Jump to content

mdm1979

JVC 4K E-shift & UHD?

Recommended Posts

I own a JVC 500x 4K E-shift proj and am wondering if I buy a UHD player will I be able to project UHD content?

 

Probably a stupid question but searching the web for a straight answer was a pain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mdm1979 said:

 

I own a JVC 500x 4K E-shift proj and am wondering if I buy a UHD player will I be able to project UHD content?

 

Probably a stupid question but searching the web for a straight answer was a pain.

 

I'm running an X500 and playing UHD discs. You won't get HDR in the image. Panasonic UHD players do the best HDR to SDR conversion.

 

You'll need a few things:

  1. UHD player (Panasonic UB300 is sufficient if your AVR is HDCP2.2 compliant, otherwise you'll need a UB400 to split audio to AVR and video to projector).
  2. A Monoprice Blackbird HDMI convertor (Radioparts sell a rebadged model locally) or a more expensive HDFury products (there's a few options).
  3. UHD compliant cables. For anything over 10m the Ruipro cables sold by EzyHD are the only stuff worth buying. At 10m and below the premium Comsol cables from Officeworks should work.

 

I'll find the Radioparts link if you're interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm running an X500 and playing UHD discs. You won't get HDR in the image. Panasonic UHD players do the best HDR to SDR conversion.
 
You'll need a few things:
  1. UHD player (Panasonic UB300 is sufficient if your AVR is HDCP2.2 compliant, otherwise you'll need a UB400 to split audio to AVR and video to projector).
  2. A Monoprice Blackbird HDMI convertor (Radioparts sell a rebadged model locally) or a more expensive HDFury products (there's a few options).
  3. UHD compliant cables. For anything over 10m the Ruipro cables sold by EzyHD are the only stuff worth buying. At 10m and below the premium Comsol cables from Officeworks should work.
 
I'll find the Radioparts link if you're interested.


Thanks so much for the in depth reply. I may just look into this. Are the benefits worth the effort though?
Sorry for the late response. I forgot to check the app.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mdm1979 said:

 


Thanks so much for the in depth reply. I may just look into this. Are the benefits worth the effort though?
Sorry for the late response. I forgot to check the app.

Cheers

It varies from disc to disc. I always thought the blu-ray of Bladerunner was very good - the UHD disc, while having some minor issues in a few scenes, is a revelation. If you've got the audio set-up for Atmos, that will be another step up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, mdm1979 said:

Are the benefits worth the effort though?

Remember, ALL domestic projectors are strictly SDR no matter how they are advertised and most will struggle to even achieve the SDR standard of 100nits unless the screen is small or high gain. So when playing HDR video via a projector gamma MUST be re mapped to an SDR like response. New "4K HDR" projectors do this internally but old models like yours will need external conversion. There is no "standard" or correct way to do the conversion so it hit and miss. I find that after fine tuning the gamma for a particular HDR title so that the picture looks like it should to my eyes the result is VERY close the SDR 1080 Bluray version displayed on a projector calibrated to the SDR standards, so close I can't tell which version I am viewing.

 

1080 Bluray is mastered for 100nits which is most appropriate for use with a projector and unless the mastering is poor this should give the most accurate presentation on a projector that is properly calibrated. You see what you where intended to see.

4K HDR video is mastered for 1000nits plus which is WAY off for use with a projector. You will never see what the studio intended you to see, just what the designers of the gamma conversion system thought would look good to most people most of the time with most content.

 

There is likely an advantage in re mastering old titles that may not have been done well previously, just like what was done with old DVD titles when Bluray came out, but modern titles are typically mastered to a high standard for 1080 Bluray so there is little to be gained in yet another version mastered for HDR which is intended for ultra bright TV's NOT projectors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Owen said:

Remember, ALL domestic projectors are strictly SDR no matter how they are advertised and most will struggle to even achieve the SDR standard of 100nits unless the screen is small or high gain.

 

You have confirmed what I have been thinking about the suitability of HDR with projectors. I have been able to get good results from some 4K discs   but with others I have preferred watching the bluray version, particularly with the "fake 4K"  releases.  Overall I am underwhelmed with HDR on projectors.  I did happen to stream  SDR 4K content with  BT2020 which looked outstanding, but most UHD recordings will need  extensive tone mapping.  

 

Anybody in my family used to be able to turn the system on using a universal remote, insert  a disc and play. Now with HDR, those days are over.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
1 hour ago, Tasso said:

Anybody in my family used to be able to turn the system on using a universal remote, insert  a disc and play. Now with HDR, those days are over.

why ? my setup is plug and play :)

 

have you spent much effort with calibration and setup though ? people have been doing and getting great result for about 2 years ? now :)

 

we arent robinson cruseo some making out to be. id take advise quite frankly from someone who has some experience of UHD and HDR with current generation projectors and there are plenty of these people out there. all too helpful to get you there. 

 

if it isnt hitting the spot... i wouldnt fret

 

all that said what sort of size screen did you end up going with ? if its far too large it will limit your capability with HDR, so have to be realistic with expectation :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, :) al said:

why ? my setup is plug and play :)

 

have you spent much effort with calibration and setup though ? people have been doing and getting great result for about 2 years ? now :)

 

we arent robinson cruseo some making out to be. id take advise quite frankly from someone who has some experience of UHD and HDR with current generation projectors and there are plenty of these people out there. all too helpful to get you there. 

 

if it isnt hitting the spot... i wouldnt fret

 

all that said what sort of size screen did you end up going with ? if its far too large it will limit your capability with HDR, so have to be realistic with expectation :)

 

I am waiting for the new screen to be delivered before I get the calibration done.  My issue with HDR is not that it cant look good, but there seems to be a lot of adjustments required to scale down the magnitude of HDR.  If I can get one calibrated setting to work with all HDR recordings, then it will be a plug and play scenario, but based on feedback from various forums, tweaking for individual movies is often required.  Its all doable, but also annoying that it has to be done, where no such fiddling was required before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
6 hours ago, Tasso said:

I am waiting for the new screen to be delivered before I get the calibration done.  My issue with HDR is not that it cant look good, but there seems to be a lot of adjustments required to scale down the magnitude of HDR.  If I can get one calibrated setting to work with all HDR recordings, then it will be a plug and play scenario, but based on feedback from various forums, tweaking for individual movies is often required.  Its all doable, but also annoying that it has to be done, where no such fiddling was required before.

@Tasso i am 100% not tweaking and twidling settings between movies. i just have one setting for uhd hdr. and it works to good effect. 

 

I think those that do theres a few reasons, one they are either at extremes of screen size(urge not to go TOO BIG) that only just there or not there and not much up sleeve that any variations from that is perhaps heading into undesirable - inadequate. there are also those that just like tweaking... ie always looking for the last 0.01% i am not one of those am more a set and forget guy and for me the enjoying is in the movies once get something pretty happy with. 

 

not to say i wouldnt whip setup back in shape regularly to keep in fine tune... but I wouldnt be happy with something constantly twiddling with, so can understand if thats where at and frustrated. 

 

I note both @catonic and @steffanth out your way have had their JVCs calibrated to uhd/hdr and blu-ray maybe worth talking to them whether they are happy with things post and its set and forget or twiddlers dream :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im defentitely a set and forget...........i dont feel the need to go to that extreme edge of perfection.

 

and i have been very happy with the calibration on my projector

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Guys. On my current 110” screen I am getting more than enough light from the PJ and only need low laser mode for HDR with no tone mapping on the Oppo. PJ is just 4.6 metres from the screen. Zooming in to the equivalent of 140” scope ( which will be my new screen) I need high laser mode for HDR , again without tone mapping from the Oppo.

I do find myself tweaking each movie however. I haven’t used Oppo tone mapping because it apparently won’t send BT2020 colour to Sony PJs for some reason. New Panasonic 4K players should do it better when they are released.

I am relieved to hear that properly setup and calibrated HDR settings are repeatable for UHD movies, and I look forward to having mine done ASAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reality check gentlemen. Lets assume we have a 100" screen with a gain of 1.3 and a projector that can actually deliver 2000 lumens to the screen, that knock out all X series JVC's and similar Sony models from the get go. We could get 2000 lumens out of a Z1 but only if we don't use wide gamut mode which drops output in half.

Anyway, with 2000 lumens we will only get about 130-140nits on our 100" screen, that only about 14% of the peak output required for HDR.

 

For owners of current X series JVC projectors the best you can hope for with calibrated colour on that relatively small 100" screen is maybe 100nits WITHOUT the wide gamut filter in the light path, and maybe 60nits with wide gamut colour.

So with the projector running FLAT OUT we can maybe get to the SRD standard of 100nits but not with wide gamut colour. A 40 year old CRT TV was brighter, so PLEASE lets have no talk of "HDR" with a domestic projector, its not happening and nor does it need to happen. SDR looks bloody fantastic and is much more appropriate to big screen dark room viewing then 1000nit plus HDR.

 

If people like the different "look" of HDR mastered content so be it, but don't fool yourself into believing you are seeing HDR on screen because thats not possible, its 100% SDR or less. Its just SDR with different gamma compared to what you are used to seeing and gamma is fully adjustable.

For those who like the exaggerated contrast of remapped HDR, they can remap SDR content to get very much the same overall look. However, IMHO the studios know what they are doing when mastered content at 100nits for 1080 Bluray and thats the way it should look on screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like what i see when i watch it owen....thats all that really matters to me.  When it says hdr on the box of the movie i have purchased i can see that it looks different to one that does not say hdr.  For me thats good enuf to call it hdr as its much easier to say hdr than it is to say "sdr remastered to make us believe it is hdr even though we know that our hardware is not capeable of displaying true hdr"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you like what you see fine, but its good to have an understanding of why you see what you see.

The thing is, the 1080 SDR Bluray version could have been mastered to give exactly the same gamma and "look" as you get with the HDR version remapped to SDR, its just a change in gamma. However the studio mastered the 1080 Bluray to look the way they wanted it to look when displayed at 100 nits. If the consumer wants a different look from the 1080 Bluray version they can dial it in on their display if they know how. Its no different to remapping HDR, just going the other way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

 I have been taking note of whether the  4K  movie was mastered in 4K  or just an upscaled 2K movie by checking the site Real or Fake 4K .  The upscaling reminds me of when Bluray was introduced and many of the early Blurays were just upscaled from their previous scan.    Some fake 4K might even look a bit better to some but I am not about to encourage the mangey buggers who want to short change us.

 

In determining whether the Bluray or 4K UHD disc would be more suitable for projection ( before buying) , I have  been reading reviews from Bluray.com and Ultrahd.highdefdigest.com  where they compare PQ between the two.  I think they use 4K TV panels  for the comparisons  and so far they seem to give a good indication what to expect, although  I haven't found a review of a 2k upscaled disc that was compelling enough to buy it. 

Edited by Tasso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
49 minutes ago, Tasso said:

 I have been taking note of whether the  4K  movie was mastered in 4K  or just an upscaled 2K movie by checking the site Real or Fake 4K .  The upscaling reminds me of when Bluray was introduced and many of the early Blurays were just upscaled from their previous scan.    Some fake 4K might even look a bit better to some but I am not about to encourage the mangey buggers who want to short change us.

please dont use that real fake site tasso

 

use imdb. they give straight from horses mouth. Can look at the technical specs of any movie you might be interested in, By clicking on technical specs to see how shot and mastered, eg below for bladerunner 2049,

 

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1856101/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec

 

but please dont get swallowed up in hoopla. just the 4k 2k aspect is the least I would suggest the driver for uhd. that said we are getting gains in that. with blu-ray we would have been lucky to get 1k detail to screen 1.5k would be pushing it. with uhd we will be going beyond that getting typically 1.5-2k + upto about 3.5k id suggest. 

 

the big driver is infact two fold WCG and HDR. read chris deerings notes on just what colour benefit uhd brings. I've quoted him before so wont repeat but it is real. and same with HDR. why do we need to limit ourselves to formats past, when can go further and we are. its why movies like life of pi with a 2k DI is an awesome experience with UHD, the shallows is a showcase of the format and only has a 2k DI. hence must suggestion not to go by that awful real fake site. you can make a far more considered judgement based on imdbs info.

 

49 minutes ago, Tasso said:

In determining whether the Bluray or 4K UHD disc would be more suitable for projection ( before buying) , I have  been reading reviews from Bluray.com and Ultrahd.highdefdigest.com  where they compare PQ between the two.  I think they use 4K TV panels  for the comparisons  and so far they seem to give a good indication what to expect, although  I haven't found a review of a 2k upscaled disc that was compelling enough to buy it. 

with blu-ray.com and high def digest I have found their reviews tend to be a bit mixed, far too variable in reviews i would suggest. ralph potts on avs i have found pretty steady as indicator.

 

just like with blu-ray sure there is some better than others in how have come up, some i wouldnt bother getting in the format, but there are many many uhds I have very much enjoyed on the format in the last 2 years. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/04/2018 at 6:53 PM, Owen said:

Remember, ALL domestic projectors are strictly SDR no matter how they are advertised and most will struggle to even achieve the SDR standard of 100nits unless the screen is small or high gain. So when playing HDR video via a projector gamma MUST be re mapped to an SDR like response. New "4K HDR" projectors do this internally but old models like yours will need external conversion. There is no "standard" or correct way to do the conversion so it hit and miss. I find that after fine tuning the gamma for a particular HDR title so that the picture looks like it should to my eyes the result is VERY close the SDR 1080 Bluray version displayed on a projector calibrated to the SDR standards, so close I can't tell which version I am viewing.

 

1080 Bluray is mastered for 100nits which is most appropriate for use with a projector and unless the mastering is poor this should give the most accurate presentation on a projector that is properly calibrated. You see what you where intended to see.

4K HDR video is mastered for 1000nits plus which is WAY off for use with a projector. You will never see what the studio intended you to see, just what the designers of the gamma conversion system thought would look good to most people most of the time with most content.

 

There is likely an advantage in re mastering old titles that may not have been done well previously, just like what was done with old DVD titles when Bluray came out, but modern titles are typically mastered to a high standard for 1080 Bluray so there is little to be gained in yet another version mastered for HDR which is intended for ultra bright TV's NOT projectors.

Tell that to the Dolby Cinema guys who have spectacular HDR at 30fl in commercial theatres.

 

Its pretty easy to tell HDR from SDR apart on a projector, if you cannot see it, you are running the wrong curves or not doing it right. It trumps my 1400nit 55" Samsung display and my 500 nit Hisense 75" every day of the week. Point is, for HDR content I am running at 100 nits, for SDR about 48 nits, I could never watch an SDR Bluray at 100 nits on a projector, it looks terrible, and no, the gamma is not the same when both are set up right, there are clear differences to the image rendition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Reality check gentlemen. Lets assume we have a 100" screen with a gain of 1.3 and a projector that can actually deliver 2000 lumens to the screen, that knock out all X series JVC's and similar Sony models from the get go. We could get 2000 lumens out of a Z1 but only if we don't use wide gamut mode which drops output in half.

Anyway, with 2000 lumens we will only get about 130-140nits on our 100" screen, that only about 14% of the peak output required for HDR.

 

For owners of current X series JVC projectors the best you can hope for with calibrated colour on that relatively small 100" screen is maybe 100nits WITHOUT the wide gamut filter in the light path, and maybe 60nits with wide gamut colour. So with the projector running FLAT OUT we can maybe get to the SRD standard of 100nits but not with wide gamut colour. A 40 year old CRT TV was brighter, so PLEASE lets have no talk of "HDR" with a domestic projector, its not happening and nor does it need to happen. SDR looks bloody fantastic and is much more appropriate to big screen dark room viewing then 1000nit plus HDR.

COMPLETELY WRONG.

 

BT2020 Filter 10 hours on lamp. 120 INCH OZTS 1.26gain (which I believe is in actual fact nearer to 1.0 gain based on multiple real meter measurements) 16:9 Screen.

 

This would be over 180nits on a 100" 1.0 gain screen and 233 nits on a real 1.3 gain.

 

Thats ~1550lm / 400LUX calibrated and verified with the WCG Filter.

 

T3sprlj.png&key=07518d1ea90f40bb2d93523edb4ccbe2874c4b4dedde0b7c9d86581f69e7a90b

 

300 Hours on lamp. 1450 Lumens after the lamp had settled.

 

167nits on 100" 1.0 gain / 218 Nits on real 1.3 gain.

 

zhoWP9B.png&key=0e3f7554d3f458f9e38afb075f388f7a7d4df539cc06c350d558d8e93256d458

 

In fact, I run HDR in low lamp due to fan noise and still get 95fl, and its more than enough for me.

 

NO FILTER nets me near 140 nits in high lamp, but I don't bother calibrate that since it looks crap and I like to close the iris way down to -12 and still be at 48nits.

 

-10 Iris Low lamp. 300 Hours.

 

BwO5Y2U.png&key=2e74b6395b5c4124b53e7345702ae6dc29ca077f163170c755329af93da5b9d4

 

Also a Z1 really is 3000lm uncalibrated and ~2500lm calibrated properly, so you are wrong again there. With filter is loses about 40%, yes.

 

 

Edited by Javs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Javs  has achieved outstanding performance indeed.   It might be obvious to some, but not often enough stipulated for those still finding their way, that projector mounting distances and screen size  have a critical impact on light levels required for HDR.   Limits would apply for any given projector. 

 

I know some who  simply wish to have the largest screen possible and I guess for them, HDR would not be an option if the light levels were insufficient. But then there could be those who might argue that the impact of the larger picture  using 1080p bluray,  is more immersive and satisfying than a smaller HDR picture. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Javs said:

Tell that to the Dolby Cinema guys who have spectacular HDR at 30fl in commercial theatres.

Maybe Dolby should look at the standards for HDR because 30fl (100nits) is SDR by definition.

 

3 hours ago, Javs said:

Its pretty easy to tell HDR from SDR apart on a projector, if you cannot see it, you are running the wrong curves or not doing it right.

Of course HDR video looks different, it was MASTERED to look different and the projector will remap gamma to look different to what the video was mastered to look like on screen.

HDR is more than just a change in gamma, it requires a massive change in peak on screen brightness. SDR displayed at 100 nits has EXACTELY the same dynamic range as HDR displayed at 100 nits, but without remapping the on screen gamma and brightness tracking of HDR video will be VERY different as will the average picture level.

SDR and HDR on screen gamma and brightness tracking are supposed to be very similar up to about 80% peak, thereafter HDR runs away in brightness to a peak that is 10 to 40 times higher. Obviously with a projector thats totally impossible as the peak output can't go up by a factor 10 or more. So in place of image brightness ramping up dramatically as it should above about 80% of peak the projectors gamma remapping pulls down the mid tones reducing the average picture level and thereby making the white level look comparatively higher. Its just a change in gamma and does not increase dynamic range.

 

3 hours ago, Javs said:

It trumps my 1400nit 55" Samsung display and my 500 nit Hisense 75" every day of the week.

No argument from me there, I'm not impressed with TV images.

 

3 hours ago, Javs said:

Point is, for HDR content I am running at 100 nits, for SDR about 48 nits, I could never watch an SDR Bluray at 100 nits on a projector, it looks terrible

I agree, running SDR gamma at 100 nits on a big screen in a dark room is over the top because the average picture level is too high, at least it is for me. The 100 nit SDR standard was intended for TV's not projectors.

If you where to run a true HDR gamma on a projector the average picture level would be about 10 times darker than SDR gamma, which would obviously be WAY too dark. So HDR gamma must be re mapped to give something close to SDR just to get an acceptably bright image. By the same token, running SDR video at 100 nits is going to be too bright and requires gamma to be re mapped to compensate. I certainly don't run standard SDR 2.2 gamma when viewing 1080 Bluray content on a projector.

 

Im curious why its fine to remap the gamma of HDR video to make it work on a projector at say 100 nits and yet its not ok to remap the gamma of SDR video to make it suitable for display on the same projector at 100nits.

 

3 hours ago, Javs said:

and no, the gamma is not the same when both are set up right, there are clear differences to the image rendition.

Obviously if the on screen gamma is deferent the image rendition will be different. However, when the on screen gamma is equalised the images should look very much the same and do.

 

There are more differences between 1080 Bluray and 4K Bluray then just HDR, different mastering for a start, so direct comparison is problematic. Even when gamma is exactly matched between them there will be subtle differences. 

 

 

My point is that domestic projectors have no where near the light output to be classified as "HDR", and likely never will, so when viewing 4K Bluray on a projector you get 4K horizontal pixels (not 4K resolution) 4:2:0 video with whatever on screen gamma you choose to apply, it will most certainly not be High Dynamic Range on screen. In fact dynamic range is set and limited by the projector NOT the video, 1080 Bluray content can be run at exactly the same white level and black level as 4K Bluray content for identical dynamic range.

Running the projector brighter does not increase dynamic range as black level increases in proportion to the increase in white level.

Edited by Owen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
6 hours ago, Tasso said:

@Javs  has achieved outstanding performance indeed.   It might be obvious to some, but not often enough stipulated for those still finding their way, that projector mounting distances and screen size  have a critical impact on light levels required for HDR.   Limits would apply for any given projector. 

 

I know some who  simply wish to have the largest screen possible and I guess for them, HDR would not be an option if the light levels were insufficient. But then there could be those who might argue that the impact of the larger picture  using 1080p bluray,  is more immersive and satisfying than a smaller HDR picture. 

 

for immersion. the screen size to seating distance is critical. thx has their recommendation which works pretty well i have found. going too small a screen immersion is just not possible ie with telly sized screens unless sitting at under typical viewing distances homely settings and ofcourse at other end of spectrum for those wanting more extreme can go further. but we also have to accept limits of blowing up imagines with the variable quality we can get with the diet of stuff we tend to feed our systems. and yeah go too big and the HDR boogie man going to get you with less and less gains over SDR....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What size screen do you need to run to get a 1000 nit "HDR" image Al? May as well buy a TV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/4/2018 at 11:33 AM, Owen said:

In fact dynamic range is set and limited by the projector NOT the video, 1080 Bluray content can be run at exactly the same white level and black level as 4K Bluray content for identical dynamic range.

Running the projector brighter does not increase dynamic range as black level increases in proportion to the increase in white level.

I cant fault the logic.    So what differences are we seeing  with HDR vs SDR  as they do look different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Tasso said:

I cant fault the logic.    So what differences are we seeing  with HDR vs SDR  as they do look different.

Its graded completely differently.

 

For an SDR calibration and setup, the ref/diffuse white level in SDR for my setup is about 20nits and that goes to 48 nits for the peak white for highlights.

 

For HDR I use a peak white of 100 nits but I keep the same 20 nits ref white. So I now have 80 nits reserved for highlight information, The overall general brightness of a scene shot indoors with two actors talking is the same as if I were watching SDR at 48 nits peak calibration and that is the point of that. But in HDR you now have 80 nits rather than 28 nits reserved for highlight information this yields a much more convincing and realistic look to certain scenes and shots, its undeniable.

 

The DI actually CLOSES to the same exact spot as it did in SDR if called for, which = the same ultimate possible black floor so long as I am in low lamp for both (the black floor is raised in high lamp), and as such, I don't know how else to put that than it is more dynamic range in real content for the same diffuse white calibration in SDR, however due to the ANSI contrast limitations in projectors the dynamic range in the same shot will always be the same as in SDR, but by that argument same with TV's except OLEDs which have infinity ANSI contrast.

 

To get the same effect in SDR you would need to add an S-Curve to the 2.4 power gamma you would otherwise be using, that breaks calibration/specs and is completely not how the content was mastered or intended to be viewed.

Edited by Javs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
15 hours ago, Tasso said:

I cant fault the logic.    So what differences are we seeing  with HDR vs SDR  as they do look different.

 

Tasso, the below is a great bit of work capturing the essence of why they do look different and in essence its the HDR aspect and WCG working together to bring gains it does.... over plain SDR. in my opinion its a triple whammy of some detail gains (4k), the greater dynamic range of HDR and wider colour gamut (giving the greater colour volume) that gives the overall wham....

 

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-lcd-flat-panel-displays/2812161-what-color-volume.html

 

no projectors cant achieve 10000 nits of dolby volume but neither do their own projectors in movie theatres. neither do we even have displays doing full rec 2020...which is in itself only 75.8% of the visible spectrum. neither do we have displays or cameras for that matter that can achieve the 20-24 stops of dynamic range our human eyes can achieve....

 

below from the article is best example of what we are chasing with HDR ....

 

KZYl2WN.jpg

 

and any closer the formats & gear can get us there, i for one see as a good thing...

 

as the pictorial describes even the above definition of HDR is still not a direct replication of reality but just ever helping us get closer and closer to it :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×