HDR Discussion Thread

[puddy77]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

As a novice, I guess my question about HDR is this...between UHD Blu with HDR and standard Blu, which image is inaccurate to the director's vision? Has standard Blu always been inaccurate?

I would say they are both inaccurate in different ways. BD has similar dynamic range to a normal theatrical presentation. But theater has a much greater color gamut (theater's P3 vs BD's 709). UBD has greater dynamic range than normal theater, but now has greater color (P3 vs UBD's 2020).

Technically, UBD is the most accurate to movies that have been released theatrically in HDR. But that list is small. Anything that hasn't been mastered for HDR originally is technically a remaster when released on UBD. And that is opening a can of worms as to what is the director's intent. It could potentially be closer to the director's vision, but we have no way of knowing that unless they are explicitly involved in the new HDR master, which may not always be the case, if ever. It is possible that the original camera negatives or original digital camera assets have greater dynamic range than what was originally presented theatrically. But who knows if they would actually go all the way back to those original materials to create a new HDR master? And who supervises the process? That's the argument that Geoff is getting at.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by puddy77

I would say they are both inaccurate in different ways. BD has similar dynamic range to a normal theatrical presentation. But theater has a much greater color gamut (theater's P3 vs BD's 709). UBD has greater dynamic range than normal theater, but now has greater color (P3 vs UBD's 2020).

Technically, UBD is the most accurate to movies that have been released theatrically in HDR. But that list is small. Anything that hasn't been mastered for HDR originally is technically a remaster when released on UBD. And that is opening a can of worms as to what is the director's intent. It could potentially be closer to the director's vision, but we have no way of knowing that unless they are explicitly involved in the new HDR master, which may not always be the case, if ever. It is possible that the original camera negatives or original digital camera assets have greater dynamic range than what was originally presented theatrically. But who knows if they would actually go all the way back to those original materials to create a new HDR master? And who supervises the process? That's the argument that Geoff is getting at.

Thank you for this answer. It helped a lot.

To make sure I'm absolutely clear, the films listed in the link you provided were actually mastered from the get go with HDR in mind...by the director/filmmakers involved yes?

[Geoff D]

See? You got one already.

[puddy77]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

Thank you for this answer. It helped a lot.

To make sure I'm absolutely clear, the films listed in the link you provided were actually mastered from the get go with HDR in mind...by the director/filmmakers involved yes?

You're welcome.

Yes, that is correct. All the movies released in Dolby Vision theatrically were originally mastered that way by the filmmakers. I have seen/read interviews by the directors of Tomorrowland, Star Wars: The Force Awakens, and Deadpool saying that the HDR version is their preferred version.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by puddy77

You're welcome.

Yes, that is correct. All the movies released in Dolby Vision theatrically were originally mastered that way by the filmmakers. I have seen/read interviews by the directors of Tomorrowland, Star Wars: The Force Awakens, and Deadpool saying that the HDR version is their preferred version.

Thank you. This was most helpful....

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

It's the only question that I could think of when it comes to this entire business of HDR and what it is, what it isn't, and if it's right or not.

Fortunately your query won’t be much of an issue with live shows, as the HDR pipeline is more analogous to what we see with our human visual system than is SDR delivery, which truncates.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

As a novice, I guess my question about HDR is this...between UHD Blu with HDR and standard Blu, which image is inaccurate to the director's vision? Has standard Blu always been inaccurate?

Most movies have multiple master versions. The one you see at home is a different version than the 1 shown in theaters, always been thag way.

The movie Deadpool had 6 different versions. the director says that the hdr version is the best version.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Fortunately your query won’t be much of an issue with live shows, as the HDR pipeline is more analogous to what we see with our human visual system than is SDR delivery, which truncates.

Okay. That's interesting to hear.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by ray0414

Most movies have multiple master versions. The one you see at home is a different version than the 1 shown in theaters, always been thag way.

The movie Deadpool had 6 different versions. the director says that the hdr version is the best version.

That was the most interesting revelation I got from all the reading I did on this subject. I kind of knew this but just not to the extent that a home video release would carry that many masters across that many formats. But, looking at that info from a distance, it does make a lot of sense.

My idiotic worry was that standard Blu was essentially not the "right" version but UHD Blu is. But now knowing this about the mastering process for each format to maximize the potential of each format, I feel fine, like always for the last ten years, with the results of standard Blu.

UHD Blu is just the next stage in getting customers and the artists to the true vision of the artist's work.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

That was the most interesting revelation I got from all the reading I did on this subject. I kind of knew this but just not to the extent that a home video release would carry that many masters across that many formats.....

A few months after I alerted readers to the publication of SMPTE ST 2084 (https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...r#post10127003), long before the A/V consumer forum/website ecosystem recognized the significance of that particular watershed event and the subsequent Monday morning quarterbacking by blogging journalists began,

I also mentioned to folks waaay back in 2014 that I foresee the HDR finish as becoming the primary master, or hero grade - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...e#post10119354

A prediction reiterated by Mike just a couple months back -

Technicolor Colorist Mike Sowa: HDR 101 - YouTube

It may take many years, but when the HDR finish does become the primary master from which all other iterations are derived, that day will also make moot much of the debate as to what is the most accurate version of the Director’s vision.

[Jumpman]

Penton-Man,

Lord help, that video gave me goosebumps...to the idea that I might, once again, have to buy my absolutes all over again if the use of HDR ends up being the standard and it's application on classic films is done properly with the filmmakers completely involved, if possible.

Oh man...

[Penton-Man]

In the above ^ YouTube, Mike refers to “single stimulus” which is one method to assess video quality. As an aside, referring back to this post on page 10 of this thread…

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

In months to come when bruceames or some other member is inclined to start a Phase 2 (HFR) discussion thread, I’m ready with posting the materials and methods, discussion, results, and conclusion (<- sound familiar to those of you with doctorate degrees who are also published in peer reviewed journals) of a scientific test assessing for the value of HFR (100fps) capture and display in terms of perceived video quality as compared to 50 fps ….



Summary:
Beyond HDR, there will be a new, upgraded TV to purchase in the future. Isn’t there always?

That ^ test used the SAMVIQ method ( page 9 -> https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r...1-I!!PDF-E.pdf ) for subjective assessment of the video quality of HFR….which, for sports, will also become the most accurate video depiction of what our eyes see…..and Director intent.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Imagery so sharp you can see the nipple scars from the implant procedure

I missed that ^ comment. Peter, sounds like you’re speaking from a lot of real life personal experience….after the ex left. You’re a player? You dawg you!

Anyway, you do realize that no matter the scar be in the inframammary fold, areolar or axillary regions, painting it out in post can be easily accomplished in a jiffy. Plus, if the surgeon went thru the navel for placement of the implant, you really don’t get much of a scar anyway.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

Penton-Man,
Lord help, that video gave me goosebumps...

Given your handle , this does me.....

Jump - Van Halen Official Video - YouTube

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by puddy77

I guess we can trust Penton ....

I guess I’m a good guesser. Although, examples of accountability to extremely specific cutting edge information tend to increase readers’
confidence level……

Date of Informational Post…April 2016…..
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...3#post12104497

Publication of new ITU HDR Rec….July 2016…..
http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/p...x#.V4UdMfkrK1v

Direct document link…..
http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BT.2100-0-201607-I/en

[gt14199]

Is buying a 4K player worth it if my 4K tv doesn't have HDR?

I bought my 4k tv on a whim last fall, not knowing about the nuances of HDR in TVs. I've had it for months now, and still have yet to see any 4k content on it thanks to Netflix having a 25 mb minimum in order to stream 4k (I get 4 mb down (this was my fault, I usually do a lot more research before buying things)). Now that the Xbox One S is coming out, I'd like to get it mainly for its 4k player ability, however I'm worried that my tv not having HDR will limit the difference I'll see between a normal blu ray and a 4k blu ray.

Should I get the Xbox One S for it's 4k player and use it on my current, non-HDR tv, or wait to buy one until I have the opportunity to upgrade my tv (probably not for at least a year) to a 4k with HDR?

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by gt14199

Is buying a 4K player worth it if my 4K tv doesn't have HDR?

I bought my 4k tv on a whim last fall, not knowing about the nuances of HDR in TVs. I've had it for months now, and still have yet to see any 4k content on it thanks to Netflix having a 25 mb minimum in order to stream 4k (I get 4 mb down (this was my fault, I usually do a lot more research before buying things)). Now that the Xbox One S is coming out, I'd like to get it mainly for its 4k player ability, however I'm worried that my tv not having HDR will limit the difference I'll see between a normal blu ray and a 4k blu ray.

Should I get the Xbox One S for it's 4k player and use it on my current, non-HDR tv, or wait to buy one until I have the opportunity to upgrade my tv (probably not for at least a year) to a 4k with HDR?

What tv do u have?

[razrx]

I'm learning a lot reading this excellent thread Has anyone seen the latest TWiT home theater geeks interview with video consultant Florian Friedrich ?
For an AV enthusiast that still considers himself a novice I found this interview enlightening

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by puddy77

....trust

Another to place your trust in is on the far right at the podium during a recent industry presentation….

[puddy77]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Another to place your trust in is on the far right at the podium during a recent industry presentation….

[Show spoiler]

Who is that? Cynthia Slavens? Any info from the event?