected improvement over HD/SDR in one of my recent content comparisons. Had I thought it through beforehand, I would have realized it, but at the time (coming from UHD/Dolby Vision & UHD/HDR10 comparisons) the HDR of HDR10 was so disappointing/distracting comparatively. I only initially engaged in these specific comparisons to decide whether to return 50+ unopened UHD/HDR10 discs.

Entering into the comparisons, it was my intent to never acquire or further watch UHD/HDR10 discs, and concentrate on UHD/Dolby Vision purchases. Also, to continue enjoying my SD/DVD/SDR and HD/SDR content, obviously disregarding the many UHD/HDR10 discs released.

The advantages of UHD were quite apparent and appreciated, specifically though not the HDR element, which was significantly distracting and unsatisfying. Resolution & color primarily were compelling, with HDR an unavoidable annoyance, interfering considerably with watching the movie without having a fit drawing unwanted attention to itself rather than the movie experience. This reoccurring distracting HDR (lighting imbalances) of UHD/HDR10 led me to my first investigation of picture adjustments of both the display/player, something I have never had reason to previously consider in my lifetime, 'attempting' to make the UHD/HDR10 picture 'tolerable', which it is otherwise not.

In summary and to the point. Once I was able to regularly view UHD/Dolby Vision (discs/streaming) picture quality, compromises that exist without it, UHD/HDR10 specifically, were/are 'extremely obvious' and quite disturbing. So much so, interfering with simple viewing. Normally when I watch a movie, i simply watch the movie, I do not analyze it. Although all this wording might indicate otherwise, my observations are passively arrived at, rather than the result of active analysis.

It is still my intent henceforth, to only purchase UHD/Dolby Vision content; selectively. Fortunately UHD releases supporting Dolby Vision now seem to be becoming more available. Acquiring UHD/HDR10 content, if I do, will be with great reluctance.

Regarding UHD/HDR10+; although an obvious implied improvement, with the single improvement of dynamic metadata capability over the crippled static metadata currently represented by UHD/HDR10, I find it very a disturbing development. It will certainly bring about a 'format war' which is already in the early stages, although denied regularly in the industry. Manufacturers and content providers are essentially in a situation that does not allow for coexistence. Prior to this specific development, at least as I perceive it, the various HDR formats as they otherwise exist, are not representative of a 'format war'. This coexistence is most obvious by the early comprehensive support of all HDR formats by LG; thus far.

In closing, a disturbing observation of serious complications with regards to UHD. UHD/HDR10+ will undermine the HDR landscape, at least as I see it at this point in time, which given it's issues is unfortunate. It only serves the agenda of Samsung and its supporters.

Another unfortunate development is the Sony situation with regards to Dolby Vision support. As I see it, developing 'fragmented profiles' in support of a single display manufacture is unprecedented; is it not? While I completely comprehend the situation both Dolby and Sony found themselves in, realizing that Sony's intended support of UHD/Dolby Vision 'in their otherwise capable processors' was not possible and a solution was needed, it is at the core of creating a 'more serious problem'. I find it disturbing that one manufacturer is compelling 'unique support' by other manufacturers of their products, that otherwise conform to 'industry-wide accepted practices'. I am of course referring to the conflict of the 'original full profile' of UHD/Dolby Vision required by Dolby, and the 'Sony unique' - 'low-latency profile' developed by Dolby to meet the 'unique needs' of Sony.

Essentially, both Samsung and Sony are forcing manufactures to make choices that otherwise should not exist, that are confusing consumers causing harm to all businesses; is it not?


For what its worth, I have always appreciated improved color/contrast/resolution throughout the years, and UHD/Dolby Vision represents picture quality performance beyond my expectations.

[jibucha]

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

I think he only used that word to say that more improvement is in progress. I wouldn't sweat it.

actually not

UHD/HDR10 & UHD/HDR10+ are nowhere near what UHD/Dolby Vision (achieves/represents) in picture quality. In time, the inherent compromises that they represent, including the possible transition from static metadata to dynamic metadata (Samsung - etc), I expect to become recognized and rejected.

While UHD/HDR10+ (dynamic metadata support) will certainly improve on the current UHD/HDR10 (static metadata) making if far more acceptable, that this cost-effective lazy approach to HDR is not about picture quality, rather it's about business, marketing and nothing more. This is a notable issue itself.

Questions? How many following HDR realize that UHD/HDR10 and the forthcoming UHD/HDR10+ are generating HDR using computer calculations and not the human involvement of UHD/Dolby Vision? While this approach is clearly 'cheap', is it really about picture quality?

It should be kept in mind that Dolby is also a business and should reasonably expect both compensation and recognition for its efforts to build on its history of audio development and now video development. Clearly, to myself at least, their efforts are easily recognized and appreciated. While this applies equally to both audio and video, thinking of Dolby Atmos and Dolby Vision as representing the pinnacle of their efforts, it is Dolby Vision that that I find myself appreciating the most at this point in time. As more Dolby Vision (content/displays/players) become available and viewed on, I expect that eventually my observations will be confirmed as accurate, that Dolby Vision is clearly the best option for UHD viewing. An additional point is that multiple HDR formats were without merit from the beginning; especially when Dolby Vision, an advanced complete comprehensive solution, was the pioneer in this development (research/development/solution), which the industry has been aware of from the start.

All explanations of the current situation of multiple formats are grounded simply in business and marketing agendas of manufacturers and content providers. Both (UHD/HDR10 & UHD/HDR10+) are without merit and have been so from the beginning of their availability. If the industry were responsible and intelligent, it would have simply unified in common support of UHD/Dolby Vision as a single standard years ago, realizing the advantages to both the industry and consumers; which i am hopeful will happen in the future.

The only real (problem/issue) is that there exists extensive confusion as to just what HDR is (simply dynamic range improvements) and what UHD is (improvement in bit depth - resolution - color & contrast - and more). Most of the improvements to UHD attributed to HDR are actually UHD improvements and mis-represented as HDR. Again, and I cannot say this often enough or loud enough, HDR is simply 'high dynamic range'; it is not the all-important non-HDR elements mistakenly (sloppy misrepresentation) that are collectively otherwise accurately UHD (UltraHD) improvements; especially the 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray disc bit-depth (10-bit & 12-bit).


note (4/18/18) @ 12pm CST - I have re-written this post, and other previous related posts, given continued complaints relating to the 'style' that I have been using for sometime. It's very difficult to communicate many of the aspects of video clearly and carefully, especially when responding to similarly 'creative dialogue' which is a consequence of our collective 'messaging behaviors'. Thoughtful communication, properly formatted, consumes far more time; although important enough to invest the time. Yet, I have struggled constantly recognizing the issue of formatting and condensed information.

from the beginning with this issue, erroneously struggling to simply get the 'basic thoughts' in threads.

[Doctorossi]

jibucha, I know it's been discussed before and I don't want to belabor the point, but you really appear to put a lot of thought and work into your posts and I feel it bears repeating that, for me, the effort is entirely wasted. I can't parse your grammar, with your lack of capitalization and your bizarre double-colon delimited phrase syntax. Please reconsider your formatting because, until you do, your posts are unreadable to me and I just skip them. With the evident work you put into them, that's a shame.

[puddy77]

Alamo Drafthouse is going to be installing EclairColor: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/be...ection-1103367

[jibucha]

ok

thank you

better?

note - I extensively have re-written (a test?) for your review; what do you think?

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

jibucha, I know it's been discussed before and I don't want to belabor the point, but you really appear to put a lot of thought and work into your posts and I feel it bears repeating that, for me, the effort is entirely wasted. I can't parse your grammar, with your lack of capitalization and your bizarre double-colon delimited phrase syntax. Please reconsider your formatting because, until you do, your posts are unreadable to me and I just skip them. With the evident work you put into them, that's a shame.

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by jibucha

actually not :: UHD/HDR10(+) are nowhere near what UHD/Dolby Vision achieves/represents in picture quality :: the further the compromises are realized in time (including the possible transition from static metadata to dynamic metadata), especially as more Dolby Vision content/displays become available and viewed on, i expect my observations will be confirmed as accurate, that Dolby Vision is clearly the best option for UHD viewing, and that multiple HDR formats were without merit, from the beginning, especially when Dolby Vision (a complete comprehensive solution) was the pioneer in this development (research/development/solution)

they (UHD/HDR10/+) are without merit, from the beginning, and the industry (were they responsible/intelligent) would have simply unified with UHD/Dolby Vision as a single standard years ago, realizing the advantages to both the industry and consumers, which i am hopeful will happen in the future

the only real problem/issue is that there exists extensive confusion as to just what HDR (simply dynamic range improvements) is and what UHD (improvement in bit depth - resolution - color & contrast - and more) is

When I said more improvement in progress I was referring to the full HDR canopy: HDR10+, HLG, Dolby Vision, ...

In theory I like DOVI, in practice it is not applicable to front projector owners, HDR10 is.

Also, improvement in progress means our display's qualities and capabilities, in conjunction with our sources. ...The full HDR industry from the software, hardware...medium, playback source, streaming application, cable connection, screen display, audio control centre. We just exited the 3-dimensional world and recently entered the 4K UHD one. Time is on our side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzcW...ature=youtu.be

[Penton-Man]

DanBa (and LordoftheRings, since you parlez too), I could get into this seating arrangement - https://www.lesnumeriques.com/audio/...ma-n73391.html

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by PaulGo

Some good uses of AI:

Especially for rural areas where folks don’t readily have access to ophthalmologists close by - https://www.aao.org/headline/first-a...-approved-by-f

[Penton-Man]

jibucha, I like your passion.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by puddy77

LG OLEDs are used in a lot of mastering houses to evaluate home HDR grades. So you can rest assured that the display, even though it can't reach the most extreme highlights, is showing an image approved by many creators.

And more. See next to the last paragraph…..http://www.etcentric.org/nab-2018-ho...n-post-part-1/

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by puddy77

tone mapping

IMO, next to Dolby Vision, ColorFront Transkoder has the best image processing software there is. Latest products and upgrades…..http://www.nabshowbuzz.com/colorfron...018-interview/

[jibucha]

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

When I said more improvement in progress I was referring to the full HDR canopy: HDR10+, HLG, Dolby Vision, ...

In theory I like DOVI, in practice it is not applicable to front projector owners, HDR10 is.

Also, improvement in progress means our display's qualities and capabilities, in conjunction with our sources. ...The full HDR industry from the software, hardware...medium, playback source, streaming application, cable connection, screen display, audio control centre. We just exited the 3-dimensional world and recently entered the 4K UHD one. Time is on our side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzcW...ature=youtu.be

ok

I did not realize that point. I thought that you were referencing UHD/HDR10 and its intended transitioning into UHD/HDR10+, including what Samsung promises of it.

Regarding HDR and front projection; I have to wonder about that point that you made regarding HDR10; why?

A point of reference and consideration. Digital Cinema is typically at 48-nits (14 foot-lamberts (fL)) and Dolby Vision Cinema is 96-nits (31 fL / 106 nits).

With all the focus on nit-levels in home consumer displays, I have to at least wonder about this rather dramatic disconnect (as I see it). And, yes, while these numbers are what they are, I recognize there is an 'relative' improvement.

However on several occasions, including the past few days, I have personally seen the current flagship home front projection by both JVC and SONY, costing between $35K and $45K, professionally calibrated, finding their 'only - whatever' to be size of image; certainly failing by any picture quality standard that I am aware of, especially with a focus on HDR in any format.

I could go on and on about front projection and its inability of even remotely comparing to flat panel display technology, but I have no interest in doing so. At one time, front projection was the reference standard both in picture quality and size, this is simply no longer so.

Front projection is simply unable and unacceptable in terms of picture quality. Yes, sizing is there, but contrasted by the losses of picture quality; doesn't an 'extremely large' flat panel (closing less?) make more sense?

Back to Digital Cinema. Already, the beginning transition from front projection in theaters has begun, transitioning into use of microLED flat panels. Now, this is going to get me back to the theaters, that I have been absent from since the beginning of HD.

My apology for getting into front projection. Believe it or not, I really do not care about it, but given my encounters recently (this year) seeing the best front projection (laser by the way) and finding them extremely disappointing, I simply got going on it (for a bit).

[Penton-Man]

Things I missed at NAB show 2018 -

1. “….and it all has to do with HDR.” Anyone hear what Mark had to say? https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...o1aMefs#t=1m8s

2. An 8K Thunderdome match between Michael Cioni (https://twitter.com/michael_cioni/st...68958725984256) and Bill Arri Bennett (https://twitter.com/CineBill/status/983420155307806720)

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Especially for rural areas where folks don’t readily have access to ophthalmologists close by - https://www.aao.org/headline/first-a...-approved-by-f

Mais c'est très bien ça, mince alors.

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

jibucha, I like your passion.

Vous avez aussi constaté, parfait.

[LordoftheRings]

We are in the HDR video business...thread...TVs with HDR, displays, including from front projectors with 4K HDR, yes, I like both, small and big, ...IMAX 3D/4K HDR.

HDR10+ is advancement, the next wave.
I mentioned HDR10 with front projectors because I thought it was part of advancement too?

I like reading your posts, it improves knowledge.

Originally Posted by jibucha

Ok; I did not realize that point. I thought that you were referencing UHD/HDR10 and its intended transitioning into UHD/HDR10+, including what Samsung promises of it.

Regarding HDR and front projection; I have to wonder about that point that you made regarding HDR10; why?

A point of reference and consideration. Digital Cinema is typically at 48-nits (14 foot-lamberts (fL)) and Dolby Vision Cinema is 96-nits (31 fL / 106 nits).

With all the focus on nit-levels in home consumer displays, I have to at least wonder about this rather dramatic disconnect (as I see it). And, yes, while these numbers are what they are, I recognize there is an 'relative' improvement.

However on several occasions, including the past few days, I have personally seen the current flagship home front projection by both JVC and SONY, costing between $35K and $45K, professionally calibrated, finding their 'only - whatever' to be size of image; certainly failing by any picture quality standard that I am aware of, especially with a focus on HDR in any format.

I could go on and on about front projection and its inability of even remotely comparing to flat panel display technology, but I have no interest in doing so. At one time, front projection was the reference standard both in picture quality and size, this is simply no longer so.

Front projection is simply unable and unacceptable in terms of picture quality. Yes, sizing is there, but contrasted by the losses of picture quality; doesn't an 'extremely large' flat panel (closing less?) make more sense?

Back to Digital Cinema. Already, the beginning transition from front projection in theaters has begun, transitioning into use of microLED flat panels. Now, this is going to get me back to the theaters, that I have been absent from since the beginning of HD.

My apology for getting into front projection. Believe it or not, I really do not care about it, but given my encounters recently (this year) seeing the best front projection (laser by the way) and finding them extremely disappointing, I simply got going on it (for a bit).

[mrtickleuk]

Originally Posted by jibucha

ok
thank you

better?

Almost - please always reply BELOW what you are quoting, and trim what isn't needed for context

Thankyou for your long reply to my question. I certainly don't agree with it, but thankyou for explaining why you regret that HDR10 is an improvement on SDR.