"Dolby demos new imaging tech that pushes more light to your television" - Worth waiting for? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 16 Old 12-06-2013, 09:13 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Solarius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Mass
Posts: 511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Sounds pretty fantastic. I'm waiting for post CES 2014 price drops on large 1080p sets to start the man cave, but I'm good staying with the 60" Sammy Plasma in the living room if this is something worth witing for. Seems like it would be. Much more interesting than 4K, and I don't really want to wait another 7 years for OLED to really, really this time, be ready. cool.gif


Source: http://www.engadget.com/2013/12/05/dolby-demos-new-imaging-tech-that-pushes-more-light-to-your-tele/


You may think your current HDTV is bright enough, but Dolby disagrees. The company, which is known more for its audio tech than its imaging capabilities, has been putting a lot of effort into developing a new type of imaging technology that offers up to 4,000 nits of backlight out of an LED panel. Compared to the TV standard of 100 nits, this is certainly a hefty improvement. Why is such a thing helpful? The 100-nit limit makes life difficult for filmmakers in post-production because they're not able to represent their masterpiece with perfectly accurate colors; there's only so much you can do to accurately portray the real world on such a limited budget of light. Bumping the display up to 4,000, however, allows the viewer to enjoy a much better experience.

Dolby showed us a prototype of this experimental tech, which we're told will likely be exhibited at CES next month (either in prototype or in a consumer product, though this will be up to individual manufacturers). The 2K panel sat next to a production monitor that many filmmakers use as their current reference -- in other words, what they use for viewing their footage before it goes through the process of compression and other tweaks -- and the difference was night and day. Despite the fact that both monitors have the same resolution, the prototype (on the left in the above image) offered far more realistic colors, higher dynamic range and more contrast sensitivity, all of which were factors that created a fantastic viewing experience. As an example, the skies were bluer on the new monitor, and clouds that were barely noticeable on the production model actually popped out far more accurately on the prototype.

We're told that the new imaging technology has already been shown off to key filmmakers in the industry, and that we'll likely see a lot more (including, we hope, an official name) on display at CES. Where it goes from there, Dolby tells us, is all up to manufacturers. And while we may see a lot more of this tech in the near future, there's no guarantee that other companies will build their monitors to the same spec (manufacturers aren't forced to go all the way up to 4,000 nits, for instance). Regardless, we'll happily take one when they start making their way into production.

Samsung PN58B550 (Livingroom) - Samsung BDP-F7500
Pioneer Elite VSX-72TXV - DefTech SM65 C/L/R x3 - CS Ensemble III (surrounds)
Sharp LC-80UQ17U (Mancave) - Amazon Fire TV & Samsung BDP-E5900
Denon 4520CI - GE Triton 2 - GE SCXL - Klipsch RP3 (surrounds) - PSA XS15se
Solarius is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 16 Old 12-06-2013, 10:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Dolby has been demoing HDR displays for years. Until they're large enough that they completely fill your field of vision, and there's a significant amount of content, I'm not really interested.
Daylight levels of brightness coming from a small display in a dark room does not sound enjoyable at all.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #3 of 16 Old 12-06-2013, 11:54 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Solarius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Mass
Posts: 511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 23
From what I hear content is already created with this in mind and scaled back to meet current set specs. I have no information about what type of sizes Dolby has been successful with. It sounds like they're largely leaving it up to manufacturers to implement. Maybe CES will bring an announcement of one of them signing on for a larger offering...

Samsung PN58B550 (Livingroom) - Samsung BDP-F7500
Pioneer Elite VSX-72TXV - DefTech SM65 C/L/R x3 - CS Ensemble III (surrounds)
Sharp LC-80UQ17U (Mancave) - Amazon Fire TV & Samsung BDP-E5900
Denon 4520CI - GE Triton 2 - GE SCXL - Klipsch RP3 (surrounds) - PSA XS15se
Solarius is offline  
post #4 of 16 Old 12-06-2013, 05:38 PM
 
vinnie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nunya
Posts: 11,657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 1000
Sure, I'll take a flat 70" UHD OLED with glasses-free 3D and Dolby HDR tech, why not? wink.gif
vinnie97 is offline  
post #5 of 16 Old 12-06-2013, 05:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
BSTNFAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chelmsford, MA
Posts: 579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Sure, I'll take a flat 70" UHD OLED with glasses-free 3D and Dolby HDR tech, why not? wink.gif

Why not??? 'Cause it's too small, of course! tongue.gif
BSTNFAN is offline  
post #6 of 16 Old 12-07-2013, 12:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solarius View Post

From what I hear content is already created with this in mind and scaled back to meet current set specs. I have no information about what type of sizes Dolby has been successful with. It sounds like they're largely leaving it up to manufacturers to implement. Maybe CES will bring an announcement of one of them signing on for a larger offering...
Well, you can adjust the exposure range of the display to match the camera to give you a "pseudo" HDR image, but nothing in wide use is currently capturing natively HDR video. It still requires specifically tailored content to work though, currently existing sources won't see any benefit from this tech. I suppose it would be possible for an "HDR Player" to download exposure values for current discs and adjust the display's exposure based on the scene content, but it would still have to be manually created for each film, and you could run into compatibility issues. I just don't see it taking off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Sure, I'll take a flat 70" UHD OLED with glasses-free 3D and Dolby HDR tech, why not? wink.gif
I think you'll be waiting a while if you want 4000 nits out of an OLED display! These will only be LED backlit LCDs for the foreseeable future.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #7 of 16 Old 12-07-2013, 03:39 AM
KOF
Advanced Member
 
KOF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 716
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Bad news for the OLEDs if that thing ever takes off! It will go the way of dodo...I mean plasmas. My Sony Trinitron BVM does similiar things. The brightness ramps up from pitch black to searing white, and up until that tech emerged, CRT was the only display that could dynamically adjust luminance output and not fail at it unlike those auto-dimming LCDs. The source is already there, it will be accepted day one, faster than 3D and 4K.

I can see already. Buyers in Bestbuy will not care if the OLED is made thinner and sexier by Samsung/LG, made cheaper by inkjet tech,given much better review by Cnet and CR. They will simply flock to the brightest display like moths again.
KOF is offline  
post #8 of 16 Old 12-07-2013, 05:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOF View Post

The source is already there, it will be accepted day one, faster than 3D and 4K.
There are no HDR sources right now. It might be possible to convert existing content to HDR (just like we have 2D to 3D conversions) but there is no native content.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #9 of 16 Old 12-07-2013, 05:32 AM
KOF
Advanced Member
 
KOF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 716
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

There are no HDR sources right now. It might be possible to convert existing content to HDR (just like we have 2D to 3D conversions) but there is no native content.

Only for the consumer sources. The original RGB data already exists on originals recorded from camera, so studios already have them and ready to convert. There will be no need for them to roll off RGB values for consumer media anymore.
KOF is offline  
post #10 of 16 Old 12-07-2013, 11:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,955
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solarius View Post

Sounds pretty fantastic. I'm waiting for post CES 2014 price drops on large 1080p sets to start the man cave, but I'm good staying with the 60" Sammy Plasma in the living room if this is something worth witing for. Seems like it would be. Much more interesting than 4K, and I don't really want to wait another 7 years for OLED to really, really this time, be ready. cool.gif


Source: http://www.engadget.com/2013/12/05/dolby-demos-new-imaging-tech-that-pushes-more-light-to-your-tele/
Of all the things I would like to see improved with consumer video (bit depth, color space, frame rate, etc...) I have mixed feelings about the idea of HDR. It might be nice if it was used properly but it is easy to imagine how TV commercials or web advertisements would use it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solarius View Post

Where it goes from there, Dolby tells us, is all up to manufacturers. And while we may see a lot more of this tech in the near future, there's no guarantee that other companies will build their monitors to the same spec (manufacturers aren't forced to go all the way up to 4,000 nits, for instance).
I don't see how they could have a standard for HDR if no one defines the brightness that is required.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KOF View Post

Only for the consumer sources. The original RGB data already exists on originals recorded from camera, so studios already have them and ready to convert.
That is only true for the video from the camera. What about all of the CGI and post production work that is done on the video after that? The only way to create HDR content is to keep it HDR from beginning to end. This is why real 4K movies are rare since most movies are shot at 4K but all of the CGI and post production work is done at 2K.
Richard Paul is offline  
post #11 of 16 Old 12-07-2013, 04:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOF View Post

Only for the consumer sources. The original RGB data already exists on originals recorded from camera, so studios already have them and ready to convert. There will be no need for them to roll off RGB values for consumer media anymore.
You need HDR cameras to shoot HDR video. We don't have HDR cameras in use today.

What you could do is use our current "low" dynamic range video adjusted for exposure on a high dynamic range display though. This means that you still only have say 12 stops of exposure information, but it can range from 100 nits to 4000 depending on the exposure value. (brightness of the scene being captured)

That's your "upconverted" content though, it's not native HDR.


People have done experiments shooting with two cameras and combining the exposures, but this looks awful on current displays. It's one possible way of capturing HDR video without requiring HDR cameras though.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #12 of 16 Old 12-07-2013, 04:25 PM
KOF
Advanced Member
 
KOF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 716
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 87
[quote name="TrentPancakes 2 days ago
@bosslugger I work in feature film VFX, so I might have some insight for you. I've been eyes-on with HDR displays in the past, and I firmly believe that HDR, if properly implemented, will be the next big thing in displays.

When we work on films, we're working with floating point (HDR) images from beginning to end. The highest RGB value that you can store on a Blu-ray or display on a TV is (1.0, 1.0, 1.0). But film (and digital cinema cameras) can easily record pixels with values that have brightness values of 60.0, 100.0, and higher. To get those values onto your screen at home, we do a soft rolloff of those high values to get them clamped back down to 1.0.

On a properly exposed frame of film (or digital cinema frame), the majority of the screen is still in that 0-1 range, but it's the bright highlights, reflections, fires, muzzle flashes, headlights... that sort of thing... that push past 1.0 and into that high dynamic range. Seeing those pixels properly exposed on an HDR screen is absolutely astounding. The demos that I watched on HDR monitors showed a dark kitchen interior, with a bright sunny day outside. You could see all of the detail in the shadowy room, but instead of the window being clamped at 1.0, you saw a bright world of detail out there, just like you were looking at the real thing.

To answer your questions, the color accuracy is great. All of the range from 0-1 is still exactly the same, there's just more output in the highlights. And footage wouldn't be interpreted as overblown since a correctly exposed frame is still mostly in the low dynamic space. However, it could be exploited by advertisers to "out bright" each other. Imagine watching a nice moody and dark show, and a car commercial comes on where the nominal brightness is 15 times what you were just watching.

Forget 3D (it's already losing favor in the studios, and completely lost the market at home), forget high frame rate. HDR is the best thing I've put eyes on, and I can't wait until everyone can see it for themselves.[/quote]

True HDR camera would be the most ideal but that doesn't mean we have to upscale from RGB values of 1.0,1.0,1.0. Even a negative holds higher HDR values than rolled off BDs.
KOF is offline  
post #13 of 16 Old 12-07-2013, 05:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,955
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOF View Post

True HDR camera would be the most ideal but that doesn't mean we have to upscale from RGB values of 1.0,1.0,1.0. Even a negative holds higher HDR values than rolled off BDs.
A standard for HDR video would have to be agreed on by the major movie studios, a DCI specification would need to be released that supports HDR (either using a bit depth higher than 12-bits or using a perceptual gamma curve), movie projectors capable of HDR would have to be released, movie theaters would have to buy those new HDR movie projectors, and movies would have to be finished in that HDR standard.

Here is a link to an article that mentions that at a recent SMPTE meeting the majority of people believed that a larger color space and HDR would be better than higher frame rates or higher resolution (only a few people picked higher resolution). So a lot of people in SMPTE do think that HDR is promising but a lot of stuff would need to happen before HDR could be seen in a movie theater. Dolby is pushing for HDR but at the moment the major studios haven't even made a standard for it.
Richard Paul is offline  
post #14 of 16 Old 12-09-2013, 01:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Elix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Dungeon, Pillar of Eyes
Posts: 1,161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 23
You can buy an HDR display right now. And it's only $40,000!
Elix is offline  
post #15 of 16 Old 12-09-2013, 02:35 AM
Senior Member
 
kkl10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 60
^ Lol, 30 seconds of googling and I came out with this.
So maybe this is what the "new" Dolby HDR display is all about after all, high resolution local dimming.
No way this is going to reach consumer market.

EDIT: For completeness sake en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrightSide_Technologies
kkl10 is offline  
post #16 of 16 Old 12-10-2013, 08:36 AM
Member
 
Matthias Hutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

You need HDR cameras to shoot HDR video. We don't have HDR cameras in use today.
Not quite true - RAW video captures the full dynamic range of the sensors, usually in the range of 10-15 stops.
On top of that dual exposure techniques can be used to extend DR further (like REDs HDRx).
Matthias Hutter is offline  
Reply Flat Panels General and OLED Technology

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off