AVS Forum banner

2021 - 2040 of 6153 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,546 Posts
It really looks that impressive at 200 nits? I think I need a projector to understand how gigantic these movies look.

I think I would still go with high lamp. 200 nits looks pretty squished to me. The pixels are closer together as you lower the target. If you really like bright images, that might be your preference. Tone mapped HDR is more about contrast than brightness, though. Your blacks can be less crushed at 200 nits, but they shouldn't change that much unless you go too low or too high.

I'm not sure if you're completely serious about your enthusiasm, but the next build has a ton of options that are hard to understand and it isn't optimized yet. I'd wait a couple weeks. You can always download a test build and look at the options to see if they are intimidating or not. Just make sure you keep the old zip file so you can go back. You could stash these test builds in the installation folder.

I hope you find something that works equally for all sources.
So do you really think I should be closer to 400 or 500nits on madvr HDR?
Someone here the other day said I should be using 187 nits for the NX9 proj....but I dont know:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,267 Posts
I do mean RTX 1060. Did I say something else? Am I going nuts?

That's what I thought. Thanks for the input

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
there isn't RTX 1060 only 2060 it's a GTX 1060 that's why you are leaving out the GTX and RTX part they are currently not needed to identify a card.

confusing customer is part of the nvidia marketing department.1070 ti and 2060 are similar priced and i would clearly go for the 2060.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,007 Posts
there isn't RTX 1060 only 2060 it's a GTX 1060 that's why you are leaving out the GTX and RTX part they are currently not needed to identify a card.

confusing customer is part of the nvidia marketing department.1070 ti and 2060 are similar priced and i would clearly go for the 2060.
Is the 2060 good enough for tone mapping? It’s a lot cheaper than a 1080ti.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
969 Posts
Are the rest of my componets ok, on the previous page?
Yes, only question is the memory, at least 8GB (2x4GB) is recommended (I couldn't tell whether you have 4GB or not :) ).


I now can run with 200 nits in madvr, its SO BRIGHT the image I can also run the NX9 on low lamp settings, the image is super bright on my very large scope curved ST130, 145" screen.
I think I would still go with high lamp.
I don't have a projector but after reading other projector users' settings don't change it to high lamp: it would raise the black level and it doesn't worth it.

Here is the thread:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-d...ving-madvr-hdr-sdr-mapping-projector-170.html

It really looks that impressive at 200 nits? I think I need a projector to understand how gigantic these movies look.
:D I can't imagine it either, probably the huge screen size difference is the cause.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,033 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2,027 · (Edited)
So do you really think I should be closer to 400 or 500nits on madvr HDR?
Someone here the other day said I should be using 187 nits for the NX9 proj....but I dont know:confused:
You could use 187 nits or 200 nits. I'm just saying the image will be more compressed; it can often look flat. If it doesn't look flat to you, I wouldn't worry about. I'm not talking about black levels or contrast, but the pixels themselves can be squished, especially the bright specular highlights. highlight recovery strength and some other processing in madVR will try to eliminate this flat look, so it is not like it will look poor.

The target peak nits defines how small of a container is used to compress the source. Most movies are mastered at around 1,000 nits. If you choose 200 nits, madVR must compress 1,000 nits into a 200 nit container. There are numerous individual steps (luminance steps) in a 1,000 nit source. When the source brightness is lowered, those steps get closer and closer together. When the luminance steps are too close together or overlap, the image will have less texture detail. Sometimes this can make the picture look a little flat and lifeless. Contrast is also reduced when you compress the difference between the brightest and darkest image elements.

If you increased the size of the container to 300 nits, there are more available steps to map the source. The problem is that most of the image with HDR content is contained in the lower part of the gamma curve, so raising the target nits provides a larger container for tone mapping, but the overall APL (Average Picture Level) goes down as well. This means: More detail, but darker images, or less detail, but brighter images.

Personally, I kind of break the rules of the gamma conversion with my own LED TV.

Basically, if you set madVR to match your calibrated gamma (2.20 or 2.40), the image should look more or less similar to identical because madVR is converting absolute PQ values to match the gamma of the display. HDR is not relative, so it tries to produce a consistent result across all displays regardless of the calibrated gamma.

However, if you set your display to 2.20 and had madVR set to 2.40, the image would get brighter. madVR converts to a dark gamma curve (2.40) and the display makes it brighter by pulling the gamma curve back towards 2.20. The side effect is that black will be raised at lower target nits. So you have to increase the target nits a fair bit to push the bottom of the curve down, which can become raised slightly. At 150 actual display nits, I end up using targets between 275 nits to 480 nits depending on the movie. To me, it looks natural, but it isn't necessarily mathematically correct.

If I set madVR to 2.20 and my display remains 2.20, then black is mapped correctly at 150 target nits to match my actual display nits. However, the image looks quite flat to me at 150 target nits. By 300 target nits, the image is almost too dark and black starts to be crushed on a black clipping pattern. So I decided to use a chain of 2.40 -> 2.20 (brighten the image) and use higher target nits at all times to keep the gamma or black level in check. The result is higher targets that produce an image with a little more depth and contrast.

I'm not saying that is the best way to do things. But at 185 nits in high lamp, I would have expected you could use targets of at least 300 nits and possibility 400 nits without getting an overly dull image. When it comes to judging brightness, you can't compared HDR content to SDR content. SDR content at the same brightness should ALWAYS look brighter than HDR. This is because tone mapping is being applied to the HDR source, which has to lower the APL for it to look accurate to the source. This is necessary to create high dynamic range or contrast. HDR content has a very high dynamic range, and replicating this contrast at a low display peak will come at the expense of some brightness.

There is a setting in the new builds that deliberately clips some highlight detail to make the image brighter. I would guess that you might like this setting when it is available because it reduces the amount of tone mapping compression required by lowering the peak brightness of the source before tone mapping. The targets also change dynamically to match the source peak brightness. These two changes would help alleviate your issues with compression and brightness. At least, to a degree....

So I'm saying that you could also experiment with gamma if you wanted, along with the targets nits. Set the projector and madVR to 2.20, or madVR to 2.40 and the projector to 2.20.

When testing the target nits, I find it is easiest to use increments of 50 nits: 200 nits, 250 nits, 300 nits, 350 nits, 400 nits, 450 nits, to judge brightness. You probably wouldn't want to go any higher than an ideal value of 480 nits, where compression is minimized.

It does sound odd that at 185 display nits, you are only able to get a good result at 200 target nits. But there are no rules and only personal taste involved because you are lowering the source brightness. A projector cannot match the brightness of an HDR mastering monitor. You have to adapt HDR content to your display, not the other way around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,007 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,033 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2,030 ·
I don't have a projector but after reading other projector users' settings don't change it to high lamp: it would raise the black level and it doesn't worth it.

Here is the thread:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-d...ving-madvr-hdr-sdr-mapping-projector-170.html
But he just bought an $18,000 projector that is designed to be run in high lamp for HDR playback. You can always raise the target nits to push the bottom the curve down and improve perceived black levels. The higher the peak brightness of the display, the higher the overall APL and the greater the contrast. HDR needs a huge amount of dynamic range and contrast to work correctly. Projector's are already light-starved for HDR playback.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,033 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2,031 ·
Where does it lose out then? Chroma Upscaling, general scaling?

It’s half price of a 1080....
Image doubling, chroma upscaling, combining a bunch of settings together. Anything that requires a bunch of processing. If you mostly wanted to use tone mapping, an RTX 2060 would do the job. These GPUs are more for gaming than watching videos. That is where most of the difference comes from; gaming performance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,007 Posts
Where does it lose out then? Chroma Upscaling, general scaling?

It’s half price of a 1080....
Image doubling, chroma upscaling, combining a bunch of settings together. Anything that requires a bunch of processing. If you mostly wanted to use tone mapping, an RTX 2060 would do the job. These GPUs are more for gaming than watching videos. That is where most of the difference comes from; gaming performance.
If I could use medium scaling settings and actually, I guess with native 4K, scaling shouldnt be too stressful, I’d be happy. And full on tone mapping.

Plus I need 8gb of ram, as I only have 4 currently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,007 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,007 Posts

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
I assume you mean RTX 2060? I would go with the newer card if the price is close, but the 1070 Ti if the price is not close.
there isn't RTX 1060 only 2060 it's a GTX 1060 that's why you are leaving out the GTX and RTX part they are currently not needed to identify a card.

confusing customer is part of the nvidia marketing department.1070 ti and 2060 are similar priced and i would clearly go for the 2060.
Hahahaha after a mind numbing day of rebuilding toasted VMs and splitting hairs on potential future GPUs, I couldn't even SEE the correct naming convention when it was repeated back to me... Good grief. Sorry. I promise I'm not an idiot. But I kind of am. Just call me Captain Conflation.

I do mean RTX 2060. I corrected my past posts for any poor sap stumbling upon my question in the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,007 Posts
Hahahaha after a mind numbing day of rebuilding toasted VMs and splitting hairs on potential future GPUs, I couldn't even SEE the correct naming convention when it was repeated back to me... Good grief. Sorry. I promise I'm not an idiot. But I kind of am. Just call me Captain Conflation.

I do mean RTX 2060.
I feel your pain - everywhere I look I see about 10 almost identical 1060s, 1070s, 1080s, 2060s, 2080s......Im going blind and crazy !
 
  • Like
Reactions: clanderson

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,033 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2,039 ·
I guess this one would let me do everything with no compromise and be ready for future madVR upgrades?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gigabyte-G...&qid=1550068873&sr=8-3&keywords=rtx+2060&th=1

This is what I might buy if I go for a 2060. Is it ok? There are so many, and I can barely see any difference in them.....
It depends on your budget. If you've never used madVR before, you don't have to go all out and get the best card available. The 2080 could have a long life, but nothing in computers has a truly long life. I added the RTX 2060 as one of the recommended cards for madVR because it can handle the basics in good quality. The 2080 is something that you would buy if you demanded the use of NGU Sharp very high upscaling to 4K. You would need a really large screen and a true 4K resolution for that to be any kind of priority.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,007 Posts
Yes, only question is the memory, at least 8GB (2x4GB) is recommended (I couldn't tell whether you have 4GB or not :) ).
I have 2x4Gb so Im good to go.

Just need the card upgrade, thankfully !
 
  • Like
Reactions: chros73
2021 - 2040 of 6153 Posts
Top