List of UHDs that contain HDR10+

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Bernardo A.

Of course there are, but they haven’t become standard. Virtually all Blu-ray releases are BD50, regardless of the movie’s running time. Is it not safe to assume maximum capacity discs will become the norm in UHD too?

Not when 100GB platters are as tricky to make in mass amounts as they still seem to be, something which BD50 quickly overcame, though it's demonstrably false that "virtually all Blu-ray releases are BD50". In any case, do you know why most new major studio releases are BD50? Because they include extras and lots of languages as well, it's not there because most of that 50GB is being given over to the video encode and many current 100GB releases on UHD are 100GB for precisely that reason: to include extras and/or loads of audio tracks, not to shower the movie with all 100 gigs.

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

If anything there are less and less DV titles

Really? The continuing DV output from Paramount, Lionsgate, Warners and Universal doesn't seem to correlate with that? Not much has really changed apart from UHD releases as a whole slowing down slightly, those who've been supporting DV on disc for a while are still very much supporting it (albeit with their own rhyme and reason e.g. Universal do not use it for catalogue discs, period) while Sony continue their somewhat erratic usage and Disney can't be arsed at all (though still grade everything in DV at source and release it that way on streaming). Fox never used DV on disc and won't be doing so now.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Because they include extras and lots of languages as well, it's not there because most of that 50GB is being given over to the video encode and many current 100GB releases on UHD are 100GB for precisely that reason: to include extras and/or loads of audio tracks, not to shower the movie with all 100 gigs.

That’s so very sad, at least from a videophile point of view.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally Posted by Bernardo A.

Of course there are, but they haven’t become standard. Virtually all Blu-ray releases are BD50, regardless of the movie’s running time. Is it not safe to assume maximum capacity discs will become the norm in UHD too?

I did a 'full-disc' back-up of my Forest Gump 4K UHD yesterday. It's around 92GB...

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by SeeMoreDigital

I did a 'full-disc' back-up of my Forest Gump 4K UHD yesterday. It's around 92GB...

The video encode takes up about 75GB on its own, that's a rarity for a film that clocks in at about 142 minutes on UHD as many of that length make do with a 66GB disc.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The video encode takes up about 75GB on its own, that's a rarity for a film that clocks in at about 142 minutes on UHD as many of that length make do with a 66GB disc.

Agreed it was a surprise...

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Bernardo A.

That’s so very sad, at least from a videophile point of view.

Bidness is bidness.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

And part of that future is true 12-bit displays. DV has that capability.

You know that human eyesight can’t discern all those colors, right?

Actually, 8-bit can reproduce all tones that a human can see. But even so, 10-bit is important to help with transitions between tones and to avoid some artifacts.

[sapiendut]

Asking the real question here, so why when I watch a movie or see a photo in 8 bit shown without dithering I always see the gradation artifacts?

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by sapiendut

Asking the real question here, so why when I watch a movie or see a photo in 8 bit shown without dithering I always see the gradation artifacts?

8-bit color is prone to banding because it uses fewer bits per pixel, so not every shade can be shown without dithering.

However, that is not my point. 8-bit color can render all colors a human can see, but still 10-bit color is necessary.

12-bit is debatable.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Bernardo A.

8-bit color is prone to banding because it uses fewer bits per pixel, so not every shade can be shown without dithering.

However, that is not my point. 8-bit color can render all colors a human can see, but still 10-bit color is necessary.

12-bit is debatable.

Studies of HDR grading show that 12 bit is necessary to make banding virtually undetectable. 10 bit is better, but still not enough.



That's why Dolby added a 12 bit layer with optional ICtCp to their DV disc suite... whether or not the studios wish to add the enhancement is another matter. It's there to use as long as a true 12 bit or greater master is utilized during encoding (most up-to-date pro grade cinema masters are).


Frankly, UHD Blu-ray should have been built around 12 bit pixel depth and higher chroma/luminance ICtCp sampling than 4:2:0 as a mandatory spec.



Start giving studios options for a lesser standard and they will take it every single time.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Studies of HDR grading show that 12 bit is necessary to make banding virtually undetectable. 10 bit is better, but still not enough.

True, but the difference is negligible to non-existant. We may get a better picture, but we won’t see any new colors.

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Frankly, UHD Blu-ray should have been built around 12 bit pixel depth and higher chroma/luminance ICtCp sampling than 4:2:0 as a mandatory spec.

And squeeze all that on 100GB with lots of language tracks? There wouldn’t be a real, tangible PQ gain with all that compressing. 10 years from now, people will be debating whether Lawrence of Arabia looks better on some 8K fancy-specs streaming or on UHD. I bet it will look better on the UHD.

[Geoff D]

4:2:0 isn't the same thing as ICtCp, in case that needed pointing out. The former is chroma subsampling, the latter is a colour difference formula. Even if they'd used ICtCp 4:2:0 for HDR disc (4:2:2 instantly doubles the chroma resolution from a quarter to half, which is a fair bit of bandwidth increase) that would still have been beneficial compared to YCbCr 4:2:0 because ITP has fewer chroma crosstalk errors at brighter levels. Heck, just running YCbCr encoded HDR content through the Dolby special sauce decoding engine (said to work in ITP space) seems to improve chroma errors, not just on actual DV content but stuff in forced DV as well.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

4:2:0 isn't the same thing as ICtCp, in case that needed pointing out. The former is chroma subsampling, the latter is a colour difference formula. Even if they'd used ICtCp 4:2:0 for HDR disc (4:2:2 instantly doubles the chroma resolution from a quarter to half, which is a fair bit of bandwidth increase) that would still have been beneficial compared to YCbCr 4:2:0 because ITP has fewer chroma crosstalk errors at brighter levels. Heck, just running YCbCr encoded HDR content through the Dolby special sauce decoding engine (said to work in ITP space) seems to improve chroma errors, not just on actual DV content but stuff in forced DV as well.

Is DV algorithm that better than HDR10+?

[Geoff D]

Whew, talk about a loaded question. DV is unquestionably better on paper, as in the full-fat proposition being 12-bit ITP with dynamic metadata, but its implementation has been dogged by various technical issues. All HDR10+ does is append a suite of dynamic metadata to the HDR10 signal, that's literally it, but we're not really any closer to finding out its true worth given that there's such a tiny amount of + content out there, and the only people who are shouting about it from the rooftops are fanboys which means that their viewpoint is entirely skewed and should be ignored until more people are able to experience it for themselves out in the wild.

But as in-house dynamic mapping options for HDR10 continue to improve, as well as bits of kit like Panny's clever HDR Optimiser, then + will be the first to find itself out of a job because the dynamic mapping is its entire USP. That same charge will seek out Dolby Vision soon enough, but as the dynamic mapping isn't the only trick it possesses then it's got more to offer content creators. Alas, if they can't actually nail down what the DV content should be doing at the consumer end (Sony TVs too dark, Panny players too bright) then that will undermine DV in its own way.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Whew, talk about a loaded question. DV is unquestionably better on paper, as in the full-fat proposition being 12-bit ITP with dynamic metadata, but its implementation has been dogged by various technical issues. All HDR10+ does is append a suite of dynamic metadata to the HDR10 signal, that's literally it, but we're not really any closer to finding out its true worth given that there's such a tiny amount of + content out there, and the only people who are shouting about it from the rooftops are fanboys which means that their viewpoint is entirely skewed and should be ignored until more people are able to experience it for themselves out in the wild.

But as in-house dynamic mapping options for HDR10 continue to improve, as well as bits of kit like Panny's clever HDR Optimiser, then + will be the first to find itself out of a job because the dynamic mapping is its entire USP. That same charge will seek out Dolby Vision soon enough, but as the dynamic mapping isn't the only trick it possesses then it's got more to offer content creators. Alas, if they can't actually nail down what the DV content should be doing at the consumer end (Sony TVs too dark, Panny players too bright) then that will undermine DV in its own way.

I’m thinking about getting that new Panny OLED to match my UB9000, early reviews say it’s a great panel. But it comes with only HDR10+, then I suppose it’s gonna be a tough sell, since the player has DV.

[eddievanhalen]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Whew, talk about a loaded question. DV is unquestionably better on paper, as in the full-fat proposition being 12-bit ITP with dynamic metadata, but its implementation has been dogged by various technical issues. All HDR10+ does is append a suite of dynamic metadata to the HDR10 signal, that's literally it, but we're not really any closer to finding out its true worth given that there's such a tiny amount of + content out there, and the only people who are shouting about it from the rooftops are fanboys which means that their viewpoint is entirely skewed and should be ignored until more people are able to experience it for themselves out in the wild.

But as in-house dynamic mapping options for HDR10 continue to improve, as well as bits of kit like Panny's clever HDR Optimiser, then + will be the first to find itself out of a job because the dynamic mapping is its entire USP. That same charge will seek out Dolby Vision soon enough, but as the dynamic mapping isn't the only trick it possesses then it's got more to offer content creators. Alas, if they can't actually nail down what the DV content should be doing at the consumer end (Sony TVs too dark, Panny players too bright) then that will undermine DV in its own way.

You know I'm getting a Panasonic UHD BD player, the same model you own, I'm waiting an answer from Curry's PC World sales staff to see if they can send me one to Spain. If not, I'll get the same model with a different model reference from Germany.
I think Panasonic's Chroma Upsampling is superior than the one done by the Sony X-800 that I think now it's an average or below average performer with HDR material. And Panasonic's HDR Optimizer will be the icing of the cake. I think both will do a clearly visible improvement on my mid range 49" Samsung set and inexpensively as Panasonic player are quite affordable.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by eddievanhalen

You know I'm getting a Panasonic UHD BD player, the same model you own, I'm waiting an answer from Curry's PC World sales staff to see if they can send me one to Spain. If not, I'll get the same model with a different model reference from Germany.
I think Panasonic's Chroma Upsampling is superior than the one done by the Sony X-800 that I think now it's an average or below average performer with HDR material. And Panasonic's HDR Optimizer will be the icing of the cake. I think both will do a clearly visible improvement on my mid range 49" Samsung set and inexpensively as Panasonic player are quite affordable.

I’m in love with the UB9000. I wouldn’t trade it even for an Oppo.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by Bernardo A.

I’m thinking about getting that new Panny OLED to match my UB9000, early reviews say it’s a great panel. But it comes with only HDR10+, then I suppose it’s gonna be a tough sell, since the player has DV.

Player and tv have both. The Panny is adopting DV for their tvs.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by ray0414

Player and tv have both. The Panny is adopting DV for their tvs.

I got the player, it indeed has both. The FZ950, although, only comes with HDR10+, unless they released a firmware upgrade for DV.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by Bernardo A.

I got the player, it indeed has both. The FZ950, although, only comes with HDR10+, unless they released a firmware upgrade for DV.

2019 Pannys will all have Dolby Vision at some point. They already announced it.


https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.ph...&id=1550482275