List of UHDs that contain HDR10+

[TitusTroy]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Let me put it this way....

If HDR10+ is useless because of "Active HDR" then the same logic applies to Dolby Vision as used by Warner and Sony (metadata only layer)...

I'm OK with that logic, by the way....

no one is saying HDR10+ is useless...it's just a way for them to try and catch up with Dolby Vision...I think you will agree that Dolby Vision is the gold standard...Active HDR just allows LG display owners (and maybe Sony as I'm not sure how their version compares) to have unofficial HDR10+ support...nothing wrong with that unless you're a non-LG owner who for some irrational reason hates that LG has Dolby Vision and is now also giving users extra features for 'free'

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

How do you know? No HDR10+ disc is available....

because that's what most of the experts and industry people are saying...how do you know that it won't be?...sounds more like you don't want it to be true or you own stock in Samsung...are you saying that there are going to be major differences between native HDR10+ implementation versus LG's Active HDR method?

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by TitusTroy

because that's what most of the experts and industry people are saying...how do you know that it won't be?...sounds more like you don't want it to be true...are you saying that there are going to be major differences between native HDR10+ implementation versus LG's Active HDR method?

I don't give a damn about either HDR10+ or Dolby Vision.... I'm stuck with HDR10 on my video chain...

But to say Active HDR is the same thing as HDR10+ is just false information..

And I don't think spreading false information is a good thing

[jibucha]

actually; i do

1. both approaches 'create dynamatic metadata'
2. one is put on the disc (into content) by computer
3. the other is 'created/generated' by the processor of the display and then 'displayed on the display'
4. 'both' approaches generate the 'dynamic metadata' from the original 'static metadata'
5. neither approach/solution is as 'different' as you are representing
6. this information is definately 'not mis-information'
7. rather, less 'confusing', yet 'different' from what is 'generally represented'

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Mis-information? You just don't know what you are talking about.

HDR10+ is based on metadata put on disc by the STUDIO (Fox, Warner whatever), not created on the fly by the display

It's not the same thing.

[BladeRunner86]

I've been following this thread for the past few pages, and I gotta say that I haven't read anyone who has claimed that they are literally the same thing. The distinction has been made quite clearly a few times. LG's active HDR is a workaround that is achieving the same thing that HDR10+ is achieving.

Perhaps I am missing something?

[Kris Deering]

Active HDR and HDR10+ are entirely different things.

Active HDR = The display is buffering frames and analyzing to determine the best tone map on a scene by scene basis, no metadata is generated and the display does not need to use any of the static metadata it has incoming.

HDR10+ = Dynamic METADATA added to the content to let the display know how to adjust on a scene by scene basis.

There is also a third solution being used, displays that use the metadata in HDR10 to try to intelligently tone map. This means that they actually use the metadata to make an intelligent decision on what the peak value and such should be. This solution will only be as good as the metadata, which is frequently wrong or generic (a copy of the mastering display properties).

I don't know why I keep seeing posts from people saying that the display is creating its own metadata. It is not. It is processing the content based on what is probably an internal histogram of buffered frames. Metadata is just packets of information provided so the display doesn't have to do any analysis.

HDR10+ vs "Active HDR". In most cases, if the display does a good job, the difference could be slight, but HDR10+ (if the metadata is reliable) will take out any guess work or limitations of the histogram (big changes in content from scene to scene). But so far the quality of representation in HDR10 for metadata has been really poor, so the idea that the frame by frame metadata of HDR10+ will be more reliable has yet to be proven.

[jibucha]

"false information"?

• we agree/dis-agree?
• the 'same'?
• obviously, they're not the same (at least the way you represent)
• one creates the dynamatic metdata in the content grading/mastering of the content to disc standards
• the other creates the dynamatic metadata by the display processor
• "both" create the dynamatic metadata from the same static metadata
• note :: this is definately/definatively 'not' false information
• as to which approach is superior, is entirely subjective, but the differences as represented by me are entirely objective
• note :: given the previous post (Kris Derring) i will consult further with reliable professional sources and update this posting (later) :: ok? :: this, in the interest of accuracy/fairness - to all

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

I don't give a damn about either HDR10+ or Dolby Vision.... I'm stuck with HDR10 on my video chain...

But to say Active HDR is the same thing as HDR10+ is just false information..

And I don't think spreading false information is a good thing

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

I don't give a damn about either HDR10+ or Dolby Vision.... I'm stuck with HDR10 on my video chain...

But to say Active HDR is the same thing as HDR10+ is just false information..

And I don't think spreading false information is a good thing

Yep, it's not "unofficial HDR10+ support" as that makes it sound like it's doing the same thing using the same methodology only without the brand name attached. Nope. It may well end up looking identical but it is not using the same methodology, as + has content-derived metadata appended to the signal for the TV to interpret alongside the image, whereas any form of in-house 'active' HDR has to analyse the incoming image in real time and amend the output accordingly.

Funnily enough though, the in-house variants may yet prove to be more suitable for this purpose because + doesn't apparently do frame by frame metadata, and during the + demonstrations earlier this year people noted how the metadata seemed to lag behind the image. That could just be typical technological teething troubles but even so, it's something to keep an eye out for as official + software is released.

[edit] And, having just read Kris' well-informed post (a rarity for this thread), it could well work better the other way around if the TV's 'active' processor is being taxed too much by the content, i.e. the + metadata takes away the real-time processing strain.

[jibucha]

is HDR10+ useless?

• of course not, if you're comparing it to HDR10
• is it better/worse than Active HDR (subject to interpretation?)?
• Dolby Vision (if you do not know it's superior by now; most likely you never will)
• Dolby Vision (is that really the point here?)
• point :: HDR10+ is not useless (of course dynamic metadata is important - even if 'computer generated')
• HDR10+ :: while i have much more i could say on this, i think each individual can make their respective conclusions

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Let me put it this way....

If HDR10+ is useless because of "Active HDR" then the same logic applies to Dolby Vision as used by Warner and Sony (metadata only layer)...

I'm OK with that logic, by the way....

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by jibucha

is HDR10+ useless?

• of course not, if you're comparing it to HDR10
• is it better/worse than Active HDR (subject to interpretation?)?
• Dolby Vision (if you do not know it's superior by now; most likely you never will)
• Dolby Vision (is that really the point here?)
• point :: HDR10+ is not useless (of course dynamic metadata is important - even if 'computer generated')
• HDR10+ :: while i have much more i could say on this, i think each individual can make their respective conclusions

Can't you write posts in a normal way?

Again, as I said: Warner and Sony use Dolby Vision exactly like they would use HDR10+. With a few Kb/s for metadata.... Nothing more....

[jibucha]

Active HDR (LG/Sony) & HDR10+ (what's the difference?)

• i am going to try to summarize, with less confusing and debatable language
• both :: have the same goal (agree/disagree?)
• HDR10+ (Samsung/Panasonic/etc) :: it uses a computer analysis to generate the dynamic metadata from the static metadata, that is embedded into the content (agree/disagree?)
• Active HDR (LG/Sony) :: prior to the existence of HDR10+ implementated an display/processor centric solution the the HDR10 static metadata issue (agree/disagree?)
• regradelss the differing technical approaches; the end-result picture quality might be indistinguishable? (agree/disagree?)
• does this 'remove' any conflicting representation, clarify the primary issue(s) - (agree/disagree?)
• question :: there are may factors at play regarding HDR10+ at play, which are in conflict with the benefits to consumers and the industry? (agree/disagree?)
• in conclusion :: if it turns out that my use previously of 'metadata' being used in the Active HDR solutions, i offer my apology in advance (i am further researching currently to determine this, if possible) - - and - - - if it does turn out i was in error, unfortunately it would seem to have 'confused' the points i was trying to communicate, which is unfortunate, as 'only' the 'use of metadata' would seem to have been in error, which time will tell - - - asap - - - thank you
  
  note (12/5/18 @ 4:40pm CST) :: Active HDR :: 'does not use metadata' :: intentionally, it 'avoids using metadata' to intentionally avoid 'metadata errors' as represented in other posts, thereby improving it's performance as intended (i was able to satisfy myself that i now can more accurately represent Active HDR, in further posts :: also, it's my intent to edit my early posts here - asap - as time permits - that unintended confusion does not continue :: also, i will include a listing of my 'edited posts' here for whatever benefit might exist - thank you)
  
  edited posts list :: (#497 - #514 - #526 - #527 - #530)
  

[jibucha]

no

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Can't you write posts in a normal way?

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by jibucha

no

OK, I'm done arguing with you, I simply don't care....

[jibucha]

question

you consider this reliable and accurate?

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Again, as I said: Warner and Sony use Dolby Vision exactly like they would use HDR10+. With a few Kb/s for metadata.... Nothing more....

[jibucha]

ok

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

OK, I'm done arguing with you, I simply don't care....

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by jibucha

no

[Staying Salty]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

HDR10+ = Dynamic METADATA added to the content to let the display know how to adjust on a scene by scene basis.
....

HDR10+ vs "Active HDR"... But so far the quality of representation in HDR10 for metadata has been really poor, so the idea that the frame by frame metadata of HDR10+ will be more reliable has yet to be proven.

I am still a bit confused, so two questions. Does HDR10+, in fact implement dynamic metadata on a frame by frame base on the content it encodes? Is there a difference between streaming content and disc content?

Hopefully my questions are not as unsolvable as the post title suggests.

[TitusTroy]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

There is also a third solution being used, displays that use the metadata in HDR10 to try to intelligently tone map. This means that they actually use the metadata to make an intelligent decision on what the peak value and such should be. This solution will only be as good as the metadata, which is frequently wrong or generic (a copy of the mastering display properties).

is this the method that LG uses in their displays?

[jibucha]

my understanding (if memory serves) is that 'it can and has that capability' but whether the director/studio/production facility implement it is questionable

the problem (as i see it) is that HDR10+ is generally the preferred option, if implemented, to save on costs/time and not to 'optimize the picture quality' as Dolby Vision (for example)

please note, that i am not raising the Dolby Vision banner here, but contrasting, at times is essential to communication (forgive me?)

in fairness, HDR10+ is/would be a significant improvement to HDR10, but we already have HDR10 as a baseline (Blu-ray standards) and Dolby Vision does far more already, so 'what's the point?' - - - we already have 'more' currently available, and HDR10+ 'complicates the marketplace', at least as i see it

what do you think?

Originally Posted by Staying Salty

Does HDR10+, in fact implement dynamic metadata on a frame by frame base on the content it encodes?

[Leterface]

Originally Posted by jibucha

my understanding (if memory serves) is that 'it can and has that capability' but whether the director/studio/production facility implement it is questionable

the problem (as i see it) is that HDR10+ is generally the preferred option, if implemented, to save on costs/time and not to 'optimize the picture quality' as Dolby Vision (for example)

please note, that i am not raising the Dolby Vision banner here, but contrasting, at times is essential to communication (forgive me?)

in fairness, HDR10+ is/would be a significant improvement to HDR10, but we already have HDR10 as a baseline (Blu-ray standards) and Dolby Vision does far more already, so 'what's the point?' - - - we already have 'more' currently available, and HDR10+ 'complicates the marketplace', at least as i see it

what do you think?

I have the same questions regarding Dolby Vision vs HDR10 - or maby I have just miss noticed if Dolby Vision material have actually shown to be more as intended originally than plain HDR10? I have seen proof of DV improving the PQ but I have not seen (or miss noticed) any proof that the metadata had made like a night-and-day difference to PQ?

[Kris Deering]

DV vs HDR10. Couple things here. For one, the difference between these two will heavily rely on a couple of factors.

The Display. Lets say you are watching the two on an OLED. The dynamic metadata isn't doing anything to help out a dynamic contrast system because the OLED is already infinite, so no issue there. For tone mapping, it really depends on the content. Most of the titles on the market right now are 1000 nits or less, so the actual amount of "tone mapping" is very small for displays that are as bright as most of the OLED/LCDs on the market. You would see a difference in difficult material (high peaks) but those may be few and far between. The other part is the 12 bit vs 10 bit. 10 bit is already REALLY good, so unless you run into a test case where there just wasn't enough bit depth at 10 bit, there is a chance the 12 bit one may avoid a bit of banding and have slightly better color resolution.

HDR10+ is still new. It is supposed to encode per frame data as well. The reason I think Samsung is pushing this so hard is that their panels are a lot of edge lit displays that really rely on good dynamic contrast to make the most of their contrast. With per frame data this helps tremendously because the display isn't guessing or adapting over time, it knows exactly what it should or shouldn't be for overall APL.

Some displays ignore metadata all together and do their own tone mapping based on frame buffering and analysis, others do a mixture of both. The latter depends a lot on how good the metadata is. If you look at disc releases, the majority of studios are reporting 1000 nits. Sony and Warner are probably the biggest outliers, and even they can be very hit or miss in accuracy (lots of MaxCLL values that exceed the mastering display). This is why you see people talking about titles like BR2049 either looking amazing or WAY too dark (using the display max for the tone map, which would be the WRONG answer).

I haven't paid too much attention to HDR10+, but I've had a lot of talks about it with the folks at Spectracal and with Stacey Spears. But until it is adopted by more than some Amazon titles, or niche titles that I could care less about, I have more to do with my time. I wouldn't mind seeing it adopted more though, because of its implementation and Dolby's reluctance to support projectors or stand alone video processors, it may be a great solution for those of us looking for more reliable HDR performance from home theater projectors. Not only do they require aggressive tone mapping, almost all of them use a dynamic contrast system of some sort.