AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 881 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,736 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I'm opening this thread to add all the current and any upcoming information about the available software solutions that support HDR calibration/profiling, HDR calibration methods/workflows/hardware/pattern generators etc.

Here is the available solutions we have now:

CalMAN 5

HDR Calibration Support: ST.2084 Gamma available from CalMAN Ultimate/Studio 5.4.1 released @ 5 March 2015 (or later version).
ST.2084 Gamma available from CalMAN Enthusiast 5.6.0 RC1 released @ 7 October 2015 (or later version).

License Level Required for HDR Calibration: CalMAN Ultimate, CalMAN Studio, CalMAN Enthusiast.

ChromaPure 2.x

HDR Support: Not yet supported. Expected be to supported in ChromaPure 3.x.

License Level Required for HDR Calibration: To be announced.

HCFR

HDR Calibration Support: ST.2084 Gamma available from HCFR 3.3.0 released @ 6 June 2015 (or later version). *Supports HDR Parametric Gamma also.

License Level Required for HDR Calibration: Free (Open Source) Software

LightSpace

HDR Calibration Support: ST.2084 Gamma available from LightSpace 6.6.7.2061 released @ 25 March 2015 (or later version).

License Level Required for HDR Calibration: All license levels support it.

Notes: LightSpace supports HDR Parametric Gamma capability also. Users can download an example HDR Parametric Gamma profile from LightSpace website; this one for the Sony BVM-X300, which is used by some major Post Facilities, including Light Iron – who were one of the first to start using the Sony display.

dispcalGUI (Powered by ArgyllCMS)

HDR Calibration Support: ST.2084 Gamma available from dispcalGUI 3.0.3 released @ 6 July 2015 (or later version).

License Level Required for HDR Calibration: Free (Open Source) Software.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,736 Posts
Discussion Starter #2 (Edited)
Here is the list with the published Peak Luminance Range Limit for each meter available in market:

Colorimeters

X-Rite DTP-94 up to 1.000 cd/m2
X-Rite i1Display 2 up to 3.000 cd/m2
Sencore's CP-6000 up to 1.000 cd/m2
X-Rite Chroma 5 up to 1.000 cd/m2
X-Rite Hubble up to 1.350 cd/m2
Sencore OTC-1000 up to 1.350 cd/m2
X-Rite i1Display PRO (i1d3 OEM/Retail i1d3) up to 1.000 cd/m2
SpectraCAL C6 (Branded OEM i1d3) up to 1.000 cd/m2
SpectraCAL C6-HDR (Branded OEM i1d3) up to 1.300 cd/m2
Datacolor Spyder 2 up to 5.000 cd/m2
Datacolor Spyder 3 up to 5.000 cd/m2
Datacolor Spyder 4 up to 5.000 cd/m2
Datacolor Spyder 5 up to 5.000 cd/m2
BasICColor Discus up to 2.500 cd/m2
Colorimetry Research CR-100 up to 5.140 cd/m2
Klein K-80 up to 10.000 cd/m2
Klein K-10A up to 10.000 cd/m2
Minolta CS-100A up to 300.000 cd/m2
Minolta CA-210 up to 1.000 cd/m2
Minolta CA-310 up to 1.000 cd/m2
Minolta CS-200 up to 20.000.000 cd/m2

Spectroradiometers/Spectrophotometers

X-Rite ColorMunki up to 1.000 cd/m2
X-Rite i1PRO1 up to 300 cd/m2
X-Rite i1PRO2 up to 1.200 cd/m2
JETI 1201 up to 70.000 cd/m2 (using optional JETI filters... up to 75.000/250.000 cd/m2)
JETI 1211 up to 2.500 cd/m2 (using optional JETI filters... up to 10.000/25.000/50.000/75.000/250.000 cd/m2)
JETI 1501 up to 150.000 cd/m2
JETI 1511 up to 150.000 cd/m2
Colorimetry Research CR-250RH up to 154.180 cd/m2
Photoreseach PR-650 up to 5.000 cd/m2
Photoreseach PR-655 up to 15.000 cd/m2
Photoreseach PR-670 up to 8.566.000 cd/m2
Photoreseach PR-680 up to 17.130.000 cd/m2
Minolta CS-1000 up to 80.000 cd/m2
Minolta CS-2000 up to 500.000 cd/m2
Minolta CS-2000A up to 500.000 cd/m2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,916 Posts
Thanks for all the work, Ted. I have an HDR ordered - LG 55EF9500 OLED and am looking forward to working with LightSpace.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,736 Posts
Discussion Starter #8

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,736 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
HDR News Updates

CalMAN 5.6.1 RC1 release added for CalMAN Expert, Professional & Ultimate license levels:

HDR-10 support for Quantum Data 780 and 804 pattern generators. (This requires firmware version 15092260 or higher)
HDR-10 support for Astro Design VG-876 & VG-877 Video Signal Generators.

HDR-10 is a standard used for mastering content, it has metadata content describing the mastering monitor peak brightness and native gamut. HDR-10 doesn't support consumer devices; displays/projectors etc.

LightIllussion added a page related with HDR here: http://www.lightillusion.com/hdr.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
HDR News Updates

CalMAN 5.6.1 RC1 release added for CalMAN Expert, Professional & Ultimate license levels:

HDR-10 support for Quantum Data 780 and 804 pattern generators. (This requires firmware version 15092260 or higher)
HDR-10 support for Astro Design VG-876 & VG-877 Video Signal Generators.

HDR-10 is a standard used for mastering content, it has metadata content describing the mastering monitor peak brightness and native gamut. HDR-10 doesn't support consumer devices; displays/projectors etc.

LightIllussion added a page related with HDR here: http://www.lightillusion.com/hdr.html
That LightIllusion page is wrong in so many ways. Everything from their explanation of useful dynamic range, to the impact of viewing distance, to the claim that 650 nits is excessive. Here is an obvious question: If 650 was excessive then why wasn't the standard limited to 650? And suggesting you can clip the 2084 curve to your display white luminance? That is a guaranteed way to destroy the image quality. Just, wow. They really don't get it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,254 Posts
That LightIllusion page is wrong in so many ways. Everything from their explanation of useful dynamic range, to the impact of viewing distance, to the claim that 650 nits is excessive. Here is an obvious question: If 650 was excessive then why wasn't the standard limited to 650? And suggesting you can clip the 2084 curve to your display white luminance? That is a guaranteed way to destroy the image quality. Just, wow. They really don't get it.
Actually, the technical data is 100% correct based on the ST2084 standard - maybe you should read it?
It defines exactly those clipping points as shown.

And the comments about viewing distance are also based on well documented tests - the image shown is from one of those test. Do you sit that close to your display?
Additionally, resolution is part of such a discussion, but that's another story.

And the comments about what is an acceptable Nits level are from actual work performed on actual HDR displays - diretc experience!

Have you been able to run test on different HDR displays at different Nits levels?
That is what we did...

Steve
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
57 Posts
If your company is in charge of HDR (progress and development) don't think y'all are. Please don't kill it with your 650 nits.

Hoping Happy Consumer


Actually, the technical data is 100% correct based on the ST2084 standard - maybe you should read it?
It defines exactly those clipping points as shown.

And the comments about viewing distance are also based on well documented tests - the image shown is from one of those test. Do you sit that close to your display?
Additionally, resolution is part of such a discussion, but that's another story.

And the comments about what is an acceptable Nits level are from actual work performed on actual HDR displays - diretc experience!

Have you been able to run test on different HDR displays at different Nits levels?
That is what we did...

Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,254 Posts
The problem with HDR is it is presently the most ill defined concept we have seen in a long while.

There are no standards that as yet are fully defined, and the various hardware manufacturers have gone off half cocked in an attempt to sell more displays.

As a 'colour management' company we have to research all the various proposals to make sure LightSpace CMS can manage them as required, and in doing that we obviously have to have a lot of direct access and experience of different displays.

Having sat in front of a large number of HDR displays we have our own 'feelings' on what works and what doesn't.
But we have to be able to deal with all variants.

For example, one of the points that often comes up when calibrating a display is 'fatigue' levels.
Excessive HDR causes (can cause?) serious eye fatigue.

There is also the issue of the way dynamic backlighting works.
ABL with plasmas was a real pain, and HDR is no different - potentially worse.
The last HDR display we played with had a real issue with the screen taking serious time to dim after a bright scene.

And while HDR is Hight Dynamic Range, UWG has also been brought into the mix.
This is causing yet another level of total standard failure.

This is really VHS vs. Betamax, but about 100 times worse...

Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
Actually, the technical data is 100% correct based on the ST2084 standard - maybe you should read it?
It defines exactly those clipping points as shown.

And the comments about viewing distance are also based on well documented tests - the image shown is from one of those test. Do you sit that close to your display?
Additionally, resolution is part of such a discussion, but that's another story.

And the comments about what is an acceptable Nits level are from actual work performed on actual HDR displays - diretc experience!

Have you been able to run test on different HDR displays at different Nits levels?
That is what we did...

Steve
2084 doesn't define reproduction at the home. It defines the EOTF for mastering, hence the title "High Dynamic Range EOTF of Mastering Reference Display". So you have that part wrong for starters. Home displays aren't expected to track the reference display exactly for a number of reasons, and the behavior of home displays was intentionally left out of that document. However, the one thing they definitely should not be doing is hard clipping the highlights. Unless the home display can match the luminance of the mastering display as reported in the 2086 metadata, it needs to perform some form of highlight compression. I'd love to hear what you are using as your reference display. My direct experience is actually working with filmmakers, sitting in color correction and guess what… 650 does not cut it. You can't just put up a picture of a bright sky and use that to set a bar on where peak luminance should fall. I've made this point in other threads, even a 100 nits picture can be uncomfortable to look at if it's poorly composed or edited. However, if you give a skilled DP and colorist the opportunity to tailor a composition for HDR, you can easily have values going well over 1000 nits without it being uncomfortable to view.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
The problem with HDR is it is presently the most ill defined concept we have seen in a long while.

There are no standards that as yet are fully defined, and the various hardware manufacturers have gone off half cocked in an attempt to sell more displays.

As a 'colour management' company we have to research all the various proposals to make sure LightSpace CMS can manage them as required, and in doing that we obviously have to have a lot of direct access and experience of different displays.

Having sat in front of a large number of HDR displays we have our own 'feelings' on what works and what doesn't.
But we have to be able to deal with all variants.

For example, one of the points that often comes up when calibrating a display is 'fatigue' levels.
Excessive HDR causes (can cause?) serious eye fatigue.

There is also the issue of the way dynamic backlighting works.
ABL with plasmas was a real pain, and HDR is no different - potentially worse.
The last HDR display we played with had a real issue with the screen taking serious time to dim after a bright scene.

And while HDR is Hight Dynamic Range, UWG has also been brought into the mix.
This is causing yet another level of total standard failure.

This is really VHS vs. Betamax, but about 100 times worse...

Steve
Remember regular old HD? It wasn't fully defined until um… let's see when was ITU-R 1886 published? 2011. But it seemed to work pretty well before then. Here's what you are missing. This new container was made both big (10k nits) and wide (2020 primaries) so it wouldn't have to be redefined in another 2, 5, 10 years down the road every time display technology advances. It was made as large as reasonable with the knowledge that only a limited portion of it would be used initially. This is where 2086 comes into play. You start with a smaller utilization and grow into the larger range over time. Even with HD, 100 nits for white was completely undocumented but informally agreed on in practice because that was all you could get out of the Sony reference CRTs. So what is going to happen with HDR and WCG? Well, there are two reference displays currently available to studios. Those will set a limit on what actually produced for distribution. By the nature of the industry and the need to interchange content between facilities, they will converge on a common (although not necessarily SMPTE standardized) target. But all you'll need to do is take a look inside the 2086 metadata to find out what that is. My suggestion is wait until CES, wait until test discs come out and then try again.

Also, as to your ABL comment… one of the most linear (flattest APL curve) response displays I have ever seen is HDR and intended for consumer market. I have also seen some very junk ones as well, and I think the biggest risk for HDR is that too many low tier displays, especially with low quality dimming like you described, will be forced into the market by manufacturers and advertised as "HDR". There is a real danger that these will compromise the consumer impression of the format, when it is capable of so much more when done right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,254 Posts
2084 doesn't define reproduction at the home. It defines the EOTF for mastering, hence the title "High Dynamic Range EOTF of Mastering Reference Display". So you have that part wrong for starters. Home displays aren't expected to track the reference display exactly for a number of reasons, and the behavior of home displays was intentionally left out of that document. However, the one thing they definitely should not be doing is hard clipping the highlights. Unless the home display can match the luminance of the mastering display as reported in the 2086 metadata, it needs to perform some form of highlight compression. I'd love to hear what you are using as your reference display. My direct experience is actually working with filmmakers, sitting in color correction and guess what… 650 does not cut it. You can't just put up a picture of a bright sky and use that to set a bar on where peak luminance should fall. I've made this point in other threads, even a 100 nits picture can be uncomfortable to look at if it's poorly composed or edited. However, if you give a skilled DP and colorist the opportunity to tailor a composition for HDR, you can easily have values going well over 1000 nits without it being uncomfortable to view.
The idea of home calibration is to match the calibration/environment that was used for the grading - as far as is possible.
That is the whole idea - so ST2084 defines the requirements for all viewing of material that was graded using ST2084...

The 'hard clipping is indeed that way ST2084 is specified, but is also part of why HDR is so badly defined.
The actual application should 'probably' be to roll-off the clip, but that is not defined anywhere.
(But, that's easy to do with LightSpace CMS when used for calibration of HDR.)

However, as the peak brightness areas for ST2084 are just the main specular highlights, as shown in the histogram, clipping will actually not be as 'harsh' as first appears - but still not ideal.

As a company, we are attempting to manage and work to the HDR specifications, and they are all over the place.
Personally, I think HLG is a far better approach, as it is much more realistic in what it is attempting.

All the members of Light Illusion are actually professionals in the Film and TV industry.
I have personally graded (and supervised) many films, and we all continue to consults with many facilities (as well as manufacturers) helping define colour workflows and pipelines. As such we spend a lot of time doing this for real.

We have seen/worked with all the professional HDR displays presently available, and many of the consumer models.

All the comments I make are only ever based on direct experience.
(But often my personal thoughts on that experience as it helps others to define their own thoughts and views)

Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
The idea of home calibration is to match the calibration/environment that was used for the grading - as far as is possible.
That is the whole idea - so ST2084 defines the requirements for all viewing of material that was graded using ST2084...

The 'hard clipping is indeed that way ST2084 is specified, but is also part of why HDR is so badly defined.
The actual application should 'probably' be to roll-off the clip, but that is not defined anywhere.
(But, that's easy to do with LightSpace CMS when used for calibration of HDR.)

However, as the peak brightness areas for HST2084 are just the main spectral highlights, as shown in the histogram, clipping will actually not be as 'harsh' as first appears - but still not ideal.

As a company, we are attempting to manage and work to the HDR specifications, and they are all over the place.
Personally, I think HLG is a far better approach, as it is much more realistic in what it is attempting.

All the members of Light Illusion are actually professionals in the Film and TV industry.
I have personally graded (and supervised) many films, and we all continue to consults with many facilities (as well as manufacturers) helping define colour workflows and pipelines. As such we spend a lot of time doing this for real.

We have seen/worked with all the professional HDR displays presently available, and many of the consumer models.

All the comments I make are only ever based on direct experience.
(But often my personal thoughts on that experience as it helps others to define their own thoughts and views)

Steve
Specular highlights. Not spectral. [Note: I see you corrected this. Thank you! :) ]

You still are misinterpreting 2084. You are not supposed to see hard clipping at the display. You need to have a limiter in your color grading system so that you do not feed the display with values that force it into the region of clipping behavior. This is nothing new. When you grade digital cinema, you don't do it directly in XYZ space do you? So if your display can not go over 1000 nits for example, you should not be sending it any 2084 code values above that level. Same way you don't send a digital cinema projector XYZ values that fall outside its native gamut. If you ignore this, you are going to screw up your clients' content. I guarantee it. I do this for real too.

At home, it is fine to roll off with a soft clip. At the simplest level, this is what the majority of consumer electronics manufacturers are going to be doing with HDR, but they have the advantage of being able to dynamically adjust their roll off as well as doing more sophisticated tone mapping, whereas calibrating with a LUT you have to pick one constant roll off for everything.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
628 Posts
Remember regular old HD? It wasn't fully defined until um… let's see when was ITU-R 1886 published? 2011. But it seemed to work pretty well before then. Here's what you are missing. This new container was made both big (10k nits) and wide (2020 primaries) so it wouldn't have to be redefined in another 2, 5, 10 years down the road every time display technology advances. It was made as large as reasonable with the knowledge that only a limited portion of it would be used initially. This is where 2086 comes into play. You start with a smaller utilization and grow into the larger range over time. Even with HD, 100 nits for white was completely undocumented but informally agreed on in practice because that was all you could get out of the Sony reference CRTs. So what is going to happen with HDR and WCG? Well, there are two reference displays currently available to studios. Those will set a limit on what actually produced for distribution. By the nature of the industry and the need to interchange content between facilities, they will converge on a common (although not necessarily SMPTE standardized) target. But all you'll need to do is take a look inside the 2086 metadata to find out what that is. My suggestion is wait until CES, wait until test discs come out and then try again.

Also, as to your ABL comment… one of the most linear (flattest APL curve) response displays I have ever seen is HDR and intended for consumer market. I have also seen some very junk ones as well, and I think the biggest risk for HDR is that too many low tier displays, especially with low quality dimming like you described, will be forced into the market by manufacturers and advertised as "HDR". There is a real danger that these will compromise the consumer impression of the format, when it is capable of so much more when done right.
I have a HDR capable JVC RS600 (9000) projector being delivered by the end of the month. What level of effect does HDR have on mid-tones when they grade movies for HDR? With today's blu rays, JVC gives me the controls on my 6710 projector to add pop to the mid tones, but the highlights may get clipped a little ... which is great for movies like aliens/Prometheus. Would HDR prevent highlights from being clipped while providing more pop to the mid-tones ... or do I have this all wrong?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,254 Posts
HDR display configuration can only be used on material that has been mastered for HDR.
And only on material that has been mastered for the specific HDR format you display uses.

To attempt to use HDR on SDR material, or mix HDR formats (mastering with final display), will result in very inaccurate images.

This is another of the HDR issues - everything is so ill defined that it is almost impossible to guarantee that source matches destination.
And matching source to destination is key in accurate final image display, as defined by calibration.

And honestly, as TVs have been 100+ Nits for years, and have looked great, why would a projector that delivers around 100 Nits all of a sudden be HDR?

That is yet another HDR issue that has not been accurately resolved or defined.

Steve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
628 Posts
There has to be a reason why a director(s) wants to color grade both their films and 4k blu ray movies with HDR (besides increasing sales). Are they looking to provide more pop in the mid-tones and shadows where much of the emotion/envelopment resides? Or are they trying to provide more pop in the highlights to create more emotion/envelopment where it is difficult to do so (because it's so bright)? JVC projectors can create a small amount of pop in the mid-tones just by adjusting several of their controls. Is this what the directors want to do with films, provide more pop, but to do it while grading the film and applied it to the full range of shadows, mid-tones and highlights? ... something that the JVC projector cannot tweak unless it too has HDR capabilities. What do directors think?
 
1 - 20 of 881 Posts
Top