HDR Discussion Thread

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

But I'm only concerned with it with discs, because with discs I'm kind of stuck when I bought into the wrong format.

If I cared about streaming, I wouldn't really bother at all tbh, since the content will always be up-to-date in the end. I might just need new hardware. With the discs I bought, I may be f***** though. Happened to people with HD-DVD not so long ago.

You still might be f***** though even with your current Dolby Vision discs. If the industry swerves towards HDR10+ due to its lower cost, superior HDR backwards compatibility across all delivery formats, and open standard nature, then the hardware will inevitable swerve that way as well over time. And then the discs you thought you were "future proofing" with Dolby Vision dynamic metadata will only provide static HDR10 metadata on future HDR10+ only hardware.

I haven't invested any money in a set with dynamic metadata support yet, as I'm waiting out the dynamic HDR format war. So I have no horse in this race other than appreciating the superior HDR10 backwards compatibility of HDR10+ since I use a projector.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PaulGo

One question as I understand it HDR10 sets the level for the whole movie so it is considered static. Why can't HDR10 change on a scene by scene basis?

HDR10 DOES change on a scene by scene basis which is probably the single biggest misconception about HDR, the content itself is graded scene by scene and is not locked to a constant 1000/4000 nits no more than regular SDR content is 'locked' to a constant 120 nits. It's just a container which can go as dark or as bright or as colourful or as desaturated as the colourist desires in any given shot.

The problem is that the interpretation of the image by the target display is 'static'. This is not an issue for something that can resolve 1000/4000 nits and 100% of P3 because it has no need of mapping the image, you will see it as the colourist intended. But when it comes to mapping that material into something that has less brightness and less colour volume THEN the inherent problems with static metadata rear their head because the display has no idea about how best to maximise the image from shot to shot to best fit the parameters of the display, it can only offer a 'best guess' which varies from manufacturer to manufacturer.

[edit] Indeed, this is where DV's dynamic system is unique because it doesn't just derive dynamic metadata from the master, it also specifies that a 'golden reference' for each display type be programmed in so that x display actually knows how best to leverage the metadata against its specific capabilities. A map is less useful without a compass, you know? This is also why DV on projectors ain't happening any time soon, because they cannot isolate a particular 'golden reference' owing to the projection screen's qualities being almost as important as the projektor itself, and the two are rarely bundled together in any official capacity.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Projectors can't use dynamic metadata of any sort due to inability to dynamically measure screen brightness, so even regular HDR10 is not going to be obsolete anytime soon.

Projectors are also a TINY part of the market. Most of them aren't even 4K - they're 2K.

12bit on its own doesn't mean much. Unless you also think that high-res DVD-Audio obsoleted CD & MP3? The dynamic metadata is what matters, not the extra 2 bits (diminishing returns).

DVD-Audio was competing with SACD *and* "free" music downloads (remember Napster?). The Atmos/DTS:X comparison is more apt.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by HeatEquation

Don't mind him. He's just salty because he knows the only way he'll be able to view Avatar 2 and Deadpool 2, along with the next X-Men movie, in dynamic HDR on disc will be with HDR10+ compatible equipment.

This is most likely what will happen given the Fox alliance, yes.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Projectors are also a TINY part of the market. Most of them aren't even 4K - they're 2K.

You can buy a 4K UHD home theater projector for under $2500 with HDR10 now, such as the Optoma UHD65.

Projector owners also tend to spend an obscene amount of money on movie related merch despite being a small percentage of the market

DVD-Audio was competing with SACD *and* "free" music downloads (remember Napster?). The Atmos/DTS:X comparison is more apt.

Right, HDR10+/DTS:X combo does the same thing as Dolby Vision/Atmos combo and costs buckets less money over time. But I'm sure the studios won't notice that, right? After all, movie studios are genuinely just trying to cater to Dolby fans and not make more profit...

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by Ruined

You still might be f***** though even with your current Dolby Vision discs.

That's my point exactly. That's why I think it sucks that the industry first comes up with DV and other companies then think it's a good idea to intruduce sth. new aka HDR10+. The consumer has to pay for the stupid industry ...

The only reason I'm not abandoning UHD discs completely again right now, is because I consider both, HDR10+ and DV, unnecessary in the first place.

I'd be more worried if HDR12 was announced tomorrow.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

That's my point exactly. That's why I think it sucks that the industry first comes up with DV and other companies then think it's a good idea to intruduce sth. new aka HDR10+. The consumer has to pay for the stupid industry ...

The only reason I'm not abandoning UHD discs completely again right now, is because I consider both, HDR10+ and DV, unnecessary in the first place.

I'd be more worried if HDR12 was announced tomorrow.

There really aren't that many Dolby Vision discs out now in the first place though. So its not like you'd be losing a lot of cash if you realize now they may end up "HDR10" in the long run.

HDR10+ and DV aren't really necessary unless you have a 4K TV that can't meet the brightness demands of HDR, such as most OLED TVs. If you have something like a Samsung QLED all you really need is HDR10 anyway. But for those TVs that can't meet HDR brightness demands, dynamic metadata differences are actually quite noticeable.

[Staying Salty]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Cool. With Panasonic onboard, along with Samsung, I think HDR10+ is going to be the future HDR metadata of choice on UHDBD. Its just a matter of time before its adopted as the standard of choice.

See Crystal Ball Dance Off for my response to this: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...8&postcount=22

Originally Posted by Ruined

Cool. With Panasonic onboard, along with Samsung, I think HDR10+ is going to be the future HDR metadata of choice on UHDBD.

As Panasonic stated, "with HDR10+ being an open standard it allows us to bring it much farther down the range." The extra cost savings allows for implementation on cheaper sets and greater penetration.

In MHO this is Panasonic gobbledygook. It has been stated that the royalty is 2 to 3 dollars a set. (Please don’t make me produce a link. ) There are cheaper sets that already have Dolby Vison. (TCL and Visio come to mind) Also UHDBD requires HDMI 2.1. You, as a consumer will pay more for that connector/implementation than DV.

[HeatEquation]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Projectors can't use dynamic metadata of any sort due to inability to dynamically measure screen brightness, so even regular HDR10 is not going to be obsolete anytime soon.

12bit on its own doesn't mean much. Unless you also think that high-res DVD-Audio obsoleted CD & MP3? The dynamic metadata is what matters, not the extra 2 bits (diminishing returns).

Additionally, Samsung, Fox, and Panasonic have also said that HDR10+ was developed with future improvement in mind. When consumer 12 bit panels become the norm (which is still several years away) you'll have HDR12/HDR12+.

Things are look very bleak for Dolby, as HDR10+ is gaining a ton of traction at an insanely quick pace. Fox already on board, Universal has a partnership with Samsung and is likely to follow, and WB is rumored to do the same. Philips is rumored to be the 3rd TV manufacturer to support the format. Xbox One X will probably add support as well given the recent partnership with Samsung. And this is just the beginning, as the format was only officially announced just 5 months ago.

Meanwhile, DV had a significant head start, yet it can be found on fewer than 10 discs currently (a collection of absolute garbage movies, no less) and only a handful more announced. On top of that, people have complained about grey letterbox bars, over saturation, black crush, and clipping.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Staying Salty

In MHO this is Panasonic gobbledygook. It has been stated that the royalty is 2 to 3 dollars a set. (Please don’t make me produce a link. ) There are cheaper sets that already have Dolby Vison. (TCL and Visio come to mind) Also UHDBD requires HDMI 2.1. You, as a consumer will pay more for that connector/implementation than DV.

There are 18.7 million UHD sets projected to be sold in 2018.

18.7 million x $2.50 average royalty per set = $46,750,000.00 in royalties to Dolby.

This is not a small amount of money, and if you have a decent share of the market it is a massive amount of money.

HDR10+ has no royalty fee. Also no, HDR10+ does not require HDMI 2.1 (several HDMI 2.0b sets support HDR10+), but HDMI 2.1 does guarantee HDR10+ HDMI chipset compatibility. HDMI 2.1 is going to be the standard going forward anyway, so its not like you will pay extra for it. HDMI 2.0b is going to go away over the next 1-3 years.

[HeatEquation]

Originally Posted by Staying Salty

Also UHDBD requires HDMI 2.1. You, as a consumer will pay more for that connector/implementation than DV.

Stop spreading this lie. Not all TVs require HDMI 2.1 to support HDR10+ via HDMI.

[DanBa]

Originally Posted by PaulGo

One question as I understand it HDR10 sets the level for the whole movie so it is considered static. Why can't HDR10 change on a scene by scene basis?

As there is no standard HDR10 tone/gamut mapping specification, HDR10 display adaptation implementations are different and some HDR10 display adaptation implementation can make use of scene-by-scene content information.
That is the case of LG’s Active HDR10.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/465-hi...l#post50857057

Scene-by-scene content information is created on the fly by a HDR10 incoming video signal analysis process running on an Active HDR-compliant TV.
Maximum, mean, minimum luminance values of the incoming HDR10 video signal are computed in real time on a scene-by-scene basis. These SMPTE ST 2094-10 dynamic metadata allow more accurate color volume mapping processed by the Dolby Vision Display Management of the Active HDR-compliant TV.

[DanBa]

Originally Posted by DanBa

HDMI 2.1 is not necessary for ST 2094-40 dynamic metadata of HDR10+ and for proprietary dynamic metadata of Dolby Vision. And these dynamic metadata can be transferred across HDMI 1.4 in a proprietary way à la Dolby (i.e. dynamic metadata are embedded into the uncompressed video flow, and A/V Receivers have problems while adding AVR screen menus into the video flow) as when there was no HDMI standardization on the subject.


Otherwise, in a standard way, the ST 2094 dynamic metadata signaling across HDMI 2.1 is detailed in the standard CTA-861-G, the base document of the HDMI 2.1 specification.
https://standards.cta.tech/kwspub/pu...-G-Preview.pdf

"In CTA-861-G, the HDR Dynamic Metadata Extended InfoFrame is used by a source device [external media player] for identifying and delivering HDR dynamic metadata to a sink device [ST 2094 based Dynamic HDR TV].
The HDR Dynamic Metadata Data Block is used for signaling a sink device’s specific HDR dynamic metadata support capabilities to a source device."
http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/...01v010201p.pdf
https://www.sra.samsung.com/assets/U...94-40-v1.1.pdf

"The HDMI Forum has assessed the applicability of the CTA-861-G Specification to HDMI 2.0b."
[HDMI Forum]
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_2_0/

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Ruined

There are 18.7 million UHD sets projected to be sold in 2018.

18.7 million x $2.50 average royalty per set = $46,750,000.00 in royalties to Dolby.

Spread out over multiple manufacturers who are well aware. Who also pay royalties in HEVC/AVC/MPEG/DD decoding already. Who pay for the DSP chips embedded already. Who don't want to be beholden to Samsung.
HDMI also isn't royalty free but DisplayPort is. How many home theater devices use DisplayPort?

HDR10+ has no royalty fee. Also no, HDR10+ does not require HDMI 2.1 (several HDMI 2.0b sets support HDR10+), but HDMI 2.1 does guarantee HDR10+ HDMI chipset compatibility. HDMI 2.1 is going to be the standard going forward anyway, so its not like you will pay extra for it. HDMI 2.0b is going to go away over the next 1-3 years.

HDMI 2.1 still requires a new UHD player. A new receiver if you have home theater, and a new TV.

[Staying Salty]

Originally Posted by DanBa

"The HDMI Forum has assessed the applicability of the CTA-861-G Specification to HDMI 2.0b."
[HDMI Forum]
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_2_0/

Originally Posted by Staying Salty

HDMI 2.1 for HDR10+ is required on 4K Blu-ray players in order for A/V receivers to pass the information thru correctly.

Can some one with the knowledge answer this in layman's terms please,

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Spread out over multiple manufacturers who are well aware. Who also pay royalties in...

HEVC

Mandatory

AVC

Mandatory

MPEG

Mandatory

DD decoding

Mandatory

...

And Dolby Vision? Optional.

Who don't want to be beholden to Samsung.

How is an open standard with no royalty fee "beholden to Samsung"?

And this exactly the reason Panasonic gave for supporting HDR10+, Dolby Vision costs too much.

HDMI also isn't royalty free but DisplayPort is. How many home theater devices use DisplayPort?

HDMI was massively entrenched in the home theater market long before displayport. Dolby Vision and its handful of discs and lack of support from what is by far the largest TV manufacturer is not.

HDMI 2.1 still requires a new UHD player. A new receiver if you have home theater, and a new TV.

Good thing HDR10+ doesn't necessarily require HDMI 2.1 in all cases Several HDMI 2.0b TVs are getting HDR10+ and I wouldn't be surprised if XBOX ONE also got HDR10+ despite HDMI 2.0b. Also likely will not require a new receiver in many cases.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Staying Salty

Can some one with the knowledge answer this in layman's terms please,

Yes as stated above, HDR10+ like Dolby Vision does not require HDMI 2.1 (several HDMI 2.0b models support HDR10+), but not all HDR10 products will be upgradable to HDR10+.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meld...t-3820712.html

According to this, Warner is still behind Dolby Vision, but is also considering HDR10+ now. They are also talking about the possibilty of having both, DV and HDR10+, on one disc. (I don't think I'd like that btw, because I consider both a waste of disc space)

They also state that there were problems with Dolby Vision and that's why there are no Warner Dolby Vision titles yet (resp. had to be cancelled). But the first Warner DV title is supposed to come by the end of the year now.

Where have I seen this movie before?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2005/10...ay-hd-dvd.html

[DanBa]

Originally Posted by Staying Salty

Can some one with the knowledge answer this in layman's terms please,

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/465-hi...l#post54128881


HDR10 Plus dynamic metadata could be transferred across HDMI 2.0b:

. "The Consumer Technology Association (CTA) has recently notified the HDMI Forum of the adoption of a new version of the CTA-861 Specification, CTA-861-G. This new version provides additional support for HDR Video transport by including (among others) an extension to the static metadata signaling to include the HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma) EOTF.
The HDMI Forum has assessed the applicability of the CTA-861-G Specification to HDMI 2.0b.
The HDMI Forum has confirmed that the extension of the static metadata signaling to include HLG can be utilized under the existing HDMI 2.0b Specification."
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_2_0/
[i.e. The HDMI Forum has not confirmed that the extension of the static metadata signaling to include ST 2094 Dynamic HDR can be utilized under the existing HDMI 2.0b Specification."]
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/465-hi...l#post51413505
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/465-hi...l#post54739608


. According to SMPTE, the transmission of SMPTE ST 2094 dynamic metadata across HDMI is described in CTA-861-G.




. "In CTA-861-G, the HDR Dynamic Metadata Extended InfoFrame is used by a source device [external media player] for identifying and delivering HDR dynamic metadata to a sink device [ST 2094 based Dynamic HDR TV].
The HDR Dynamic Metadata Data Block is used for signaling a sink device’s specific HDR dynamic metadata support capabilities to a source device."
http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/...01v010201p.pdf
https://www.sra.samsung.com/assets/U...94-40-v1.1.pdf

[Staying Salty]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Yes as stated above, HDR10+ like Dolby Vision does not require HDMI 2.1 (several HDMI 2.0b models support HDR10+), but not all HDR10 products will be upgradable to HDR10+.

So does 4K Blu-ray players require HDMI 2.1 to show HDR10+ ?