HDR is crayons

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by nick4Knight

Maybe you just need to admit you have a digital projection bias, eh

IMO if one is into home theater it should be ones goal to reproduce that epic scale of commercial cinema, as large as space permits in ones living space.

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Never had a projector in my life.

But that doesn't change the fact that a lot of people have subpar experiences with HDR because you need a $1500 TVs MINIMUM to get good HDR performances.

People with projectors and normal screens are basically left out because a proper HDR->SDR conversion is not possibile using the information on the disc..

And that is a shortcoming, it's simply my opinion.

I think more specifically the shortcoming is the lack of any real standard/guidelines for tone mapping technique. Right now its basically the wild west with no tonemapping standards in that two people can have vastly different experiences with similarly spec'd equipment simply due to differences in tonemapping technique in player or display.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by Ruined

IMO if one is into home theater it should be ones goal to reproduce that epic scale of commercial cinema, as large as space permits in ones living space.



I think more specifically the shortcoming is the lack of any real standard/guidelines for tone mapping technique. Right now its basically the wild west with no tonemapping standards in that two people can have vastly different experiences with similarly spec'd equipment simply due to differences in tonemapping technique in player or display.

Yes, that was exactly my point. But the best solution would have been to have the ability to "reconstruct" the SDR grade using metadata from the actual disc.

It's not that different from the work MadVR does on PC software players. But even better because the studios themselves would give us the intended SDR grade....

[chip75]

Would some people be happier if they dumped the Blu-ray from the releases and added a SDR release in UHD? They might be but it would probably be cost prohibitive.

If the HDR grade is coming from the raw data (digital or film), then why is it so difficult to include an SDR grade as part of that data? The SDR grade is coming from the same data as well, is something technically holding them back from doing this? or is do the studios think SDR equals Blu-ray?

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by chip75

Would some people be happier if they dumped the Blu-ray from the releases and added a SDR release in UHD? They might be but it would probably be cost prohibitive.

If the HDR grade is coming from the raw data (digital or film), then why is it so difficult to include an SDR grade as part of that data? The SDR grade is coming from the same data as well, is something technically holding them back from doing this? or is do the studios think SDR equals Blu-ray?

Thats what ive been advocating from the start, both HDR and SDR BT2020 grades for old films that are evergreens. Of course, replicating the old BD is cheaper - but has the shortcomings of that format.

[StingingVelvet]

*checks thread*

*sees 4 more pages of the same shit*

*leaves thread*

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

*checks thread*

*sees 4 more pages of the same shit*

*leaves thread*

HDR is crayons

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

To be honest, there was a simple solution for this problem but they couldn't deliver it:

- To use an HDR system directly backwards compatible with SDR. I mean a system where using metadata the player could output the correct SDR grade as intended. Something like a "reverse Dolby Vision layer"

They couldn't find a way to do it so the HDR->SDR conversion depends entirely on the UHD BD Player with no TRUE standard in place. It's the biggest shortcoming of the format IMO

The irony being that the version used to create the dynamic DV metadata is indeed a 100-nit SDR 709 trim pass! But because you would physically need a TV with Dolby Vision in order to access this metadata-led SDR 709 downconversion then its inclusion is essentially useless, for you will never find a TV that does Dolby Vision without it also being HDR. (Same goes for the Philips/Technicolour HDR variant which also uses metadata to derive a content-derived SDR downversion.)

Could they have included a Dolby Vision-led SDR downconversion inside the player, so that if HDR was turned off then it would do the downconversion to SDR using the DV metadata? Yeah I guess. But seeing as DV itself wasn't a thing software-wise until a good 15 months after the UHD Blu format had debuted then it probably wasn't at the forefront of anybody's mind to build in an SDR DV version inside the hardware, they were busy just trying to get HDR DV to work on the hardware.

If people go back to my posts in the HDR discussion threads from around 2014/15 then they'll see that this was my biggest concern about UHD, that there was no set SDR downconversion method in place. In the end, after about a year of grappling with SDR conversion and all the weird and wonderful things it does to HDR, I gave up and bought an absolute monster of an HDR TV.

[Geoff D]

Penton just posted this video in the HDR discussion thread as a primer for HDR, it's been around for a while but it's the first time I've seen it and it's so interesting how the speaker is covering all the sorts of things that some complain about when it comes to how SDR 709 looks vs HDR 2020. I don't mean "revisonism" so much but how HDR vs SDR pans out in general.

The narrator remarks that the images of animals against bright rocks were deliberately boosted into a yellowy tone in SDR by a different colourist to sell the effect, while the dynamism and contrast of HDR means that it doesn't need to cheat the colour in order to convey the intensity of the shot, so it ends up looking more natural and yet more vibrant at the same time. He also mentions how blue can end up being mixed with green in the SDR volume if you want more brightness on a blue sky, hence the more cyany skies we've become accustomed to in SDR 709 perhaps? Fascinating stuff and thanks to Penton for posting it again.

https://vimeo.com/203351189#t=1h6m34s

[KevinStriker]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Penton just posted this video in the HDR discussion thread as a primer for HDR, it's been around for a while but it's the first time I've seen it and it's so interesting how the speaker is covering all the sorts of things that some complain about when it comes to how SDR 709 looks vs HDR 2020. I don't mean "revisonism" so much but how HDR vs SDR pans out in general.

The narrator remarks that the images of animals against bright rocks were deliberately boosted into a yellowy tone in SDR by a different colourist to sell the effect, while the dynamism and contrast of HDR means that it doesn't need to cheat the colour in order to convey the intensity of the shot, so it ends up looking more natural and yet more vibrant at the same time. He also mentions how blue can end up being mixed with green in the SDR volume if you want more brightness on a blue sky, hence the more cyany skies we've become accustomed to in SDR 709 perhaps? Fascinating stuff and thanks to Penton for posting it again.

https://vimeo.com/203351189#t=1h6m34s

I'd believe that just looking at the comparisons between Blu-ray and 4K of Blade Runner.
https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=1&x...2&l=1&i=1&go=1

[mysticwaterfall]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Penton just posted this video in the HDR discussion thread as a primer for HDR, it's been around for a while but it's the first time I've seen it and it's so interesting how the speaker is covering all the sorts of things that some complain about when it comes to how SDR 709 looks vs HDR 2020. I don't mean "revisonism" so much but how HDR vs SDR pans out in general.

The narrator remarks that the images of animals against bright rocks were deliberately boosted into a yellowy tone in SDR by a different colourist to sell the effect, while the dynamism and contrast of HDR means that it doesn't need to cheat the colour in order to convey the intensity of the shot, so it ends up looking more natural and yet more vibrant at the same time. He also mentions how blue can end up being mixed with green in the SDR volume if you want more brightness on a blue sky, hence the more cyany skies we've become accustomed to in SDR 709 perhaps? Fascinating stuff and thanks to Penton for posting it again.

https://vimeo.com/203351189#t=1h6m34s

Showing how HDR can be more accurate to "original intent" then SDR can once again. I dont even know why were still arguing about this.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by mysticwaterfall

Showing how HDR can be more accurate to "original intent" then SDR can once again. I dont even know why were still arguing about this.

Apparently, because you still aren’t hearing when we say that while it certainly can be, it isn’t always done in practice. Again, the potential of the format to render accurately is unprecedented at home and isn’t being questioned. The argument isn’t about that potential but how the format is being used by the industry.

[mysticwaterfall]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Apparently, because you still aren’t hearing when we say that while it certainly can be, it isn’t always done in practice. Again, the potential of the format to render accurately is unprecedented at home and isn’t being questioned. The argument isn’t about that potential but how the format is being used by the industry.

You could make the same argument for every video format ever made though. To throw out an entire technology just because it could be misused is incredibly silly. I'll certainly agree we dont need HDR just for the sake of it being there, but so far I cant really point to a movie I've watched where I'm like, "the movie was good, but the HDR really detracted from it".

[Noremac Mij]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Apparently, because you still aren’t hearing when we say that while it certainly can be, it isn’t always done in practice. Again, the potential of the format to render accurately is unprecedented at home and isn’t being questioned. The argument isn’t about that potential but how the format is being used by the industry.

It’s being used perfectly.

[brian9229]

Hdr was crayons, now they is markers.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by mysticwaterfall

To throw out an entire technology just because it could be misused is incredibly silly.

Nobody’s throwing it out because it could be misused; people are just warning about a particular type of misuse that does seem to be happening in certain cases.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Nobody’s throwing it out because it could be misused; people are just warning about a particular type of misuse that does seem to be happening in certain cases.

[citation needed]

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Noremac Mij

It’s being used perfectly.

Ah, good to know. And since you were intimately involved with the original theatrical color timing of every catalog movie yet released on the format, I’ll just consider you an infallible arbiter on this matter.

[brainofj72]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Ah, good to know. And since you were intimately involved with the original theatrical color timing of every catalog movie yet released on the format, I’ll just consider you an infallible arbiter on this matter.

So I suppose we should assume you were, then?

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

[citation needed]

Ok, I guess it’s anecdotal. I haven’t seen evidence of anyone doing so. I’m stating a simple position in what I think is a very rational way, but the return argument is treating me like an alarmist, flailing about how the cyan-boosted sky is falling.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by brainofj72

So I suppose we should assume you were, then?

Since I’m not making any blanket claims that things are being done accurately, no, you shouldn’t.