HDR Discussion Thread

[Opips3]

Originally Posted by ray0414

Little soft pic... I noticed top left cover a cloud.

Bruceames, look superior picture.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by Opips3

Little soft pic... I noticed top left cover a cloud.

Bruceames, look superior picture.

Different cameras will capture differently, the thing to pay attention to is the sun.

[bruceames]

Actually both pics look pretty damn good. On par or even better than the nit-starved DV pic, IMHO. Now I really feel like I'm not missing out on much, if anything at all. Would much rather have a 1200 nit TV that has slight clipping on only the most extreme highlights in a few movies, than have the whole picture downgraded to meet the TVs lower specs.

Speaking of extreme highlights, I read that the brightest measured area in The Lego Movie was only 1200 nits. I doubt that the sun scene here is much higher than that, if it is at all. WB realizes the UHD BD has HDR standards of 1000 nits min, and even though they may master at 4000, the actual brightest scene I bet is in the low 1000's.

Edit: Yeah looking at the rest of the picture I notice that Ray's picture is a little darker, with greater color saturation (slightly different colors as well, notably the orange glow), which will reduce the amount of visible detail in some areas. So the settings are obviously different on our TVs. On my Sony all the settings are default except having color at 65 instead of 50. I'll take another pic at 50 to see if the color scheme is even closer to the DV pic (it's pretty close as it is). Also I'll take an alternate pic with the Sammy player on standard rather than dynamic mode.

[ray0414]

^^^my camera crushes big time. It's not that dark in person. I agree Bruce, id take slight clipping on a tv that has more horsepower than a weaker tv with slightly more detail.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

I think the HDR timeline might look like this:

2018: SMPTE 2094 and ICtCp added to HEVC
2019: SMPTE 2094 and ICtCp used in consumer products

Reminds me, Jaclyn will be presenting in a few days at IBC 2016….

http://www.ibc.org/speaker-library/jaclyn-pytlarz
Note to Bruce…now that’s ^ a smile despite the fact that devising new color spaces is intense.

[Penton-Man]

Come to think of it, in terms of papers, as a follow-up to some of the Q&A from last year’s IBC Best Conference Paper, this year, ‘Image Adaption Requirements for High Dynamic Range Video under Reference and Non reference Viewing Conditions’ is a supporting paper for this upcoming IBC 2016 session, so it won’t be presented at IBC, but will be published as part of the Technical Conference.

Keep an eye out for it.

[Penton-Man]

Speaking of dee eye (and beyond, i.e. the HVS), either Pat from Dolby was misquoted here….“According to Griffis, the human visual system (HVS) can see just a handful of photons; perhaps 40" (http://www.displaydaily.com/display-...dr10-clarified) or else Pat needs to study up on Blu-ray.com more frequently….https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...n#post12576905

[DanBa]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

(http://www.displaydaily.com/display-...dr10-clarified)

"When asked about the added cost of Dolby Vision compared to HDR10, Griffis said, “the incremental cost is minimal and frankly a fraction of the total TV cost which is much more driven by the display electronics and electronic components, not royalties.”"

Samsung 65KS9500: Only HDR10, Edge-lit: $2800
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-...&skuId=5034500
Samsung 65KS9000: Only HDR10, Edge-lit: $2500
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-...&skuId=5035000
Vizio P65: Dolby Vision, HDR10, FALD: $2000
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/vizio-65...&skuId=4352400
LG 65UH7700: Dolby Vision, HDR10, Edge-lit: $1500
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/lg-65-cl...&skuId=4954100
Vizio M65: Dolby Vision, HDR10, FALD: $1300
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/vizio-65...&skuId=4989200

[bruceames]

I wouldn't be surprised if Dolby is not charging anything on hardware implementation in order to make money on content. They worked extensively with Vizio so it's very possible they even subsidized it, if not monetary-wise, then with their time.

Look at Netflix. They want every remote to have a Netflix button and cost to the manufacturer is not going to get in the way with that.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by bruceames

I wouldn't be surprised if Dolby is not charging anything on hardware implementation in order to make money on content. They worked extensively with Vizio so it's very possible they even subsidized it, if not monetary-wise, then with their time.

Dolby's licensing fees have always been more than reasonable, part of the reason they're on so many devices out there for audio. Fees were taken into consideration when they were recommended for both ATSC (for AC-3) and now ATSC 3.0 (with AC-4). DV is no different.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Dolby's licensing fees have always been more than reasonable, part of the reason they're on so many devices out there for audio. Fees were taken into consideration when they were recommended for both ATSC (for AC-3) and now ATSC 3.0 (with AC-4). DV is no different.

Yes. My point was that DV licensing fees would be more of an issue on content rather than hardware, since it's competing with open source HDR10. Both HDR10 dynamic and DV can't reside on one disc, like they can on a hardware device.

[Opips3]

Originally Posted by bruceames

Yes. My point was that DV licensing fees would be more of an issue on content rather than hardware, since it's competing with open source HDR10. Both HDR10 dynamic and DV can't reside on one disc, like they can on a hardware device.

Sony without DV and will conitue HDR10 to 2020. Silly licensing fee would more...

Enough Atmos and HDR. Oh 4K native films please.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by bruceames

Yes. My point was that DV licensing fees would be more of an issue on content rather than hardware, since it's competing with open source HDR10. Both HDR10 dynamic and DV can't reside on one disc, like they can on a hardware device.

Actually no. The software is not really an issue. Dolby gets most of its money from the authoring packages and playback devices.


Dolby wasn't really hurt (and by the same fashion DTS didn't make out like bandits) by most BD lossless tracks being DTS-HD MA instead of TrueHD.

[Show spoiler]If you ask me why I'll have to kill you.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Opips3

Sony without DV and will conitue HDR10 to 2020. Silly licensing fee would more...

Enough Atmos and HDR. Oh 4K native films please.

Sony was one of the first to announce 4K UHD authoring with Dolby Vision.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Sony was one of the first to announce 4K UHD authoring with Dolby Vision.

Is there a reason their newest UHD Blu-ray's have yet to include 12 bit Dolby Vision if that's the case?

Not enough BD100's available?

The grading and authoring software for the latest dynamic Dolby Vision isn't ready for prime time?

They're pissed off they didn't come up with this technology themselves and have to rely on Dolby?

Something else?

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Actually no. The software is not really an issue. Dolby gets most of its money from the authoring packages and playback devices.


Dolby wasn't really hurt (and by the same fashion DTS didn't make out like bandits) by most BD lossless tracks being DTS-HD MA instead of TrueHD.

[Show spoiler]If you ask me why I'll have to kill you.

So do think that the fees Dolby charges for DV (whether it's software or hardware relate) will have little or no influence on the outcome of the impending format war between dynamic HDR techs?

[flyry]

Not sure if this is the right place to ask but is it necessary to buy an hdmi 2.0 cable for my cable box for my new 4k tv or does that not matter since they only broadcast in 1080i anyway.

I got one for my UHD player

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by bruceames

So do think that the fees Dolby charges for DV (whether it's software or hardware relate) will have little or no influence on the outcome of the impending format war between dynamic HDR techs?

No. It will come down to implementation, software.


Look at what Dolby did with AC-4 and Atmos compared to their competitors. Not even close. Offering high performance and solutions for encoding, playback, and hardware in spades.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by flyry

Not sure if this is the right place to ask but is it necessary to buy an hdmi 2.0 cable for my cable box for my new 4k tv or does that not matter since they only broadcast in 1080i anyway.

I got one for my UHD player

No, not unless you get a decoder box with 4k support. What you are looking for in particular with cabling is certified 18 Gbps compliance.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Is there a reason their newest UHD Blu-ray's have yet to include 12 bit Dolby Vision if that's the case?

Not enough BD100's available?

The grading and authoring software for the latest dynamic Dolby Vision isn't ready for prime time?

They're pissed off they didn't come up with this technology themselves and have to rely on Dolby?

Something else?

Sony announced a tie-up with Dolby re: using their Dolby Vision suite to mastering their HDR content in general, the press release made no mention of UHD Blu-ray whatsoever. (Same with Warners when they announced a similar partnership with Dolby re: HDR)

Besides, it'd sure help if consumer players actually existed that could fully decode the DV UHD discs, no? Even if Pete is correct and the mastering, authoring etc for legit DV on disc has already been done, I doubt we'll see those respective get discs released until the playback hardware is in place to support it in the home.