UHD and HDR in General

Discuss North American DVDs and Blu-rays or other DVD and Blu-ray-related topics.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#151 Post by EddieLarkin » Wed Sep 08, 2021 7:59 pm

Dolby Vision cannot accommodate the brightness v detail extremes anymore than HDR10 can, because that is ultimately limited by your TVs capabilities.

What it can do is instruct your TV which of the two it should prioritise, whereas HDR10 cannot. These instructions are decided by the person or team carrying out the Dolby Vision pass. Should a 600 nit TV display all of the detail in this 1500 nit highlight by lowering overall brightness, or should it maintain max brightness and crush out some of the detail? Or should it offer a middle ground, and if so to what degree? How should a 1000 nit TV handle the same? And so on. Ultimately DV is about control and finesse over how to fit each frame or scene into a display that is less capable than the display the grading itself was performed on.

HDR10 on the other hand is just a best effort: here is the maximum light level, let the TV decide how to adjust each scene. You lose that control and finesse, and you feel the effects of that more the bigger the difference there is between the grade's light level and the TVs light output capability. The closer these are, the less something like DV is needed.

So in regards to Rear Window, it may be the case the bulb scene is graded a bit brighter than your TV can handle, and the TV is choosing to maintain detail over brightness, thus making the shot seem dimmer than ideal. DV still wouldn't be able to do both (on your TV), but a human would be choosing which is best, rather than the TV.

This is essentially what the extra cash would have bought you if you'd got the A90J over the A80J, which goes about 200 nits brighter. That higher level may allow such a scene to be both fully bright and detailed, or if not, to be closer to the intended point (in both HDR10 and DV).

User avatar
senseabove
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:07 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#152 Post by senseabove » Wed Sep 08, 2021 9:06 pm

Ah! Okay, that makes it make sense to me. Really appreciate your patience explaining all this!

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#153 Post by EddieLarkin » Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:30 am

No problem! What I'm trying to put across is that depending on the disc/TV combo, Dolby Vision can range from doing nothing to doing a lot. So when you say you're going to check out Basic Instinct to see what DV can do, you can't be sure it's actually going to do anything unless you know what kind of level grade the title in question is, and what kind of level your TV can handle natively. And another variable is the HDR10 static mapping, as some TVs do this "guessing" a lot better than others, and I'm fairly certain Sony are at the higher end of that scale. So don't be surprised if a lot of the time there isn't really much difference between DV and HDR10 if you compare them directly, for many high end TV owners DV is just a nice reassuring bonus to have, rather than anything that's actually super important.

User avatar
jegharfangetmigenmyg
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:52 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#154 Post by jegharfangetmigenmyg » Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:41 am

EddieLarkin wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 5:06 pm
jegharfangetmigenmyg wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 2:47 pm
I didn't know that the studios had different nit intensity standards, but it makes sense. The one extreme transfer that just killed my eyes and looked very intense and non-filmic, I would even say, on my PJ was Ghostbusters which was released by Sony. I checked on my UB-420, and if I remember correctly it was mastered at 1000 nits. But then, when I set my player to output in SDR Rec. 709, it looked extremely pleasing as if the high nit level made the downsampling easier for the Panny and the result better.
They don't have set standards or anything, but they do use grading monitors of different levels. WB and Sony are the only ones that regularly grade on the Dolby Pulsar, which I believe is the only set available that is capable of 4000 nits of brightness. All of the other studios use 1000 nit monitors. Ghostbusters was graded on the 4000 nit monitor, and its highest averaged frame goes as high as 2273 nits. This is rather an insane way to grade a film based title and if your TV (and especially a projector) isn't very proficient at tone mapping HDR10 (i.e. knowing that it should take a title like this and map its brightness down massively), it instead will just play every part of any bright or daylight scene in the film at the maximum capability of your output device. Dolby Vision on a title like Ghostbusters would be a huge benefit but alas, it's a rarity with Sony.
Thank you again for a handful of extremely useful posts, Eddie! Back in the day, we just had to by the best looking dvd and blu-ray, but now we have to read about mastering – or even sample a movie before seeing to check if it's blown out. My life is really (almost) too short for this.

I know this is a mileage may vary question, but keeping in mind that I have a projector that can't fully render HDR anyways, how much of a disservice to you think I'm doing by downsampling to SDR Rec.709? I have a Panasonic UHD player, and as you mentioned, they are supposed to be the leaders in SDR conversion. I have tried the built-in tonemapping which can be set to projector, but honestly, I don't see a lot of difference, unfortunately. Downsampling of course also gives me the advantage of being able to calibrate the SDR image more easily (calibrating HDR is very hard, even for experts, I understand). I am very happy with the results that my Panny gives me, but what puts me on the fence is the fact that I also, sometimes, get a UHD HDR image that I am very pleased with and I wouldn't want to miss out on that. But I would say that it would be an annoying film experience every time I was amidst a UHD film and suddenly found it too dim or too bright and had to even think about that and switch mode...

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#155 Post by EddieLarkin » Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:56 am

I really don't have any experience converting UHDs to SDR, but I can imagine it being a superior way to view if the projector isn't much up to displaying HDR. Do you have the 820? Hit the Playback Information button twice and it'll show you the HDR10 metadata the disc is carrying. You can then make a judgement on how to approach things on a disc by disc basis, the general idea being to leave those discs that have low nit ranges (Goodfellas, Blade Runner 2049, Hereditary, to name a few) in HDR, since your projector should be able to handle them without any problem. For discs with high nit ranges, this is where you'll need to do some comparing. I would even go back to trying out the HDR Optimiser Projector setting, because if you happened to be using a very low nit disc at the time you tested it out before, it wouldn't have been doing anything anyway.

On the subject of projectors, those that are looking to upgrade soon should consider the new JVCs that were just announced. Their first laser projectors and I believe the first projectors with HDR10+, as well as generally having higher brightness capabilities. They should end up being class leaders and may be the first projectors to really start matching basic OLED HDR performance (assuming proper room conditions and professional calibration, but those should be a given with projectors this expensive!):

https://eu.jvc.com/microsite/eu/D-ILA/i ... 5JgPSkwDi4

User avatar
jegharfangetmigenmyg
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:52 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#156 Post by jegharfangetmigenmyg » Thu Sep 09, 2021 7:01 am

I have a 420, but it does the same thing as the 820, so I am able to view the metadata information. Thanks for the tip regarding the nits check. I actually had the Optimiser activated when viewing Ghostbusters, so now I wouldn't want to know how it looked without activated...! I guess that should just follow your rule of thumb and be aware when popping in a Sony or a Warner (were they more conservative in their handling of the Kubricks? None of them have struck me as being extremely bright in any way, and 2001 is one of my preferred HDR reference discs).

My anecdotal experience with HDR to SDR conversion on my PJ is that the color scheme clearly changes of course, but – to my eyes, at least – not for the worse. It is just like the PJ's superior rendering of SD blu-rays with the resolution bumped up. Again, I tend to find the look of Rec.709 more filmic, at least on my projector, so hopefully this information can be useful for other midrange HDR projector users who are disappointed.

The JVC projectors? I've seen them, yes, but my wife would throw me out if I even mentioned spending such an amount on our home cinema!

User avatar
andyli
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:46 pm

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#157 Post by andyli » Thu Sep 09, 2021 11:17 pm

For those struggling to grasp the idea of HDR and how it’s handled in practice you should definitely give this article a read. Its crystal clear explanation of HDR10 vs. DV tone mapping with illustrations made me finally understand what underlies the Goodfellas controversy. Highly recommended!!

User avatar
jegharfangetmigenmyg
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:52 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#158 Post by jegharfangetmigenmyg » Fri Sep 10, 2021 3:20 am

EddieLarkin wrote:
Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:56 am
I really don't have any experience converting UHDs to SDR, but I can imagine it being a superior way to view if the projector isn't much up to displaying HDR. Do you have the 820? Hit the Playback Information button twice and it'll show you the HDR10 metadata the disc is carrying. You can then make a judgement on how to approach things on a disc by disc basis, the general idea being to leave those discs that have low nit ranges (Goodfellas, Blade Runner 2049, Hereditary, to name a few) in HDR, since your projector should be able to handle them without any problem. For discs with high nit ranges, this is where you'll need to do some comparing. I would even go back to trying out the HDR Optimiser Projector setting, because if you happened to be using a very low nit disc at the time you tested it out before, it wouldn't have been doing anything anyway.
I popped in the new Willy Wonka UHD that I just received yesterday. Checked the playback information, and it clocked in at 3318 nits! Is this some kind of new record? It looked terrible on my projector. Gene Wilder suddenly had luminant blue laser eyes. I would be interested to hear how such an extreme release looks on an OLED or LED, better suited to handle such a signal. I just ordered Goodfellas, and if I understand what I read correctly, I should love the look of that one.

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#159 Post by EddieLarkin » Fri Sep 10, 2021 6:37 am

I suspect 3318 is the MAXCLL, not the MAXFALL? The latter is more important, as it relates to the brightest averaged frame, whereas the former is the single brightest pixel. It's a super high MAXFALL that can cause real problems.

Ultimately handling a signal like this has less to do with the technology (Projector vs OLED vs LCD) and everything to do with the specific device's tone mapping. Does your projector have any sort of built in mapping (JVC call theirs Frame Adapt HDR)? Any decent OLED or LCD from the last few years will have. If not the Panasonic Optimiser set to Projector should make a big difference, this will map down the whole disc to below 300 nits (though if your projector is not very bright and isn't in a very well controlled environment it may be outputting well below this anyway, in which case same problem).

User avatar
jegharfangetmigenmyg
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:52 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#160 Post by jegharfangetmigenmyg » Fri Sep 10, 2021 7:34 am

EddieLarkin wrote:
Fri Sep 10, 2021 6:37 am
I suspect 3318 is the MAXCLL, not the MAXFALL? The latter is more important, as it relates to the brightest averaged frame, whereas the former is the single brightest pixel. It's a super high MAXFALL that can cause real problems.

Ultimately handling a signal like this has less to do with the technology (Projector vs OLED vs LCD) and everything to do with the specific device's tone mapping. Does your projector have any sort of built in mapping (JVC call theirs Frame Adapt HDR)? Any decent OLED or LCD from the last few years will have. If not the Panasonic Optimiser set to Projector should make a big difference, this will map down the whole disc to below 300 nits (though if your projector is not very bright and isn't in a very well controlled environment it may be outputting well below this anyway, in which case same problem).
@MAXCLL/MAXFALL: I will check it tonight. My BenQ W2700/HT3550 (https://www.benq.com/en-us/projector/ci ... t3550.html) has static tone mapping. I can turn on and off Wide Color Gamut (I leave it on, because wouldn't that be most sensible when dealing with HDR?) and Brilliant Color (I leave it off because black/white movies become black/brown movies when turned on). Other than the actual calibration settings, there is a CinemaMaster menu with Color Enhancer, Flesh Tone, 4K Pixel Enhancer and 4K Motion Enhancer. The only of those I'm using is Pixel Enhancer which I use moderately because I find that it makes filmgrain from blu-rays look less digital and less compressed.

I'm beginning to suspect that a professional calibration would help the HDR image significantly, because, as you write, if I don't see any real difference when toggling on and of the tone mapping on my Panny, there might be something wrong... As it stands, I'm very happy with the SDR image the projector brings, and I haven't had to calibrate it in any way, but again, I guess that calibrating HDR is vastly different from calibrating SDR?

User avatar
jegharfangetmigenmyg
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:52 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#161 Post by jegharfangetmigenmyg » Fri Sep 10, 2021 4:52 pm

jegharfangetmigenmyg wrote:
Fri Sep 10, 2021 7:34 am
EddieLarkin wrote:
Fri Sep 10, 2021 6:37 am
I suspect 3318 is the MAXCLL, not the MAXFALL? The latter is more important, as it relates to the brightest averaged frame, whereas the former is the single brightest pixel. It's a super high MAXFALL that can cause real problems.

Ultimately handling a signal like this has less to do with the technology (Projector vs OLED vs LCD) and everything to do with the specific device's tone mapping. Does your projector have any sort of built in mapping (JVC call theirs Frame Adapt HDR)? Any decent OLED or LCD from the last few years will have. If not the Panasonic Optimiser set to Projector should make a big difference, this will map down the whole disc to below 300 nits (though if your projector is not very bright and isn't in a very well controlled environment it may be outputting well below this anyway, in which case same problem).
@MAXCLL/MAXFALL: I will check it tonight. My BenQ W2700/HT3550 (https://www.benq.com/en-us/projector/ci ... t3550.html) has static tone mapping. I can turn on and off Wide Color Gamut (I leave it on, because wouldn't that be most sensible when dealing with HDR?) and Brilliant Color (I leave it off because black/white movies become black/brown movies when turned on). Other than the actual calibration settings, there is a CinemaMaster menu with Color Enhancer, Flesh Tone, 4K Pixel Enhancer and 4K Motion Enhancer. The only of those I'm using is Pixel Enhancer which I use moderately because I find that it makes filmgrain from blu-rays look less digital and less compressed.

I'm beginning to suspect that a professional calibration would help the HDR image significantly, because, as you write, if I don't see any real difference when toggling on and of the tone mapping on my Panny, there might be something wrong... As it stands, I'm very happy with the SDR image the projector brings, and I haven't had to calibrate it in any way, but again, I guess that calibrating HDR is vastly different from calibrating SDR?
I checked the Willy Wonka UHD just now, and you were right MAXCLL is 3112, but the MAXFALL is only 252 nits which is actually fine for my projector. I toyed around with the HDR settings, basically just toggling back and forth brightness and contrast levels, and now it's much better. I had just read everywhere that this projector had and impeccable out of the box calibration, but I guess probably not for a totally light controlled room such as mine. Turning down the brightness a bit helped A LOT on the black levels. But I believe that I still slightly prefer the 4K upscaled SDR image that I get when projecting a optimally encoded blu-ray.

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#162 Post by Ribs » Wed Sep 22, 2021 12:24 pm

Somewhat randomly, A24's follow-up to their Midsommar release is The Last Black Man in San Francisco. I *like* the movie but it seems like a very odd pick, to me, especially as everyone assumed Lighthouse or Gems (which obviously won't happen) seemed more obvious follow-ups.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#163 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:22 am

So funnily enough my region-free blu-ray player is on the verge of death, and I just realized I own a 4K UHD TV (Roku Model: E4AA50R, someone please correct me if I'm wrong!) so I'm thinking I might just purchase a region free UHD compatible setup, since I was worried I'd need to get a new TV, and all the works to make it count. I'm admittedly not tech savvy and incredibly confused by the details in this thread, so I'm curious from those who are 'in the know' on the format: a) Does my TV meet (if not ideal, at least worthwhile) qualifications for making the jump? b) Do Region-Free blu-ray/UHD players exist, and if so, is there an ideal option? (Edit: This seems to be the only version available on 220electronics) c) Do I need to know anything else to make this worth it?

I'd like to order a new player ASAP, as I refuse to be bedridden post-surgery for all of December without a way to watch movies, so I appreciate the forum's advice in advance and I also apologize for I'm sure this information is elsewhere but I've tried combing through various threads and I'm just getting more lost.

swo, you can laugh now

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#164 Post by EddieLarkin » Wed Nov 17, 2021 5:13 am

It's about as cheap as a 4K TV gets, but it does support HDR so at least you won't have to watch stuff converted to SDR. But, naturally at that price point the HDR is going to be very limited, so you certainly won't get the full quality out of a great many UHDs. Depending on how it handles the mapping of HDR, it may even make certain discs look worse than their BD counterparts. But the Panasonic 820's HDR Optimiser would help in this regard.

You can get region free UHD players (the UHD format is already region free, but you need a mod to playback BDs region free). I'm not sure what options there are in the US but in the UK there are sites like this, that offer pre-modded players.

User avatar
senseabove
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:07 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#165 Post by senseabove » Wed Nov 17, 2021 5:23 am

therewillbeblus wrote:
Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:22 am
So funnily enough my region-free blu-ray player is on the verge of death, and I just realized I own a 4K UHD TV (Roku Model: E4AA50R, someone please correct me if I'm wrong!) so I'm thinking I might just purchase a region free UHD compatible setup, since I was worried I'd need to get a new TV, and all the works to make it count. I'm admittedly not tech savvy and incredibly confused by the details in this thread, so I'm curious from those who are 'in the know' on the format: a) Does my TV meet (if not ideal, at least worthwhile) qualifications for making the jump? b) Do Region-Free blu-ray/UHD players exist, and if so, is there an ideal option? (Edit: This seems to be the only version available on 220electronics) c) Do I need to know anything else to make this worth it?

I'd like to order a new player ASAP, as I refuse to be bedridden post-surgery for all of December without a way to watch movies, so I appreciate the forum's advice in advance and I also apologize for I'm sure this information is elsewhere but I've tried combing through various threads and I'm just getting more lost.

swo, you can laugh now
Honestly, I was most baffled by your swearing to die on the non-UHD hill because I thought I remembered you had said you already had a 4k UHD-capable TV... but yes, that model number will handle 4k UHD. I see several options listed at that 220 link, so I'm not sure why you say "this...version," but the consensus seems to be: Panasonic is pretty universally considered Top of the Line, then probably LG, then Sony, then the rest.

Also, [as Eddie just pointed out,] UHD discs are region free by design (aside from a scant few seemingly accidental, standard-defying discs), so if you're willing to have two players, you could by a bog-standard US UHD player on Black Friday for all your region A and UHD needs and, down the line, either a cheaper, new region-free BD player or, if you don't have region C BDs, a bog-standard UK BD player from amazon.co.uk and a voltage adapter. You'd probably end up spending about the same amount, but figured it was worth mentioning.

I will note two things, to temper your expectations: one, that TV does not appear to support Dolby Vision (or HRD10+), so some discs—notably some UK StudioCanal discs with middling HDR10 encodes and good Dolby Vision ecodes—may not look their absolute best if you already notice things like compression; and two, my first experience with 4k UHD was on a Roku TV, and based solely on comparing the Phantom Thread BD/UHD, I had to point out for my completely non-cinephile/videophile friends who owned the TV what I was seeing as I switched between the two. I could see it pretty plainly, and when I did explain it, with pauses and finger pointing, they saw it as well. Having since also compared those two sources on my current LG UBK90/Sony A80J, I don't think I would need to point things out even to laymen, it's so blatant. So if you've never watched an HD movie and thought "gee, I wish this looked better," UHD on that TV may not be the gobsmacking difference you expect, but if you have, or if you're willing to pay attention in order to appreciate it, it will still be noticeable. Just wanted to say that, since I don't ever really recall you griping abut image quality.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#166 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:02 pm

EddieLarkin wrote:
Wed Nov 17, 2021 5:13 am
It's about as cheap as a 4K TV gets, but it does support HDR so at least you won't have to watch stuff converted to SDR. But, naturally at that price point the HDR is going to be very limited, so you certainly won't get the full quality out of a great many UHDs. Depending on how it handles the mapping of HDR, it may even make certain discs look worse than their BD counterparts. But the Panasonic 820's HDR Optimiser would help in this regard.
Thanks for the response- I’m not looking to upgrade a TV for a while (or even jump into the format beyond maybe a couple titles) but I certainly don’t want it to look worse than blu-ray! How can I check whether my TV would have such an effect? Also, are you suggesting that the quality of a player could boost/resolve this issue, or is the 820 HDR Optimiser a different tool? I was thinking of getting this player after senseabove’s helpful comments regarding Panasonic as the best and this being a relatively affordable option- tho I’ve never bought from Bombay Electronics (or anyone other than 220). Would this one not boost the issues my TV may have in converting the quality into a worse state? I’d like to spring for, say, the UHD Shining since it seems to be a huge upscale from the blu, but wouldn’t want to spend $20+ if it’s going to look worse because of my setup

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#167 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:15 pm

senseabove wrote:
Wed Nov 17, 2021 5:23 am
I see several options listed at that 220 link, so I'm not sure why you say "this...version," but the consensus seems to be: Panasonic is pretty universally considered Top of the Line, then probably LG, then Sony, then the rest.

So if you've never watched an HD movie and thought "gee, I wish this looked better," UHD on that TV may not be the gobsmacking difference you expect, but if you have, or if you're willing to pay attention in order to appreciate it, it will still be noticeable. Just wanted to say that, since I don't ever really recall you griping abut image quality.
I only saw that version pop up when I clicked the 4K UHD option on the side to narrow down players, which I believed was distinct from being capable of “UHD upscaling” - not sure if this is correct but also unsure why they’d only list that player when clicking the UHD tab…

You’re right that I’m not one to gripe about image quality, but I appreciate the rundown of your experience, and I certainly don’t believe my TV is going to an ideal projector of the format. I’m not going to go out and sell my Arrow Crash blu for a UHD upgrade or anything, but it’d be nice to test out a few titles that are supposedly way better in this format without doing any work around getting a new setup, and then years down the line having that option when I finally do. However, none of this feels worthwhile if my TV could make a superior format look worse than blu-ray, which just seems insane (*cue thinking patterns damning UHD yet again*) but if I’m able to bypass that issue, then even if it’s not profoundly noticeable now, it’d be cool to have. I mean, I have to imagine that something like the new 4K restoration of The Shining has to be observably better just due to the jump in quality.. right?

bluesforyou
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2020 6:35 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#168 Post by bluesforyou » Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:40 pm

Panasonic is top of the line but don't get an LG player. Horrible user experience. Sony x800M2 is the best midrange option. Stay away from the x700 (playback problems) and x800 (no Dolby Vision) though.

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#169 Post by EddieLarkin » Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:57 pm

therewillbeblus wrote:
Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:02 pm
Thanks for the response- I’m not looking to upgrade a TV for a while (or even jump into the format beyond maybe a couple titles) but I certainly don’t want it to look worse than blu-ray! How can I check whether my TV would have such an effect? Also, are you suggesting that the quality of a player could boost/resolve this issue, or is the 820 HDR Optimiser a different tool? I was thinking of getting this player after senseabove’s helpful comments regarding Panasonic as the best and this being a relatively affordable option- tho I’ve never bought from Bombay Electronics (or anyone other than 220). Would this one not boost the issues my TV may have in converting the quality into a worse state? I’d like to spring for, say, the UHD Shining since it seems to be a huge upscale from the blu, but wouldn’t want to spend $20+ if it’s going to look worse because of my setup
The HDR format uses a brightness range that no TV can reproduce completely, though each individual title only uses a certain percentage of this range, with some using very little and some using a lot. So the more range your TV can reproduce the more titles you can play either 1:1, or with a moderate amount of HDR mapping (where the TV will try and crush the range down to fit your TV). But because your TV has a very limited range of HDR (we're talking projector level, it appears), then there's very few titles that it will reproduce 1:1, and a great many it will have to map. But these cheap TVs tend to have bad mapping as well, and if this one does then yes it could easily encounter a bright disc that it ends up futzing badly.

This is where the Pansonic come in. I shouldn't actually have linked the 820 as it comes with Dolby Vison, which you don't need/can't use. The 420 is sufficient so I would certainly recommend you get that. It has a function called the HDR Optimiser that takes the job of mapping HDR content away from the TV and instead performs it itself, doing a far better job than any budget TV likely will. In other words, the combination of your TV and the 420 is about the best 4K/HDR experience you're going to be able to get, and the Optimiser should ensure any bright UHDs don't give you any problems. Though it's still true you're not going to be getting close to what the format can truly offer.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#170 Post by swo17 » Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:11 pm

How would something like Goodfellas look on the setup you're describing for twbb? Are there particular titles you would say he shouldn't bother with?

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#171 Post by EddieLarkin » Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:04 pm

swo17 wrote:
Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:11 pm
How would something like Goodfellas look on the setup you're describing for twbb? Are there particular titles you would say he shouldn't bother with?
In theory Goodfellas would be the ideal title for a TV like this because it has a very limited range of HDR usage. But, even in cases like Goodfellas the HDR metadata can confuse certain TVs.

This is an example of HDR10 metadata values. The maxium light level (MaxCLL) is the single brightest pixel in the film, and maximum frame average light level (MaxFALL) is the brightest single frame. This tells the TV how bright the content is so it can attempt to map it. In Goodfellas those numbers are 247 and 60 respectively. No TVs should have any problem with values this low, and so no mapping should be needed. But, the lower data under Master Display tells the TV the brightness capabilities of the display the film was graded on. This is always either 1000 nits or 4000 nits. In Goodfellas case it's the latter. Some TVs only look at this Master Display data, instead of the content data, which is how you end up with bad mapping, as this data is compartively useless. So you have a TV with a disc that has a light content of sub 60 nits for basically its entire runtime, but that the TV believes is actually 4000 nits. This leads to the TV crushing the already dim image into imperceptibility (the precise reason why so many reviews of this disc were so bad).

The Panasonic Optimiser fixes this because it forces all TVs to look at the content metadata, not the Master Display data. So even with low nit titles the Optimiser is useful if you have a TV or projector with low capabilities/bad mapping. For high nit titles it serves an even more important function by ensuring the highlight detail the TV cannot display natively is not lost.

For these reasons I wouldn't say there any titles one should avoid because they have a low end TV, aslong as they have the 420/820 to go with it.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#172 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:21 pm

EddieLarkin wrote:
Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:57 pm
This is where the Pansonic come in. I shouldn't actually have linked the 820 as it comes with Dolby Vison, which you don't need/can't use. The 420 is sufficient so I would certainly recommend you get that. It has a function called the HDR Optimiser that takes the job of mapping HDR content away from the TV and instead performs it itself, doing a far better job than any budget TV likely will. In other words, the combination of your TV and the 420 is about the best 4K/HDR experience you're going to be able to get, and the Optimiser should ensure any bright UHDs don't give you any problems. Though it's still true you're not going to be getting close to what the format can truly offer.
Thanks for the info! Do I need to do anything to actualize the Optimiser once I get the player, or will the Panasonic 420 automatically convert what needs to be done to resolve any of these stated issues?

So even though my TV is not going to give me anything "close to what the format can truly offer," on a 50" TV sitting ~6 feet away, is it still worth purchasing UHDs for certain films? Like, to use my previous example, will I still be wow'd by the new 4K UHD restoration of The Shining compared to its accompanying BD, or notice improvements in Criterion's Citizen Kane, even if only marginally?

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#173 Post by EddieLarkin » Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:03 pm

therewillbeblus wrote:
Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:21 pm
Thanks for the info! Do I need to do anything to actualize the Optimiser once I get the player, or will the Panasonic 420 automatically convert what needs to be done to resolve any of these stated issues?

So even though my TV is not going to give me anything "close to what the format can truly offer," on a 50" TV sitting ~6 feet away, is it still worth purchasing UHDs for certain films? Like, to use my previous example, will I still be wow'd by the new 4K UHD restoration of The Shining compared to its accompanying BD, or notice improvements in Criterion's Citizen Kane, even if only marginally?
Yes, there is an option in the Settings menu to set your "HDR Display Type", so the Optimiser knows what sort of light level to map down to. The options are High Luminance LCD (1500 nits), Medium Luminance LCD/OLED (1000 nits), and Basic Lumaninance LCD (500 nits). Obviously you'd go for the latter. Then for use during playback there is a dedicated Optimiser button on the remote, which you hold down to turn it on and off, which is a great feature as it allows you to see exactly what the Optimiser is doing to the image in real time.

I would say it's probably worth purchasing UHDs in all cases. For one you're getting the maximum resolution capabilities out of your TV, you also don't have to worry about whether a BD actually uses a new 4K transfer rather than just an old master that was already on Blu (which is a very common occurence), and there are even cases where new 4K transfers intended for UHD are in fact used on new BDs, but for whatever reason they are poorly done (like The Matrix, where the new BD looks worse than the old BD in some respects, but looks stupendous on UHD). And you're future proofing yourself if you do eventually spring for a shiny new OLED one day.

As for The Shining specifically, I've never seen the new BD but even in direct cap comparison it doesn't look as good as the UHD.. The fact is most of these new restorations are specifically being done in the HDR world, and a quick downconvert is then done for any new BD, with often mixed results.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#174 Post by swo17 » Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:06 pm

twbb, if you want suggestions about which titles are supposed to show the greatest improvement on UHD, that's what this thread is for

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#175 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Nov 17, 2021 4:51 pm

EddieLarkin wrote:
Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:03 pm
therewillbeblus wrote:
Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:21 pm
Thanks for the info! Do I need to do anything to actualize the Optimiser once I get the player, or will the Panasonic 420 automatically convert what needs to be done to resolve any of these stated issues?

So even though my TV is not going to give me anything "close to what the format can truly offer," on a 50" TV sitting ~6 feet away, is it still worth purchasing UHDs for certain films? Like, to use my previous example, will I still be wow'd by the new 4K UHD restoration of The Shining compared to its accompanying BD, or notice improvements in Criterion's Citizen Kane, even if only marginally?
Yes, there is an option in the Settings menu to set your "HDR Display Type", so the Optimiser knows what sort of light level to map down to. The options are High Luminance LCD (1500 nits), Medium Luminance LCD/OLED (1000 nits), and Basic Lumaninance LCD (500 nits). Obviously you'd go for the latter. Then for use during playback there is a dedicated Optimiser button on the remote, which you hold down to turn it on and off, which is a great feature as it allows you to see exactly what the Optimiser is doing to the image in real time.

I would say it's probably worth purchasing UHDs in all cases. For one you're getting the maximum resolution capabilities out of your TV, you also don't have to worry about whether a BD actually uses a new 4K transfer rather than just an old master that was already on Blu (which is a very common occurence), and there are even cases where new 4K transfers intended for UHD are in fact used on new BDs, but for whatever reason they are poorly done (like The Matrix, where the new BD looks worse than the old BD in some respects, but looks stupendous on UHD). And you're future proofing yourself if you do eventually spring for a shiny new OLED one day.

As for The Shining specifically, I've never seen the new BD but even in direct cap comparison it doesn't look as good as the UHD.. The fact is most of these new restorations are specifically being done in the HDR world, and a quick downconvert is then done for any new BD, with often mixed results.
Okay that's helpful- I definitely understand the argument about future-proofing but was curious if there would be a noticeable difference in general across the format, making titles where the jump is strong for those who have better TVs equipped for the format also worth it for me in my compromised situation, and you just answered me- Thanks! One last question: Is the settings menu with "HDR Display Type" you're talking about on the blu-ray player itself, or my TV? I only ask because when looking to determine display type regarding 4K capabilities yesterday I noticed that my Roku TV doesn't have this feature- so if it's supposed to be the TV then I don't know what to do
swo17 wrote:
Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:06 pm
twbb, if you want suggestions about which titles are supposed to show the greatest improvement on UHD, that's what this thread is for
Thanks swo, I am aware of that thread and its purpose and will certainly begin to use it as a resource, but my question was more generalized around if my TV setup is a determining variable for the advice in that thread, or whether it's muted based on my inferior UHD TV. I was just using The Shining as an example since the 4K UHD transfer is supposed to be far better than the regular blu, as a case study for if my weaker TV would still be able to transmit the value in such a release that has inherent range against others

Post Reply