Professional Calibrators/Experts, Why do we need HDR?

[Auditor55]

Why aren't current displays bright enough?

[Alan Brown]

Originally Posted by Auditor55

Why aren't current displays bright enough?

Your first question posed in the thread title requires a different answer from the one in your post. We "need" HDR for better pictures. HD video dynamic range is very limited compared to real life. HDR is a new image quality capability suggested as part of the new UHD format. A common goal in all motion imaging formats is to provide a more true to life visual experience.

Display brightness is not dynamic range. The difference (range) between the darkest and lightest part of the image is. Wider dynamic range done right requires more bit depth in order to avoid banding. The UHD Blu-ray Disc format will be 10 bit, rather than current digital video at 8 bits. Most imaging industry leaders want 12 bits. That is the current standard for digital cinema. I have yet to see a consumer TV offered in a native 10 bit or 12 bit design. They are still 8 bit designs.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

[Auditor55]

Your first question posed in the thread title requires a different answer from the one in your post. We "need" HDR for better pictures. HD video dynamic range is very limited compared to real life. HDR is a new image quality capability suggested as part of the new UHD format. A common goal in all motion imaging formats is to provide a more true to life visual experience

It all due respect to you, the above seems to be infused with a degree of marketing type speak, because I doubt very serious if any electrical device will ever be able to come close to what the human eye is capable of.

Display brightness is not dynamic range. The difference (range) between the darkest and lightest part of the image is. Wider dynamic range done right requires more bit depth in order to avoid banding. The UHD Blu-ray Disc format will be 10 bit, rather than current digital video at 8 bits. Most imaging industry leaders want 12 bits. That is the current standard for digital cinema. I have yet to see a consumer TV offered in a native 10 bit or 12 bit design. They are still 8 bit designs.

I understand what dynamic range is, however when it comes to display technology, it always seems current display tech had more a range problem with the darker range (black level) of the spectrum. That usually resulted in poor dynamic range.

I asked the question in this thread based upon the following:

High-dynamic-range imaging (HDRI or HDR) is a set of techniques used in imaging and photography to reproduce a greater dynamic range of luminosity than is possible with standard digital imaging or photographic techniques. The aim is to present the human eye with a similar range of luminance as that which, through the visual system, is familiar in everyday life



1.
the state or quality of being luminous.
2.
Also called luminosity. the quality or condition of radiating or reflecting light:
the blinding luminance of the sun.
3.
Optics. the quantitative measure of brightness of a light source or an illuminated surface, equal to luminous flux per unit solid angle emitted per unit projected area of the source or surface.

Based upon the foregoing, it seems we're particularly concerned with greater brightness in our display.

[Auditor55]

Evidence (not potentially tainted by financial affiliation) suggests they are not… bright enough if you consider your typical consumer TV to be around 400 nits luminance capability and a couple from last year maybe reaching around 800 nits

Why is then that professional calibrators turn the brightness down, usually resulting in what some might consider a dull or dim picture? A calibrator would consider it an accurate picture.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Auditor55

Why is then that professional calibrators turn the brightness down, usually resulting in what some might consider a dull or dim picture?

Properly Setting Brightness for Video Calibration - YouTube

In simplistic terms, alternatively, think of HDR graded content as viewed on brighter consumer televisions as having a better dynamic range than that seen at the 46-56 sec. timestamp of the above linked YouTube clip.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Properly Setting Brightness for Video Calibration - YouTube

In simplistic terms, alternatively, think of HDR graded content as viewed on brighter consumer televisions as having a better dynamic range than that seen at the 46-56 sec. timestamp of the above linked YouTube clip.

Bonus points goes to any vision ‘experts’ that can tell us where around dat eye would a Baerveldt implant be placed.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Auditor55

Why aren't current displays bright enough?

Evidence (not potentially tainted by financial affiliation) suggests they are not… bright enough if you consider your typical consumer TV to be around 400 nits luminance capability and a couple from last year maybe reaching around 800 nits.

By “evidence” I mean independent professional lab testing which included more than a handful of expert and non-expert viewers and showed an increase in terms of quality of imagery from the conventional level of 100 nits peak brightness graded content to HDR/high brightness at 4,000 nits (manually graded by professional colorists from the original captured video), with intermediate improvements at the 400 and 1,000 nits levels (tone-mapped down to those levels from the manually graded 4,000 nits version). I could post graphs but they’re on my other computer.

Although, with all that said, each study has had its limitations, e.g. ambient light was not considered as a variable in the design of tests, extremely short video sequences were used as datasets for the viewing participants, relatively small reference monitors (42”) were used when it is a known fact among vision scientists/engineers that larger screens can be less bright than smaller screens and the content will appear the same.

Bottom line is brighter TV sets along with higher graded content should bring consumers a better viewing experience than the hamstrung nature of what you’ve been getting for years. How high?....that yet to be determined as that is dependent upon a multiplicity of factors.

[Alan Brown]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Evidence (not potentially tainted by financial affiliation) suggests they are not… bright enough if you consider your typical consumer TV to be around 400 nits luminance capability and a couple from last year maybe reaching around 800 nits.

By “evidence” I mean independent professional lab testing which included more than a handful of expert and non-expert viewers and showed an increase in terms of quality of imagery from the conventional level of 100 nits peak brightness graded content to HDR/high brightness at 4,000 nits (manually graded by professional colorists from the original captured video), with intermediate improvements at the 400 and 1,000 nits levels (tone-mapped down to those levels from the manually graded 4,000 nits version). I could post graphs but they’re on my other computer.

Although, with all that said, each study has had its limitations, e.g. ambient light was not considered as a variable in the design of tests, extremely short video sequences were used as datasets for the viewing participants, relatively small reference monitors (42”) were used when it is a known fact among vision scientists/engineers that larger screens can be less bright than smaller screens and the content will appear the same.

Bottom line is brighter TV sets along with higher graded content should bring consumers a better viewing experience than the hamstrung nature of what you’ve been getting for years. How high?....that yet to be determined as that is dependent upon a multiplicity of factors.

Valid points.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

yet to be determined

As is the longevity of OLED tvs running HDR content all the time. This is already of some concern in the professional realm where super expensive color correcting monitors are utilized.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

By “evidence” I mean independent professional lab testing which included more than a handful of expert and non-expert viewers and showed an increase in terms of quality of imagery from the conventional level of 100 nits peak brightness graded content to HDR/high brightness at 4,000 nits (manually graded by professional colorists from the original captured video), with intermediate improvements at the 400 and 1,000 nits levels (tone-mapped down to those levels from the manually graded 4,000 nits version).

Subjective preference results from two independent professional labs in graphic form (one on the left, the other (from a different lab) on the right) having no financial affiliation with Dolby or any other company’s HDR approach –