Originally Posted by Kris Deering
Again, other than these two movies, I rarely have any issue with saturation, so I am not going to make this into a bigger deal than it needs to be. I watch movies all the time and this problem probably represents less than 1% of viewing time for issues (the slight gamma manipulation from the dynamic iris process in my JVC causes more issues than this), so I'm not gonna sweat it. If I was watching these two movies all the time, maybe I'd care more.
It's currently only dramatically obvious in a few rare movies/scenes. However, I bet there are a million scenes where although not obvious, this feature will make a clearly visible difference if you compare side-by-side. Furthermore, in the long run I'd expect the trend to go towards 4000nits masters, maybe at some point even 10000nits masters. Which should increase the amount of movies/scenes where saturation could become an obvious problem. So while desaturation might be not the most important thing in the world, I still think it's an important part of tone mapping.
Originally Posted by thrang
Paradoxically, the more controls we have the further away we get from the simple joy of watching...
My top down view is most of these controls have no set and forget mode, so the more options, the more fiddling and the more invasive the whole process becomes
This is the Windows approach to intensity mapping. We need the Apple approach. Perhaps that is frame by frame IM that may be coming. But adding more spices doesn’t always make the dish taste better
And I’m not criticizing Lumagen at all here - they are trying to deal with the mess of all the variables to make this work. But perhapas a different paradigm is needed here.
HDR -> SDR tone mapping is not standardized anywhere. Everybody does it differently. So at this point we're all still experimenting with different curves and different formulas. If you want a pefectly tuned solution which works well for all movies out of the box with no options at all (or with all options having a clear and well optimized default value), then come back in a few months/years. For now all the solutions need fine tuning, and user feedback is helpful there, so it makes sense to start with a lot of options, and to thin them out over time based on user feedback.
I don't see why frame by frame analysis would reduce the number of options. Actually, there will probably at least be one more option: Namely to enable or disable frame by frame analysis.