I tested your settings, but I get a tiny bit more depth with 20-40-20:Thank you for this feedback. I've actually found myself really enjoying 15-30-15 the past couple days in case anyone wants to try it. It gives a nice balance between depth and pop (perceived).
Used on its own it should be the case. When using HSTM (Histrogram shaped tone mapping), I would expect the same, but I'm not 100% sure, the exact behaviour can be a tad unpredictable at times. FWIW, when using HSTM, a lower target doesn't have to result in a brighter image. When using HSTM, you can't really tell much by looking at the target nits.b98, if I use the attached settings (ouput HDR format) and disable "dynamic clipping" then sometimes I get lower targets (brighter image): does it make sense?
I thought "dynamic clipping" "always" result in lower targets.
Aren't we back to judging saturation here, though? Which I asked you to ignore (for now)?The skin color is 1000x more natural with the "start at" option, IMO.
The "start at" value will surely not be the same for every content. Maybe based on FALL or something else... (because measured peak is not reliable for this and can change very fast).
But this option alone could be the topic of another test, with its own set of parameters...
Edit: Another test:
Edit2: a value of 100 seems to be already beneficial in most cases?
I guess the detail in the stone wall looks better, but it's hard to say how it's supposed to look.I don't really know what's happening here, but I love it:
HSTM Off / HSTM On (my settings) / HSTM On (my settings + start at:100)
LG Colors of Journey HDR UHD 4K Demo - Frame 4511
I think you're mostly just using different target nits values here and judge the results.I'm still not 100% sure about my preferred settings yet...
Just looking at the start setting...
With Atomic Blonde increasing the start values gradually improves the image until around 175 (which might be a fraction better than 150). At 200 it clips the detail in the hair. The measured frame peak is around 315 iirc
Why are we discussing saturation?50-10-20-10 has clearly more depth than 100-20-40-20, but the colors are wrong IMO.
LG HDR monitor looks better than JVC projector for HDR content, but...(Projector is gaining with v96).Strange! Any ideas why? In which way does it look better?
It seems very likely at this point.Fingers crossed HSTM makes it to final-cut. Thanks.
Soulnight and Manni are running P3, if I'm not mistaken.I would like to comment on the color. Just gave 99b a test drive. My projector ( RGB Laser ) is capable of beyond P3. With desaturation chosen color is still way under saturated, 709 at best, not seeing any difference between desat and 1 or 2. I believe the JVC projectors can do P3, is no one else running P3?
I think these are not far from what Neo-XP and Fer15 are using, although some things are still under discussion, e.g. the max sky width, sky strength and the HSTM power/clipping point/strength.
Haha! I had actually considered to add a grayscale option to the desaturation combobox...I can't get this scene "right" with build 96 parameters:
HSTM On build 96 parameters (default settings) / HSTM On build 97 parameters (default settings)
Same in grayscale :
HSTM On build 96 parameters (default settings) / HSTM On build 97 parameters (default settings)
don't compress below 0 / don't compress below 1003) The "start at nits" option is now split into "don't compress below" and "calculate FALL above", which are both in nits. Would be interesting to check which of these is the one which you think helps quality. I anticipate that it might be the "calculate FALL above" option, which would mean that it basically only influences madVR's decisions on how to bright make the final image (and nothing else).
Good question. I'm not fully sure how all the options interact with each other. For example, if you tell HSTM to try to keep the FALL the same, then not compressing the area from 0-100 may mean that HSTM has to compress *everything* stronger to keep the FALL the same, which may help with 20-100 nits, but could actually harm 0-20 nits. But I've no idea. There are so many different options which can interact with each other in complicated ways, so I'm not sure.don't compress below 0 / don't compress below 100
Pacific Rim - Frame 173097
Is the "don't compress below" option working as intended? Shouldn't the blacks be less compressed with 100? I used no shadow boost here.
Yes, I think I will let this setting alone for nowHope that makes sense?
Just saying : using the last build and the above settings (except real display peak nits set to 130 which is what I get on my Sony HW40ES), I experienced unwanted brightness changes watching The Lion King (2019), as if scene detection was messed up.
FWIW, this isn't really a key part of HSTM. Basically this "calculate FALL above" option modifies the original FALL algo a bit to pick a different target brightness/peak to render at. If you use a nits number above 0, you're telling madVR to ignore a part of the histogram in its decision making. I'm not fully sure what the practical effect will be. I can imagine it to be somewhat unpredictable because it might be sort of "random" whether the part of the histogram you're igoring is higher or lower than the average. So it could make the image either darker or brighter, and I'm not sure if the changes that are done this way are scientifically sound. But I guess proof is in the pudding, so if after careful testing you think you get better decisions this way, that's fine with me.However, the other one, "calculate FALL above", seems very beneficial on scenes like this with very bright highlights on faces:
calculate FALL above 0 / calculate FALL above 100
The Meg - Frame 116231
"curve" doesn't have any limits. "limit curve" means that madVR doesn't allow the HSTM target nits to be below the real display nits. So this option will only produce different results in situations where "curve" would produce a target nits level that is below your real display nits.Question: what's the difference between "curve" and "limit curve"? They are my favorites to keep good targets, but I see very little change between the two.
That is as expected. Please stick to test build 95 for real movie watching use. The newer test builds are only for testing purposes.I experienced unwanted brightness changes watching The Lion King (2019)
I've said it like a million time in the last couple of pages: We will revisit saturation later. I'm not interested in discussing it now. I'm only interested in discussing HSTM for now. Which should have nothing to do with saturation. Please use "don't desaturate" when testing HSTM, this way HSTM should not influence saturation.am unfortunately only a lay tester at madVR. But maybe my opinion is valuable?
Have a JVC X7900 and come a year ago from the Panasonic Blu-ray Player to madVR. I have always missed the saturated colors. I think I'm not alone.
Now it is very good with these settings (99b).
JVC DCI calibrated Low Lamp Gamma 2.2
So which setting combinations for the 2 new drop-down-boxes on the bottom right part of the HDR settings page did you compare? I suppose you compared 96/96 to 97/97? Did you try anything else? E.g. 96/97 or 97/96? And which settings combinations did you prefer for which reason?But more important as the colors is the depth of the picture. The comes in variant V96 very special to well. It's like Soulnight says like a veil that goes away. Or like putting on glasses. And in contrast to the real V96, the skin colors fit again.
Did this happen with all settings combinations you tried or only with some?Highlights cliffs partially and look a bit washed out.
Which is all nice and fine, but as you know, I've zero interest in discussing saturation at this point in time. There will be a time to discuss saturation in the near future, but not now. For now I will ignore any and all comments related to saturation, I'm sorry.First, I saw no scenes where no desaturation looked bad. In fact, in many scene it was a welcome natural uptick on color compared to desaturate 1, and a huge one to desaturate 1+2 without any apparent highlights details.
So at least on what I tested, no desaturation was clearly my favorite.
Yes, please...Then I proceeded to compare profile 3) 4) 5) all with "no desaturation "
I suppose you compared both drop-down-boxes set to 96 with both set to 97, correct? Might be interesting to also try mixes of both, or try the other options which are neither 96 nor 97.Both 4) and 5) were always a nice improvement in picture clarity compared to 3. I love hstm.
Since 4) with 96 is often brighter, it was a bit difficult to compare....
But to be fair, I found today than often 5) with 97 looked better than 4) with 96.
That could be quite interesting to analyze in more detail.Having said that, the opposite also happened sometimes with 96) looking better than 97) and that without being any brighter (so not the reason this time).
If my math is correct, I'm trying to achieve the same FALL value *after* tone-mapping, with HSTM turned on vs off. Of course this only applies if you set the first of the 2 new drop-down-boxes to "keep FALL".In fact sometimes 97) looks darker than htsm off, like the fall correction would not be working properly. How do you proceed to ensure brightness match exactly?
Looking forward to that. Please also consider testing the 2 new drop down boxes set to a mix of 96/97 or 97/96. E.g. maybe one of the drop-down-boxes has a very clear winner, and maybe the other one doesn't.I will provide some screenshots hopefully by tomorrow to document this so that we can try to take the best from 96 and 97.