Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 4K UHD (2017)

[HeatEquation]

Originally Posted by Ruined

The reason why its a format war:

1. HDR10 is mandatory for HDR
2. HDR10+ dynamic metadata is fully backwards compatible with HDR10, thus HDR10+ can replace HDR10 on UHDBD and meet the mandatory HDR10 requirement.
3. Since open standard HDR10+ dynamic metadata replaces HDR10 and is fully backwards compatible with HDR10 - and every single set supports HDR10 - why is the more expensive Dolby Vision HDR still necessary?
4. Hence the format war is actually between two optional formats: open standard HDR10+ vs more costly Dolby Vision.

Dolby Vision has more of a head start in the dynamic metadata field, but HDR10+ will be cheaper to use in the long run. And you know how studios like $. So should be interesting

2themax has pretty much already confirmed that HDR10+ will be part of the UHD spec at some point, but as an optional layer, not as the base layer. So it won't be replacing HDR10.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Which is a good thing IMO, the extended cut takes a funny-ish film and bloats it far too much as well as removing some of my favourite lines. Damned shame that's the only cut on the 4K.

Guess I'm the outlier because I found the Extended Cut added some really funny jokes, including Ozzy Osbourne shouting "W*nkers!" at the Ghostbusters.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Ruined

The reason why its a format war:

2. HDR10+ dynamic metadata is fully backwards compatible with HDR10, thus HDR10+ can replace HDR10 on UHDBD and meet the mandatory HDR10 requirement.

So is Dolby Vision (or Philips HDR)

3. Since open standard HDR10+ dynamic metadata replaces HDR10 and is fully backwards compatible with HDR10 - and every single set supports HDR10 - why is the more expensive Dolby Vision HDR still necessary?

Because most set manufacturers now support Dolby Vision. Dynamic metadata is better. 12-bit is better than 10-bit.

4. Hence the format war is actually between two optional formats: open standard HDR10+ vs more costly Dolby Vision.

The cost is negligible for the studios.

Dolby Vision has more of a head start in the dynamic metadata field, but HDR10+ will be cheaper to use in the long run.

It's not really cheaper, the studios have no incentive to support only one television brand and DV already has a capture-to-display chain in place, not to mention CUSTOMER SUPPORT.

[HeatEquation]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

So is Dolby Vision (or Philips HDR)

Not true at all. If you watch DV content on a TV that does not support DV but supports HDR10, you will get the SDR version. Whereas if you watch HDR10+ content on a TV that does not support HDR10+ but supports HDR10, you will get the HDR10 version.

On a disc, this doesn't really matter, since having HDR10 as the base layer is mandatory.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

So is Dolby Vision (or Philips HDR)

Because most set manufacturers now support Dolby Vision. Dynamic metadata is better. 12-bit is better than 10-bit.

The cost is negligible for the studios.

It's not really cheaper, the studios have no incentive to support only one television brand and DV already has a capture-to-display chain in place, not to mention CUSTOMER SUPPORT.

As another poster stated, it is false that Dolby Vision is backwards compatible with HDR10 everywhere. Only on UHDBD will you get HDR10. Elsewhere you get SDR.

On the other hand, HDR10+ is fully backwards compatible with HDR10 everywhere, unlike Dolby Vision.

12bit is a higher number than 10bit, but in practice the image quality difference is minimal. The most popular front projection technlology can't even display 12bit.

The more important feature Dolby Vision offers is dynamic metadata, and HDR10+ also supports dynamic metadata.

So in the long run it will be:
HDR10+ = dynamic metadata, cheaper, backwards compatible with all HDR10 hardware everywhere, open standard, 10bit

Dolby Vision = dynamic metadata, more expensive, sometimes falls back to SDR, proprietary format, 12bit

So essentially you have two formats that do the same thing - dynamic metadata HDR. One got a head start but is more expensive to implement, less compatible, and proprietary. The other is newer, less expensive to implement, more compatible with HDR10 hardware, and an open standard. After the process is nailed down I doubt studios will pay a pretty penny just for customer support they probably won't use.

But, we will see what happens. [emoji5]

[legends of beyond]

In a perfect world, we would have HDR10+ as a base later and Dolby Vision as a premium layer on every disc, but let's be real, the most we can hope is Dolby Vision on select releases.

[Geoff D]

The SDR thing for DV is primarily for broadcast, I've never heard of someone actually going out of their way to pay to stream DV content on a TV that doesn't support it knowing full well they'll only get SDR out of it. That's asinine beyond belief.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

Guess I'm the outlier because I found the Extended Cut added some really funny jokes, including Ozzy Osbourne shouting "W*nkers!" at the Ghostbusters.

And I liked the previous line ("Sharon! I'm having another flashback!") much better. Same with the theatrical anti-Irish fence joke and the Pringles gag. Oh, and all that added stuff with Erin's boyfriend is utterly useless.

[HeatEquation]

Originally Posted by legends of beyond

In a perfect world, we would have HDR10+ as a base later and Dolby Vision as a premium layer on every disc, but let's be real, the most we can hope is Dolby Vision on select releases.

Pretty sure there are compatibility issues that would prevent that. At least that's what 2themax implied. So we won't ever see HDR10+ and DV on the same disc. That's part of the reason HDR10+ won't be the base layer, but rather just an optional layer like DV.

[Geoff D]

HDR10+ as an optional format is easiest for all concerned, not least because it would require generation of three sets of metadata on a theoretical DV + HDR10+ disc (static HDR10, dynamic HDR10+, dynamic DV). Not that the mastering suites and encoding/authoring toolsets couldn't be updated to include all these processes but that sounds like a lot of arseache for minimal benefits seeing as sets will likely have one or the other dynamic format, so doubling down seems unnecessary from where I'm sitting (which is currently on a sofa watching Twin Peaks).

"But what about people stuck with static HDR10?", I hear you cry. Well, in either case the dynamic version won't mean shit to owners of current non-upgradable HDR10-only hardware, and as displays improve further in terms of peak brightness, colour volume and tone/gamut mapping over the next few years then the need for dynamic mapping itself will become less of a concern. A potential 2018/2019 set with static HDR10 and only one dynamic flavour will be just fine.

[Adam_ME]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And I liked the previous line ("Sharon! I'm having another flashback!") much better. Same with the theatrical anti-Irish fence joke and the Pringles gag. Oh, and all that added stuff with Erin's boyfriend is utterly useless.

Yeah, neither cut is good, but the theatrical is superior to the extended cut. It's infuriating that they only included the extended one on the UHD. The only way to watch a 4K version of the theatrical cut is via the digital copy and that's exclusive to a few Sony TVs(for now at least).

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by HeatEquation

Not true at all. If you watch DV content on a TV that does not support DV but supports HDR10, you will get the SDR version. Whereas if you watch HDR10+ content on a TV that does not support HDR10+ but supports HDR10, you will get the HDR10 version.

Only on Vudu. You get HDR10 on Netflix & Amazon.
We're also only talking about disc here.

Originally Posted by Ruined

As another poster stated, it is false that Dolby Vision is backwards compatible with HDR10 everywhere. Only on UHDBD will you get HDR10. Elsewhere you get SDR.

Again, Netflix & Amazon revert to standard HDR10 as well.
Again, we're talking about disc here.

12bit is a higher number than 10bit, but in practice the image quality difference is minimal. The most popular front projection technlology can't even display 12bit.

Not yet, and the masters are actually going to 16-bit. It's a big difference. And displays are in development. A couple years ago most displays were 8-bit. Now they're 10-bit. Must we always go for the lowest standard?

Dolby Vision = dynamic metadata, more expensive, sometimes falls back to SDR, proprietary format, 12bit

You forgot supported by nearly everyone except Samsung & Fox.

So essentially you have two formats that do the same thing - dynamic metadata HDR. One got a head start but is more expensive to implement, less compatible, and proprietary. The other is newer, less expensive to implement, more compatible with HDR10 hardware, and an open standard. After the process is nailed down I doubt studios will pay a pretty penny just for customer support they probably won't use.

Except there isn't much support for HDR10+ and it's an inferior standard.

Much like "open" DTS:X vs. Dolby Atmos, the superior format has the most traction.

[HeatEquation]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Only on Vudu. You get HDR10 on Netflix & Amazon.
We're also only talking about disc here.

No, Dolby Vision is not backwards compatible with HDR10 anywhere. The reason you get HDR10 on Netflix and Amazon is because those services specifically grade for HDR10 and they include the format on any title that has HDR support of any kind. Same with 4K discs.

Once Amazon releases HDR10+ content, they won't need to specifically include an HDR10 grade, as HDR10+ is fully backwards compatible with HDR10.

[MulhollandDr]

Once upon a time this thread was about the 4K UHD release of Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Only on Vudu. You get HDR10 on Netflix & Amazon.
We're also only talking about disc here.

Again, Netflix & Amazon revert to standard HDR10 as well.
Again, we're talking about disc here.

The HDR format war is not just about disc, its about HDR in general. Disc probably will end up being a smaller part of that HDR war in the long run. And as the above poster noted, HDR10+ does not require a separate HDR10 grade like Dolby Vision does since HDR10+ is backwards compatible with HDR10. Without that separate HDR10 grade, Dolby Vision reverts to SDR as its backwards compatible layer.

Not yet, and the masters are actually going to 16-bit. It's a big difference. And displays are in development. A couple years ago most displays were 8-bit. Now they're 10-bit.

As stated earlier, the most popular front projection technology (single chip DLP) is hardware limited to 10bit. There is no way around this without using 3-chip DLP (over $20,000) or radical redesign of the chip, which just happened last year and the new chip is still limited to 10bit. There are other techs which support high bit depths, but it is worth considering the majority of the home theater front projection market won't even be able to display 12bit at all.

Must we always go for the lowest standard?

Well...

If we went for the highest standard in HDR compatibility that would be HDR10+, not Dolby Vision.

If we went for the highest standard in long term cost savings, that would be HDR10+ and not Dolby Vision.

If we went for the most open standard, that would be HDR10+ and not Dolby Vision.

So just focusing on bit depth and nothing else isn't really taking the whole picture into account of which is the "highest" standard.

You forgot supported by nearly everyone except Samsung & Fox.

Samsung, the largest TV manufacturer in the world, by far, selling double its closest competitor for many years? That's a pretty large "except".

I don't expect there to be a mountain of software support yet given HDR10+ was just launched. But in a year or two, I would not be surprised if HDR10+ becomes the new HDR10 in terms of disc support.

Except there isn't much support for HDR10+ and it's an inferior standard.

Inferior in bit depth, superior in many other areas as noted above.

Much like "open" DTS:X vs. Dolby Atmos, the superior format has the most traction.

The format that came out first has more traction, that doesn't make it the superior format. In fact, one could argue DTS:X's more flexible speaker positioning makes DTS:X the superior format. We have in the recent past seen Dolby rocket out of the gates only to sputter out in the long run. We will see if that is the same case with HDR and sound in the UHD world, only in time...

[StingingVelvet]

It's definitely true that the purely superior in quality format doesn't always win format wars. In fact the trend is often the opposite, I believe.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

It's definitely true that the purely superior in quality format doesn't always win format wars. In fact the trend is often the opposite, I believe.

Probably the best way to state it is that it's irrelevant. Sometimes the better tech wins, sometimes it doesn't. But whichever wins, it's almost always due to other causes (such as industry support, the main reason HD DVD lost to Blu-ray).

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Ruined

The HDR format war is not just about disc, its about HDR in general. Disc probably will end up being a smaller part of that HDR war in the long run. And as the above poster noted, HDR10+ does not require a separate HDR10 grade like Dolby Vision does since HDR10+ is backwards compatible with HDR10. Without that separate HDR10 grade, Dolby Vision reverts to SDR as its backwards compatible layer.

You keep repeating this like there's a bunch of HDR10+ content out there already. There isn't. Fact is streaming services support DV and HDR10. Amazon is the only one that said they would offer some HDR10+.

As stated earlier, the most popular front projection technology (single chip DLP) is hardware limited to 10bit. There is no way around this without using 3-chip DLP (over $20,000) or radical redesign of the chip, which just happened last year and the new chip is still limited to 10bit. There are other techs which support high bit depths, but it is worth considering the majority of the home theater front projection market won't even be able to display 12bit at all.

Just how much of the industry is geared towards front projection?

If we went for the highest standard in HDR compatibility that would be HDR10+, not Dolby Vision.

Which doesn't seem to matter right now.

If we went for the highest standard in long term cost savings, that would be HDR10+ and not Dolby Vision.

DV is already in place. Gearing up for HDR10+ still requires some investment and new displays and infrastructure.

If we went for the most open standard, that would be HDR10+ and not Dolby Vision.

Which again matters as much as Linux on the desktop.

So just focusing on bit depth and nothing else isn't really taking the whole picture into account of which is the "highest" standard.

The highest standard would be a complete DV grade with no backwards compatibility for HDR10.

Samsung, the largest TV manufacturer in the world, by far, selling double its closest competitor for many years? That's a pretty large "except".

You think other tech manufacturers are going to adopt Samsung's standard?

The format that came out first has more traction, that doesn't make it the superior format. In fact, one could argue DTS:X's more flexible speaker positioning makes DTS:X the superior format. We have in the recent past seen Dolby rocket out of the gates only to sputter out in the long run. We will see if that is the same case with HDR and sound in the UHD world, only in time...

DTS:X "flexible speakers" has already been shown to be a vaporware. They can't even reliably get anything other than fixed 7.1.4 working properly. For an object based format that's just plain bad. Otherwise it's only on Blu-ray lossless did Dolby stumble. It's the standard for theatrical, streaming with DD+, HDTV, most gaming, and now ATSC 3.0 with AC-4.

[Staying Salty]

Originally Posted by HeatEquation

No, Dolby Vision is not backwards compatible with HDR10 anywhere..

This is Blu-ray.com, you are posting in a thread about a movie on 4k UHD Blu-ray, why are you not supporting the superior technology for disks that is available for purchase and display.

Originally Posted by Ruined

The HDR format war is not just about disc, …

This is Blu-ray.com, you are posting in a thread about a movie on 4k UHD Blu-ray, why are you not supporting the superior technology for disks that is available for purchase and display.

We are boring people and the mods are probably getting tired of deleting our posts.

[HeatEquation]

Originally Posted by Staying Salty

This is Blu-ray.com, you are posting in a thread about a movie on 4k UHD Blu-ray, why are you not supporting the superior technology for disks that is available for purchase and display.

Good point. We should all embrace DV's grey letterbox bars. That certainly enhances the movie watching experience.