Great Essay on Grading for HDR Displays

[pozz]

Somewhat dated at 2016. http://vanhurkman.com/wordpress/?p=3548

Stumbled onto it during TV research.

 

[Offler]

Somewhat dated at 2016. http://vanhurkman.com/wordpress/?p=3548

Stumbled onto it during TV research.

Interesting...

I planned to watch HDR content by this year on PC and I got new display for that, however its not possible to watch original UHD content on AMD PCs as official software require Intel SGX (which is no longer supported by Intel and I hope it will be dropped soon). Only exception are UHD HDR demos, which look nice, but are not content-protected.

Also I cannot color grade my photos to a different gamut as sRGB 24 bit - partially because most displays, browsers are not capable of higher color range than BT709 or sRGB and even quite common AdobeRGB might cause trouble. So I have found different usage of the displays capabilities...

Display is HDR600 certified, allows 10bits of colors, has enough dynamic range and can cover over 123% of sRGB and allows hardware calibration where data are imported into LUT profile in display, not just into software ICC profile.

So i decided to move one step back use this capacity to get more accurate sRGB 24bit color calibration. Subsequent measurement with the sensor, tests show of 0,64%. in average color deviation, 1% of color temperature deviation, exact precise black and 0.34% deviation in gamma.

FulllHD content from standard Blu-Rays (1920x1080 with color range of BT709) now looks amazing, and digital photos are life-like.

So if you by chance end up stuck with no possibility to use HDR display in such manner, you can still get best sRGB possible.

 

[L5730]

Modern dSLR cameras easily out do the sRGB colour space. They also capture more dynamic range than visible on sRGB 8 bit displays (my Dell u2415 included), and this only gets worse when we take bracketed images, exposure for darks, mids and highlights and combine in an HDR image.
All too often this HDR image is tone mapped and rendered out as an 8 bit sRGB jpeg for web use and display. Folks still call it HDR, but it's not, it's tone mapped.

High Dynamic Range displays would help to get closer to displaying all of the graduations, and extreme dark and lights in such an image. Unfortunately, as it's not common tech for most folks, one is still best rendering out as 8 bit sRGB jpeg for other viewers.

...and here we are in the same crux as many a music mastering engineer. What the heck is the end user going to be looking at / listening to? It's all well and great mastering for a lovely full range system, calibrated and in a treated room, but what does the fellow with their cheapy earbuds do? I suppose the loudness war is a bit like the dumbing down of images for the masses with uncalibrated screens with poor (or even poorer) colour gamuts, gamma and contrast ratios.

But yes, I can't agree more. Calibrate your gear. If you are running your own prints and can calibrate across the board, that is the best way. Screen to paper accuracy. You know what you are going to get (within reason as backlight vs. reflected light off paper are two different things!).
You can't help the rest of the world that isn't calibrated.

I wouldn't mind trying out a decent quality HDR TV, but it looks like we'll be HDRPro10 at best, as we've only the space for a 32" TV. 36" units are made, so have to go smaller rather than larger.

 

[andymok]

Also, great overview from Light Illusion (LightSpace / Colorspace)

https://www.lightspace.lightillusion.com/uhdtv.html

 

[AudioJester]

Anyone tried lumagen or madVR for dynamic tone mapping with a capable projector?