HDR Discussion Thread

[DisplayCalNoob]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Follow-up from 2017 on DSC - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...c#post13576062

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.ph...&id=1561624113

Is one of the benefits of DSC is HDMI 2.1 won't require the consumer to turn on 4:4:4 at each input for 4k HDR playback? The display will just switch to lossless native YCbCr 4:4:4, while the playback device sends content in native YCbCr 4:2:0.

[LordoftheRings]

Just for fun: For anyone interested in state-of-the-art HDR moving picture quality ...



The audio (Atmos) too is right up there among the best.
This is for technical merits, not for the film's true "emotional" impact.

[Penton-Man]

talking adversarial -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhUmSeko1ZE#t=6m35s
an adversarial fighter jet - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...t#post16398218

lurking about yesterday on ‘the island’, not that far from the San Diego Convention Center

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by DisplayCalNoob

Is one of the benefits of DSC is HDMI 2.1 won't require the consumer to turn on 4:4:4 at each input for 4k HDR playback? The display will just switch to lossless native YCbCr 4:4:4, while the playback device sends content in native YCbCr 4:2:0.

ask Kris https://www.deepdiveav.com/

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by DisplayCalNoob

Is one of the benefits of DSC is HDMI 2.1 won't require the consumer to turn on 4:4:4 at each input for 4k HDR playback? The display will just switch to lossless native YCbCr 4:4:4, while the playback device sends content in native YCbCr 4:2:0.

Not sure the two are in any way related re: DSC?

I don't recall hearing of DSC before but from the quickest of glances it appears to be a method of compressing the video image that's squirted down the pipe? When dealing with video images sent over current HDMI they are essentially uncompressed (having first been unpacked and uprated from its heavily compressed transport stream by the playback device) which is what takes up so much bandwidth, but with DSC the image is being subjected to another form of compression once it comes off the playback device so that they can squeeze more data in.

[Staying Salty]

[Show spoiler]

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Staying Salty

[Show spoiler]

Wowza!

[Penton-Man]

nothing yet from Deep Dive AV?
Yo Kris, as LordoftheRings indicated, we’re knock, knock, knockin on heaven’s door – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnKbImRPhTE#t=1s

In this case heaven being –

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

almost 200,000 views in 30 days

P.S.
DisplayCal, from what I understood about it from my time at CES 2017 - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...c#post13576062 before it was reported by AV journalists is that DSC primarily enables more efficient compression efficiency of YCbCr 4:2:0

[LordoftheRings]

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

[Kris Deering]

Originally Posted by DisplayCalNoob

Is one of the benefits of DSC is HDMI 2.1 won't require the consumer to turn on 4:4:4 at each input for 4k HDR playback? The display will just switch to lossless native YCbCr 4:4:4, while the playback device sends content in native YCbCr 4:2:0.

Every display already converts whatever signal you send it to 444. Being able to send 420 from a source device only benefits you if the color conversion to 444 is done better in the display vs the source, which isn’t always the case. Stacey’s disc has some great patterns for evaluating this.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

Every display already converts whatever signal you send it to 444. Being able to send 420 from a source device only benefits you if the color conversion to 444 is done better in the display vs the source, which isn’t always the case. Stacey’s disc has some great patterns for evaluating this.

Exactly. Turning on 4:4:4 'enhanced' modes is just so that the HDMI can accept the higher bandwidth signals in the first place.

[sapiendut]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

Every display already converts whatever signal you send it to 444. Being able to send 420 from a source device only benefits you if the color conversion to 444 is done better in the display vs the source, which isn’t always the case. Stacey’s disc has some great patterns for evaluating this.

/\ /\ THIS !! /\ /\

For those who don’t believe me and kept saying “all UHD players have the same picture quality”, get this disc and test it yourself. This pattern will very clearly demonstrate the difference of the chroma upsampling capabilities of various players and TVs.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by sapiendut

/\ /\ THIS !! /\ /\

For those who don’t believe me and kept saying “all UHD players have the same picture quality”, get this disc and test it yourself. This pattern will very clearly demonstrate the difference of the chroma upsampling capabilities of various players and TVs.

How much difference it actually makes in motion is more contentious...

[sapiendut]

Yup!

Regardless, whether the difference is visible to one person or not is very subjective, but the difference is there. Saying there is no difference different players and or TVs chroma upsampling is plain wrong. (Usually comes from the “digital is digital, there is no difference between players” group tho )

[DJR662]

But how much will the difference be and will you be able to tell by eye when watching real world content in motion? That's what this is really about IMO.

I understand that there might be differences between players when throwing test patterns at them. The thing I'm having a problem with, is when people say there is a significant difference in picture quality that is easily noticable when watching a BD and/or UHD.

[Fendergopher]

If the difference was easily noticeable in motion when watching normal content then most enthusiasts would likely be buying the exact same player, they're not though. Some of that is down to certain features or format support, but basic disc playback isn't going to look drastically different from player to player. Unless it's a Samsung of course...

[sapiendut]

Some people are more sensitive than others, especially when it became second nature to them to see the difference. My problem is that there are so many keyboard warriors that simply claim that all players are the same, yet many of them don’t even know where to look and what to look. Making things worse, usually this same group of people are the ones the most vocal claiming that false statement.

[sapiendut]

Originally Posted by DJR662

But how much will the difference be and will you be able to tell by eye when watching real world content in motion? That's what this is really about IMO.

I understand that there might be differences between players when throwing test patterns at them. The thing I'm having a problem with, is when people say there is a significant difference in picture quality that is easily noticable when watching a BD and/or UHD.

If you know what to look, or where too look, sometimes the difference can be visually significant.

For example, when I watch a single chip DLP, be it a regular single light or 3-LED variety, I get nauseated (within a minute or two) and/or puke (literally, usually after 5-10 minutes). It runs the family I guess, my daughter without knowing the existence of DLP, puked at some of her friends and my friends’ HT, and 100% all the time due to the single-chip DLP’s colour wheel

[DJR662]

Originally Posted by sapiendut

If you know what to look, or where too look, sometimes the difference can be visually significant.

For example, when I watch a single chip DLP, be it a regular single light or 3-LED variety, I get nauseated (within a minute or two) and/or puke (literally, usually after 5-10 minutes). It runs the family I guess, my daughter without knowing the existence of DLP, puked at some of her friends and my friends’ HT, and 100% all the time due to the single-chip DLP’s colour wheel

I was thinking more of two players from a different brand hooked up to the same TV and then let them play the exact same disc based content.

[Fendergopher]

Originally Posted by sapiendut

Some people are more sensitive than others, especially when it became second nature to them to see the difference. My problem is that there are so many keyboard warriors that simply claim that all players are the same, yet many of them don’t even know where to look and what to look. Making things worse, usually this same group of people are the ones the most vocal claiming that false statement.

I agree, it's very important that anyone engaging in conversation about technical topics knows what they're talking about, lest they sully the overall discussion. The main distinction I'd want to make is between objectively observable specs and how that translates to normal day-to-day use cases, which isn't always obvious. Being a little humble also goes a long way, there's always someone who knows more than I do.