HDR heatmaps and torch mode UHDs

[mrtickleuk]

Originally Posted by matty746

Just subscribed!

As have I

[nissling]

Originally Posted by Fjodor2000

If someone could analyze the Blue Velvet 4K BD it would be really nice. Looks a bit dark to me from screenshots I've seen, but who knows what the analysis will show.

Here ya go

Blue velvet (The Criterion Collection)

• HDR10 and Dolby Vision FEL
• Mastering display luminance level: 1000 nits white level, 0.0001 nits black level
• MaxFALL: Null
• MaxCLL: Null

It is dark in the sense that it barely ever reaches (or surpasses) 150 nits and averages are certainly low. Despite that it clearly shows on both the waveform and the heatmaps that there is zero clipping or inaccurate roll-off. Considering this was supervised by Lynch this is fully intentional and obviously made for a dark enviroment.

I personally think it looks fantastic but if you cannot fully control the light in your living room your mileage may very well vary.

Albums

Heatmaps:

[Show spoiler]

Gamut visualization:

[Show spoiler]

Tonemapped (BT.2100 to BT.709):

[Show spoiler]

I moved to Mac recently so I have no simple way to rip my UHDs at the moment tho I did this analysis for a different forum right after Lynch passed away. May post a few others I have laying.

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by nissling

It is dark in the sense that it barely ever reaches (or surpasses) 150 nits and averages are certainly low. Despite that it clearly shows on both the waveform and the heatmaps that there is zero clipping or inaccurate roll-off. Considering this was supervised by Lynch this is fully intentional and obviously made for a dark enviroment.

I personally think it looks fantastic but if you cannot fully control the light in your living room your mileage may very well vary.

Thanks for doing the analysis, much appreciated!

I notice there are several screencaps where the average light level is below 1 or even 0.5 nits. That's really low! Are there any other movies where a lot of the scenes are in this range? Perhaps Heat or Donnie Darko on 4K BD?

I'm not sure a controlled living room completely helps with this, not even a completely dark grotto or man cave. There's a lot of detail in near-black areas lost when I view it at least, since it's being crushed. Some may be due to the display which is an LG OLED CX in my case (which is known to crush blacks a bit), but I'm not sure if it can be blamed for all of it. Perhaps if you watch on a display with raised blacks instead that compensates somewhat.

Anyway, far too low dark for my taste. I know it's director supervised, but I'm not sure how much the directors are actually are involved, and under what conditions. Seems to vary. I've seen several director approved 4K BD movies which clearly were no master pieces of video quality, so it no guaranteed quality stamp.

That said, I agree it suits this movie to be somewhat dark, but it's been taken way too far for my liking.

[nissling]

Originally Posted by Fjodor2000

I'm not sure a controlled living room completely helps with this, not even a completely dark grotto or man cave. There's a lot of detail in near-black areas lost when I view it at least, since it's being crushed. Some may be due to the display which is an LG OLED CX in my case (which is known to crush blacks a bit), but I'm not sure if it can be blamed for all of it. Perhaps if you watch on a display with raised blacks instead that compensates somewhat.

I don’t see any crushed blacks in this film on my Panasonic OLED which is verified ny the lack of clipped shafows on the waveform/histogram. Heat is by comparison not necessarily dark, but certainly dim which I don’t think Blue Velvet is.

Overall I’d say Blue Velvet looks kinda similar to Lost Highway most of the time, with the latter having certain very strong and obvious peaks which Blue Velvet obviously doesn’t have.

I’ve also got The Departed, Infernal Affairs and The Frighteners if anyone is interested.

[dorian]

Originally Posted by nissling

I moved to Mac recently so I have no simple way to rip my UHDs at the moment

Try MakeMKV. It's free but you have to update the licence key every few months using this forum post.

[nissling]

Originally Posted by dorian

Try MakeMKV.

I do have makeMKV and even bought my license actually, not wanting to update the key every other month.

However my BD-XL drive is SATA so I must either get a new drive, a chassis for it to use with USB or bring out a low end PC from my closet. With MakeMKV having had some minor issues with macOS 15 and me despising Windows I may even end up using Linux for this specific task.

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by nissling

I don’t see any crushed blacks in this film on my Panasonic OLED which is verified ny the lack of clipped shafows on the waveform/histogram. Heat is by comparison not necessarily dark, but certainly dim which I don’t think Blue Velvet is.

Overall I’d say Blue Velvet looks kinda similar to Lost Highway most of the time, with the latter having certain very strong and obvious peaks which Blue Velvet obviously doesn’t have.

I’ve also got The Departed, Infernal Affairs and The Frighteners if anyone is interested.

In my case I don't have any problem with the brighter daylight scenes in Blue Velvet. They are still dark for being daylight scenes, but not problematically so. It's mostly the dark scenes that are problematic, where there are not much details visible in those parts of the image that are near-black, it's all just black there more or less.

But I think it's hard to make these "what does it look like in real life" comparisons without knowing some more details about the display, viewing conditions, settings, etc.

People could be watching using very different conditions, e.g. calibrated reference monitor in complete dark room, or CRT TV from the 80ies in bright daylight, or OLED TV of various types where settings may have been modified and the ambient light may vary a lot, or LCD TV, or using a projector, or in a cinema with various level of ambient light, etc. Depending on which setup is used the video will look completely different, despite that the 4K BD is exactly the same.

That's also why this type of analysis that you and other have been doing in this thread is so valuable, since it shows what's actually on the disc. So it serves as some kind of ground truth, and is not affected by all the conditions I mentioned in the previous paragraph.

But in the end people need to watch the movie on something. So real life comparison and judgment will have to be made.

In my case I'm usually watching using this:

* LG OLED CX TV

* Panasonic DP-UB820 player

* TV setting mode "Cinema" is used. No settings affecting color, brightness, etc have been changed. The "Cinema" setting is pre-calibrated in factory to best suit a dark room environment. From what I've heard, it should be very accurate for being an "out of the box" TV setting mode, even though it's not calibrated at the consumer's specific home viewing environment.

* Viewing environment is a dark room without any lights turned on. Some faint light coming in from windows. I watch at night, but e.g. light from stars or street lights can leak in a bit. But overall it's a very dark room, although not pitch black.

May I ask what your setup look like? For example you mentioned you used a Panasonic OLED. Is it one of the later models with QD-OLED display? Those have better near-black performance than LG OLEDs from what I've heard. So it could explain why you're seeing details in near-black content and not any black crush, but I do. On the other hand QD-OLED have been known to have problems with raised blacks instead.

EDIT: After checking, I think Panasonic uses an OLED panel from LG too. It's Sony and Samsung that have some models with QD-OLED panels. So in that case, the panel type could not explain the differences in near-black content that we're seeing, since my TV also has an OLED panel from LG.

[Fjodor2000]

Regarding differences in TVs displays, there's an interesting thread over at AVSForum where the results from the latest Value Electronics (VE) shootout are discussed:

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/the...-2025.3329094/

In the VE shootout there are expert judges comparing the 2025 flagship TV models from four major TV manufacturers in various categories.

Just as an example, here is a post showing how different it can look.

Image from that post:



Check out the difference in how much detail is visible in the near-black areas between the Sony Bravia 8 II and LG G5.

[nissling]

Originally Posted by Fjodor2000

People could be watching using very different conditions, e.g. calibrated reference monitor in complete dark room, or CRT TV from the 80ies in bright daylight, or OLED TV of various types where settings may have been modified and the ambient light may vary a lot, or LCD TV, or using a projector, or in a cinema with various level of ambient light, etc. Depending on which setup is used the video will look completely different, despite that the 4K BD is exactly the same.

While it is true that enviroments do differ plenty between various setups and living rooms, there is no real way for a colorist, director or DoP to keep this in mind to any certain extent. When dealing with PQ EOTF which is fully nominal, standards are fairly strict.

Whenever I do an HDR grade, I actually prefer to have a secondary viewing monitor clipping at 100 nits. Some may find it crazy but it prevents me from doing overblown HDR grades, as I prefer to keep averages similar to that of SDR but let the peaks get as roll-off.

TV manufacturers also implement HDR very different depending on the make and model, but a film like Blue Velvet is actually somewhat forgiving thanks to Dolby Vision metadata as practically any TV can provide enough brightness.

Originally Posted by Fjodor2000

May I ask what your setup look like? For example you mentioned you used a Panasonic OLED. Is it one of the later models with QD-OLED display? Those have better near-black performance than LG OLEDs from what I've heard. So it could explain why you're seeing details in near-black content and not any black crush, but I do. On the other hand QD-OLED have been known to have problems with raised blacks instead.

AFAIK Panasonic has no models using a QD-OLED panel and have always opted for WOLED panels by LG. That said I've got a Pansonic 65HZ980 and a Oppo UDP-203 hooked up directly to it. I've made my living room completely dark 24/7 with double black film on all windows and pitch black curtains on all windows and entrances to prevent all light from entering.

Having reviewed a quite a few WOLEDs and QD-OLEDs as well as calibrated plenty, I wouldn't say that QD-OLEDs in general performs better than WOLEDs as it almost always boils down to differences between products. As for Panasonic they have very, very slightly raised blacks compared to LG in order to make the shadow detail more visible. I've never seen raised blacks on QD-OLEDs unless used in a bright enviroment, which is a pretty common issue on those panels. WOLEDs don't suffer from the same issue.

When measuring the Panasonic with my Klein K10-A, I usually get a contrast ratio of around 100,000:1. LGs give a much more random number like 671,128,983,147:1 give or take a couple billions. In practise the Panasonic still has very, very deep blacks and could probably fool anyone into thinking it's just as black as an LG. If you put them up side by side and show an entirely black image or a very, very dark scene on both of them, you may be able to percieve a very faint glow on the Panasonic by comparison. In a realistic scenario however, this is a non-issue, especially considering how much it helps with the dithering.

On the other hand, I have managed to get very good PQ EOTF tracking and color accuracy on the LG CX and later by generating 3D LUT in ColourSpace. A film like Blue Velvet could possibly benefit greatly from that. Considering the wide availability of LGs and the outstanding results when performing 3D LUT calibrations, I may go for them when I retire the Panasonic.

Just for fun I decided to increase the exposure on the tonemapped Blue Velvet screenshots using Lightroom and from what I can see it's clear that there's no real clipping in shadows. However the tone curve has been adjusted to both make the shadows very dark and the grain to be as discreet as possible. Considering the amount of grain, I suspect the negative wasn't very dense after processing to begin with being shot on Eastman 5247 (100T).

[nissling]

Infernal Affairs (Kam & Ronson Enterprises)

• HDR10 and HDR10+
• Mastering display luminance metadata: 1000 nits white level, 0.0001 nits black level
• MaxCLL: 1000 nits
• MaxFALL: 295 nits

Very hard clipping with no real roll-off and high APL. I dislike the noise reduction and raised blacks as well. Have no idea what the source elements looked like but I feel that a film finished photochemically in 2002 should look much better than this.

Album.

Heatmaps:

[Show spoiler]

Gamut visualization:

[Show spoiler]

Tonemapped (BT.2100 to BT.709):

[Show spoiler]

EDIT: Something went wrong with the inital links. Fixed now.

[nissling]

The Departed (Warner Brothers)

• HDR10
• Mastering display luminance metadata: 1000 nits white level, 0.0001 nits black level
• MaxCLL: 452 nits
• MaxFALL: 91 nits

Unlike Infernal Affairs, APL is lower and they've obviously focused on keeping blacks dark while maintaining shadow detail. On the other hand, there's still a fair bit of clipping. This may be baked into the DI which could explain why the peaks are often reserved.

Album.

Heatmaps:

[Show spoiler]

Gamut visualization:

[Show spoiler]

Tonemapped (BT.2100 to BT.709):

[Show spoiler]

[Fjodor2000]

Sorry for the late reply, but here are some thoughts from my side:

Originally Posted by nissling

While it is true that enviroments do differ plenty between various setups and living rooms, there is no real way for a colorist, director or DoP to keep this in mind to any certain extent. When dealing with PQ EOTF which is fully nominal, standards are fairly strict.

Sure, but there's also the director's intent and some freedom of whomever produces the 4K BD, right? E.g. we've got both super low brightness 4K BDs such as Heat, and at the same time Light Cannon 4K BDs such as The Bridge Over The River Kwai.

How does the colorist know how bright to grade the movie? The PQ EOTF does not tell, even though the curve itself is fully nominal like you mentioned.

Also, the PQ EOTF curve does not tell whether to crush/lower blacks to hide noise/grain. No single truth there either from the curve alone.

Originally Posted by nissling

Whenever I do an HDR grade, I actually prefer to have a secondary viewing monitor clipping at 100 nits. Some may find it crazy but it prevents me from doing overblown HDR grades, as I prefer to keep averages similar to that of SDR but let the peaks get as roll-off.

So how do you handle cases where the average brightness ought to be higher in HDR, but that wasn't possible to grade properly in SDR? E.g. bright daylight in desert sun. Do you still grade it according to SDR average brightness, and thus do not make use of the HDR capabilities?

Originally Posted by nissling

TV manufacturers also implement HDR very different depending on the make and model, but a film like Blue Velvet is actually somewhat forgiving thanks to Dolby Vision metadata as practically any TV can provide enough brightness.

Agreed that the max brightness is not a problem for TVs with a movie like Blue Velvet 4K BD, when graded as it currently is with low brightness. But the problem is instead in the near-black areas, where details are lost.

Originally Posted by nissling

AFAIK Panasonic has no models using a QD-OLED panel and have always opted for WOLED panels by LG. That said I've got a Pansonic 65HZ980 and a Oppo UDP-203 hooked up directly to it. I've made my living room completely dark 24/7 with double black film on all windows and pitch black curtains on all windows and entrances to prevent all light from entering.

Right. And I corrected my previous post to state that Panasonic OLED does not use QD-OLED panel before you wrote this message. So we agree on that.

Originally Posted by nissling

Having reviewed a quite a few WOLEDs and QD-OLEDs as well as calibrated plenty, I wouldn't say that QD-OLEDs in general performs better than WOLEDs as it almost always boils down to differences between products. As for Panasonic they have very, very slightly raised blacks compared to LG in order to make the shadow detail more visible. I've never seen raised blacks on QD-OLEDs unless used in a bright enviroment, which is a pretty common issue on those panels. WOLEDs don't suffer from the same issue.

When measuring the Panasonic with my Klein K10-A, I usually get a contrast ratio of around 100,000:1. LGs give a much more random number like 671,128,983,147:1 give or take a couple billions. In practise the Panasonic still has very, very deep blacks and could probably fool anyone into thinking it's just as black as an LG. If you put them up side by side and show an entirely black image or a very, very dark scene on both of them, you may be able to percieve a very faint glow on the Panasonic by comparison. In a realistic scenario however, this is a non-issue, especially considering how much it helps with the dithering.

Ok, I don't have any real-life experience with the QD-OLED TVs so I cannot comment on this from my own experiences. But reading user review on e.g. AVSForum there are several people who mention issues with raised blacks.

Originally Posted by nissling

On the other hand, I have managed to get very good PQ EOTF tracking and color accuracy on the LG CX and later by generating 3D LUT in ColourSpace. A film like Blue Velvet could possibly benefit greatly from that. Considering the wide availability of LGs and the outstanding results when performing 3D LUT calibrations, I may go for them when I retire the Panasonic.

Well, if you check the Value Electronics TV 2025 shootout, and the screenshots I posted previously here from calibrated WOLED vs QD-OLED TVs, don't you notice the difference in near-black detail?

If so, isn't there a remaining near-black issue on WOLED even after having been calibrated, in that they do not show as much detail near-black?

Originally Posted by nissling

Just for fun I decided to increase the exposure on the tonemapped Blue Velvet screenshots using Lightroom and from what I can see it's clear that there's no real clipping in shadows.

Just to clarify, by black crush I don't necessarily mean absolutely 0 nits. Instead I mean that content near-black has so low nits that it's hard to distinguish detail.

Originally Posted by nissling

However the tone curve has been adjusted to both make the shadows very dark and the grain to be as discreet as possible. Considering the amount of grain, I suspect the negative wasn't very dense after processing to begin with being shot on Eastman 5247 (100T).

Yes, this was also what I meant. I.e. that content near-black on Blue Velvet 4K BD has so low nits that it's hard to distinguish detail.

Even in the screenshots here where you had artificially bumped brightness it was hard to distinguish detail, and without that bump it was even harder.

To me this is black crush, even though not absolutely 0 nits throughout areas with near-black content.

Also, I agree that the reason could be that whomever graded Blue Velvet 4K BD noticed that the Eastman 5247 (100T) negative was very noisy/grainy in near-black, so they lowered brightness to make the noise/grain less visible.

In short: DNR by lowering brightness.

Not what I would have preferred though, since the near-black detail is lost.

[aladdin123]

Please, could someone here do The Red Shoes?

[teddyballgame]

Originally Posted by Fjodor2000

Well, if you check the Value Electronics TV 2025 shootout, and the screenshots I posted previously here from calibrated WOLED vs QD-OLED TVs, don't you notice the difference in near-black detail?

Hey Fjodor, the TVs in those screenshots were not calibrated, but were running in the most accurate mode out of the box. It was done by youtuber Tech with KG ("Best OLED TV Battle 2025: LG G5 vs Z95B vs S95F vs Bravia 8 II", with that specific scene starting at 23:41).

There's hardly any video/photo of the specific units competing at Value Electronic's shootout. I kind of get why too, it would mostly be a waste of time and potentially misleading. Iceman and Bob( youtuber) did share a video which is helpful if you want to get an idea for what kind of content was used for evaluation though.

My favorite comparison videos are found on Vincent Teoh's second channel called HDR Test where he will occasionally upload in HDR. The Z95B, Bravia 8 II, and Sony reference monitor all in the same frame and viewed with HDR is neat to see. Use your best HDR display to watch

Are we off topic?

[nissling]

Due to lack of time I won’t be able to reply in fully atm but I feel like explaining this however.

Originally Posted by Fjodor2000

To me this is black crush, even though not absolutely 0 nits throughout areas with near-black content.

Also, I agree that the reason could be that whomever graded Blue Velvet 4K BD noticed that the Eastman 5247 (100T) negative was very noisy/grainy in near-black, so they lowered brightness to make the noise/grain less visible.

In short: DNR by lowering brightness.

Not what I would have preferred though, since the near-black detail is lost.

With the amount of grain visible in the shadows when increasing the exposure, it all gets very clear to me: There was not much density to begin with.

In other words, if the colorist would’ve attempted to increase the shadow detail you’d most likely not gain much except a higher noise floor. You certainly wouldn’t gain any real detail. And I’d be very surprised if a release print had more shadow detail than those found on the UHD.

I really don’t understand what they could’ve done better considering the nature of the negative, based on how the grain appears in the shadows.

As for ”DNR by lowering brightness”, I’d say that’s making things a bit too simple. Decreasing luminance will not reduce grain or noise in an image. It is however possible to make grain less apparent by ”flatten” curves. This often work best for B/W negatives and for specific luminance levels. It has to be done with care however to avoid posterization. For some reason I always tend to notice this in French restorations, tho I’ll admit I sometimes go this route too.

Originally Posted by aladdin123

Please, could someone here do The Red Shoes?

If I can get one of my PCs up and running I may be able to give it a shot next week.

[aladdin123]

Originally Posted by nissling

If I can get one of my PCs up and running I may be able to give it a shot next week.

Great, thanks! If possible, Dolby Vision Level 1 and 2 metadata graphs would be nice as well.

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by teddyballgame

Hey Fjodor, the TVs in those screenshots were not calibrated, but were running in the most accurate mode out of the box. It was done by youtuber Tech with KG (Here's the full video, with that specific scene starting at 23:41).

There's hardly any video/photo of the specific units competing at Value Electronic's shootout. I kind of get why too, it would mostly be a waste of time and potentially misleading. Iceman and Bob( youtuber) did share a video which is helpful if you want to get an idea for what kind of content was used for evaluation though.

My favorite comparison videos are found on Vincent Teoh's second channel called HDR Test where he will occasionally upload in HDR. The Z95B, Bravia 8 II, and Sony reference monitor all in the same frame and viewed with HDR is neat to see. Use your best HDR display to watch

Are we off topic?

Ok, interesting. I don't know whether that is correct or not. Could be that they were compared using out-of-the box calibration like you said. But that should also be of interest, since most users do not calibrate their TVs. Not even enthusiasts (e.g. on AVSForum). And I know at least some TVs like those from LG are supposed to have out-of-the-box calibration that is very good anyway.

That said, they main question still remains: Is there any difference in near-black detail when comparing various latest generation OLED TVs?
(Using either calibrated, or out-of-the -box calibration.)

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by nissling

Due to lack of time I won’t be able to reply in fully atm but I feel like explaining this however.


With the amount of grain visible in the shadows when increasing the exposure, it all gets very clear to me: There was not much density to begin with.

In other words, if the colorist would’ve attempted to increase the shadow detail you’d most likely not gain much except a higher noise floor. You certainly wouldn’t gain any real detail. And I’d be very surprised if a release print had more shadow detail than those found on the UHD.

I really don’t understand what they could’ve done better considering the nature of the negative, based on how the grain appears in the shadows.

If that's the case, then I agree with what you wrote. It means the problem with lack of near-black detail on the Blue Velvet 4K BD is in the source material, i.e. film negative (or master?). Then there's not much to do about it. No way of bringing back more near-black detail.

But the only way to know for sure would be to scan the film negative and look at the master. Could be that a well-done rescan/master would produce a better result, with more near-black detail.

Originally Posted by nissling

As for ”DNR by lowering brightness”, I’d say that’s making things a bit too simple. Decreasing luminance will not reduce grain or noise in an image. It is however possible to make grain less apparent by ”flatten” curves. This often work best for B/W negatives and for specific luminance levels. It has to be done with care however to avoid posterization. For some reason I always tend to notice this in French restorations, tho I’ll admit I sometimes go this route too.


If I can get one of my PCs up and running I may be able to give it a shot next week.

It was a general statement w.r.t. how noticeable noise/grain is. All else equal, if you increase the brightness you also increase the contrast, which in turn makes noise/grain more visible. Because the difference between the brightest and darkest pixels will be amplified.

As an example: If you you create two different 4K BDs using the same source material, one using 50 nits average brightness and another one using 200 nits average brightness, then the noise/grain will be more noticeable in the latter one. So going with 50 nits would mean "DNR by lowering brightness".

But using too low brightness has the drawback of not utilizing HDR fully. It could be SDR in HDR container, or perhaps even worse than that.

Then there is of course also the director's intent. Maybe director wants it to look dark, or to have blown out highlights, or black crush, or whatever.

[WhiskeyGnome]

Originally Posted by Fjodor2000

Thanks for doing the analysis, much appreciated!

I notice there are several screencaps where the average light level is below 1 or even 0.5 nits. That's really low! Are there any other movies where a lot of the scenes are in this range? Perhaps Heat or Donnie Darko on 4K BD?

I'm not sure a controlled living room completely helps with this, not even a completely dark grotto or man cave. There's a lot of detail in near-black areas lost when I view it at least, since it's being crushed. Some may be due to the display which is an LG OLED CX in my case (which is known to crush blacks a bit), but I'm not sure if it can be blamed for all of it. Perhaps if you watch on a display with raised blacks instead that compensates somewhat.

Anyway, far too low dark for my taste. I know it's director supervised, but I'm not sure how much the directors are actually are involved, and under what conditions. Seems to vary. I've seen several director approved 4K BD movies which clearly were no master pieces of video quality, so it no guaranteed quality stamp.

That said, I agree it suits this movie to be somewhat dark, but it's been taken way too far for my liking.

When a film does not have the luminance levels that one might enjoy, the answer is always tone mapping on the LG if you have one. That solves almost all issues to me. You have to tone pixel brightness and contrast down a bit to tastes to make up for the big push, but the slight crushing is almost not noticeable from the C1, and the newer TVs are even better about it.

It adds usually a lot of luminance and makes very dim films appear properly IMO. For so-called torch mode HDR, graded to more reality-like levels of luminance, tone mapping is not needed and makes things worse.

Last movie I watched that looked way too dim was The Thing. I thought the snow in particular just didn't give me what I wanted. Toning pixel brightness down a tad and contrast down a bit more, tone mapping really brought out the film and it looks properly realistic to me anyway. No soul crushing levels or anything. Just looks better to me.

I'm gonna pop my copy of Blue Velvet in soon to see how the levels are to me in person though.

I personally do not enjoy SDR grades with slight HDR highlights that basically look very dim on an OLED. It just does not give me a transparent window vibe looking into the screen. Just looks super dim and not real to me every time. So be it if people enjoy that, but I do not. Doesn't have to be TORCH mode, I just like to feel as if I am looking at real snow when it's prominent in the film.

[Deadend45]

Ah the yes LCD owners solution...Torch mode. Cause blacks should never be actually black according to them. lol

The Thing UHD blacks looked great on my OLED.