HDR is crayons

[davcole]

Actually one of my desires is to see a HDR release of SPARTACUS and VERTIGO. I feel it's more about color accuracy.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

You know the one where you called me Ted Turner If I came back with a rebuttal you probably would have called me George Lucas or something which is why I responded the way I did.

Hmm... not sure if upgrade, downgrade or lateral...

[ROSS.T.G.]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Hmm... not sure if upgrade, downgrade or lateral...

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Blu-rays can still look amazing on high-end displays/projectors. Usually, the problem is with the display rather than the disc itself. I've never seen anybody with an OLED complain about how flat Blu-rays look unless the disc was poorly mastered to begin with.

Reminds me of a while back, I had to make do with a calibrated LED for home viewing and while some discs looked great, I noticed plenty of ones which I knew looked amazing on high-end displays, appeared flat and washed out on the LED.

I think the issue is likely due to TV limitations, especially in regard to SDR settings. I remember trying to watch some remastered Warner Blu-rays on the LED I had at the time and just couldn't enjoy the experience because I knew I was missing out by not watching it on a display that could do it justice. On an OLED, it was like watching a pristine print while on the LED it was like watching washed-out video.

I said something similar years ago when people were complaining about a distracting "blanket tint" on some Blu-ray. On all the calibrated displays at my office, the Blu-ray looked fine yet when I viewed it on a consumer-grade LED, I noticed what people were complaining about, but the issue was that the disc wasn't being viewed on a display that could do it justice, rather than it being an issue with the disc.

This is such annoying pissing match bullshit.

When we say SDR looks "flat" now we mean it lacks the contrast, range, color variance and richer textures UHD provides. Like Geoff said, I never thought BDs looked flat before UHD came around. It's not a "LOL LCD" issue, it's that HDR has upped the game and made standard blu look flat and blanketed in comparison. If you don't feel that way then hey fine. My wife doesn't even notice a difference between DVD and Blu. People are different. But I can tell you I certainly notice how much flatter most blu-rays look to me now. They can still look great of course, but they ain't got nuthin' on proper HDR.

[ack_bak]

Everything looks better on a better display. Contrast, color accuracy, color saturation, resolution, etc. Which also means HDR should look better than standard Blu-Ray. HDR, for me, is almost always a big upgrade over the standard 1080p disc. I am not running out and replacing all my catalog Blu-Ray titles with UHD, but I am for my favorites if the studio did HDR right. But for new releases? It's almost always UHD. This is such a silly thread....

[koberulz]

I don't really see that much of a difference with UHD TBH.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

This is such annoying pissing match bullshit.

When we say SDR looks "flat" now we mean it lacks the contrast, range, color variance and richer textures UHD provides. Like Geoff said, I never thought BDs looked flat before UHD came around. It's not a "LOL LCD" issue, it's that HDR has upped the game and made standard blu look flat and blanketed in comparison. If you don't feel that way then hey fine. My wife doesn't even notice a difference between DVD and Blu. People are different. But I can tell you I certainly notice how much flatter most blu-rays look to me now. They can still look great of course, but they ain't got nuthin' on proper HDR.

People also tend to get caught up in PQ and forget that things exist besides PQ (gasp!). Lower native contrast techs like LCD and DLP often offer more functional advantages for the same price than equally priced higher contrast displays - with those functional advantages sometimes being more appealing than the PQ difference.

For instance, LCD has no burn in concerns like OLED, and with DLP projectors you can get Laser/LED for the same price as lamp lcos projectors. These are important functional advantages. When you combine the functional advantages with the fact the vast majority of commercial theaters (what inspired us to build a HT in the first place) struggle to even achieve 2000:1 total contrast, getting a lower native contrast display with good dynamic contrast and significant functional advantages becomes an attractive alternative.

[motorheadache95]

I like watching movies.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by Ruined

People also tend to get caught up in PQ and forget that things exist besides PQ (gasp!). Lower native contrast techs like LCD and DLP often offer more functional advantages for the same price than equally priced higher contrast displays - with those functional advantages sometimes being more appealing than the PQ difference.

For instance, LCD has no burn in concerns like OLED, and with DLP projectors you can get Laser/LED for the same price as lamp lcos projectors. These are important functional advantages. When you combine the functional advantages with the fact the vast majority of commercial theaters (what inspired us to build a HT in the first place) struggle to even achieve 2000:1 total contrast, getting a lower native contrast display with good dynamic contrast and significant functional advantages becomes an attractive alternative.

Some do. My 2016 LG UHD LCD panel has issues with temporary image retention. It even mentions it in the manual. Leave a blu-ray player or TV menu up for more than a couple minutes, and the afterimage remains for a couple minutes until it fades. You don't notice it unless you have a plain background up afterwards. I haven't tried gaming on this TV yet but I imagine it's an issue.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by mar3o

Some do. My 2016 LG UHD LCD panel has issues with temporary image retention. It even mentions it in the manual. Leave a blu-ray player or TV menu up for more than a couple minutes, and the afterimage remains for a couple minutes until it fades. You don't notice it unless you have a plain background up afterwards. I haven't tried gaming on this TV yet but I imagine it's an issue.

Yeah image retention is different than burn-in though. Burn-in is permanent and doesn't go away, as often seen on CRT, Plasma, and OLED. Very rarely does it occur on LCD (but it definitely can occur - just far less likely). The only 100% burn-in free tech is DLP since it uses mirrors. DLP can still have dead/stuck pixels like the other techs, though.

[Deciazulado]

Containees compared (KV & KP = range of Kodak Vision & regular prints)
allthecontainersinthewurrld.jpg

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Most low-to middle tier LCDs just dont cut it. They have terrible contrast which makes them unsutiable for good HDR performance. Heck, it makes them bad for any performance, really. The crappy blacks - or shall we call them purples/greys, make the overall image lack depth & "punch". They look washed out and very flat.

Originally Posted by Harryhausen AF

Stuff like software is made to work at its best on different systems so why cant SDR look as good on LED as OLED?

Originally Posted by Harryhausen AF

But how is it possible that I get better blacks in HDR than SDR if the panel has crappy blacks as you said.

Speaking of panels..

HDR can have more range in the blacks than SDR but you have to have a panel that has more contrast to display it.
Even for the darkest levels of SDR, a high contrast panel can be beneficial.

Here's a normal 1000:1 LCD panel (plus dimming to 2000:1)

averagelcdvssdr.jpg

Originally Posted by Harryhausen AF

But how is it possible that I get better blacks in HDR than SDR if the panel has crappy blacks as you said.

You can still massage a normal contrast LCD to look optimal (as best it can) and snappy but probably at the expense of a few of the last darkest levels on a test pattern being "crushed". Adjust level 235 as the max light output with the Contrast to get the maximun range, and then adjust Brightness down till the image on a great looking transfer looks superb/snappy/realistic enough like a Kodachrome slide . You might find the 4% PLUGE is below the contrast range (4% PLUGE is almost 1200:1 in gamma 2.2, 2300:1 in gamma 2.4) (Turning the Brightness down is similar to increasing the gamma) YγMV

[oddbox83]

OK, that graph makes zero sense to me. Can we have one with labels and pretty pictures?

[infiniteCR]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Sounds like a calibration issue or simply a perception thing.

Actually many (most?) UHD BDs are encoded at a higher black level than BD.

Ive noticed (not you) that some of the people posting about the comparison are ignorant of how how the EOTF forces an absolute gamma and then they go and compare it to a washed out 2.2 gamma. That’s going to exaggerate perceptual depth differences. So long winded way of agreeing with you.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by infiniteCR

Ive noticed (not you) that some of the people posting about the comparison are ignorant of how how the EOTF forces an absolute gamma and then they go and compare it to a washed out 2.2 gamma. That’s going to exaggerate perceptual depth differences. So long winded way of agreeing with you.

I agree with you, but I will say as a side note I wouldn't touch a 2.2 gamma on SDR with a 10 foot pole. It looks washed out, period!

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Ruined

People also tend to get caught up in PQ and forget that things exist besides PQ (gasp!). Lower native contrast techs like LCD and DLP often offer more functional advantages for the same price than equally priced higher contrast displays - with those functional advantages sometimes being more appealing than the PQ difference.

For instance, LCD has no burn in concerns like OLED, and with DLP projectors you can get Laser/LED for the same price as lamp lcos projectors. These are important functional advantages. When you combine the functional advantages with the fact the vast majority of commercial theaters (what inspired us to build a HT in the first place) struggle to even achieve 2000:1 total contrast, getting a lower native contrast display with good dynamic contrast and significant functional advantages becomes an attractive alternative.

Perhaps for some users, yes. But overall, Contrast is always the #1 PQ characteristic when reviewing displays. The higher, the better. Bigger is better.

The burn in issue, while overblown, is certainly worthy of being taken into consideration but only by those living on the extreme edge of use cases. The vast majority will never see ny burn in at all. I suspect most OLED owners are into the hobby enough that they wont just use the thing as a stock ticker or watch cable news all day. LOL!

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Perhaps for some users, yes. But overall, Contrast is always the #1 PQ characteristic when reviewing displays. The higher, the better. Bigger is better.

The burn in issue, while overblown, is certainly worthy of being taken into consideration but only by those living on the extreme edge of use cases. The vast majority will never see ny burn in at all. I suspect most OLED owners are into the hobby enough that they wont just use the thing as a stock ticker or watch cable news all day. LOL!

For multipurpose uses game HUDs are biggest issue. The burn in potential actually does resonate with many consumers.

[ack_bak]

Originally Posted by koberulz

I don't really see that much of a difference with UHD TBH.

I wish I didn't it would save a lot of money

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by Ruined

For multipurpose uses game HUDs are biggest issue. The burn in potential actually does resonate with many consumers.

I don't understand why games don't have a simplest setting of HUD's transparency. I'm sure it would be great even for people who don't have OLEDs.

[LoSouL]

More games definitely need dynamic HUD options and borderless, transparent mini-maps etc.

[BrownianMotion]

Since we were talking about Amazon Prime a couple of pages back, if you're a subscriber you should check out Lore season 2. Some of the episodes are interesting, and the HDR is spectacular. A true showcase for the format.