AVS Forum banner

HDR TV shall support all HDR formats.

201 - 220 of 619 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
HDR10+ will have to prevail because it's part of the base HDMI 2.1 standard, dolby is a blackbox system and not "required" in any standard to implement. The licensing fees over time add up and will push content/panel makers away from dolby.

Dolby clearly weren't expecting to be blind sided and thought they would be the only "premium" option in the market place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
259 Posts
It's the content

HDR10+ will have to prevail because it's part of the base HDMI 2.1 standard, dolby is a blackbox system and not "required" in any standard to implement. The licensing fees over time add up and will push content/panel makers away from dolby.

The devices sold will be driven by the needs/wants of the consumers. The needs/wants are driven by the “content” i.e. movies/programs and the HDR contained in them. It’s the studios that have the ultimate power in this contest. There is quite bit of DV content for streaming already, so that drives display sales. If let’s say Disney starts releasing their 4k Blu-ray blockbusters in Dolby Vision then that will really drive player sales that support that HDR format.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PatOgg1718

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
The devices sold will be driven by the needs/wants of the consumers. The needs/wants are driven by the “content” i.e. movies/programs and the HDR contained in them. It’s the studios that have the ultimate power in this contest. There is quite bit of DV content for streaming already, so that drives display sales. If let’s say Disney starts releasing their 4k Blu-ray blockbusters in Dolby Vision then that will really drive player sales that support that HDR format.
I agree and base standards enforce what the content must be encoded with. This is why HDR10+ being part of the hdmi 2.1 standard is big because every display will need to support it. Dolby vision is still seen as optional by all specs.

The differences between HDR10+ and Dolby vision aren't big enough for content makers to opt for the extra licensing and not use the industry standard format.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,773 Posts
I agree and base standards enforce what the content must be encoded with. This is why HDR10+ being part of the hdmi 2.1 standard is big because every display will need to support it. Dolby vision is still seen as optional by all specs.

The differences between HDR10+ and Dolby vision aren't big enough for content makers to opt for the extra licensing and not use the industry standard format.
I understand the intent of your argument, but it is flawed. Being supported by HDMI 2.1 gives no edge to HDR10+ (ST.2094-40) because Dolby Vision (ST.2094-10) is supported at the same time. They are both "base standards" for HDMI 2.1. In fact, all four dynamic metadata standards in ST.2094 are supported by HDMI 2.1. Plus, DV already works with HDMI 2.0a. Being supported by HDMI doesn't automatically equate to any other device supporting it, otherwise all devices with HDMI 2.0a would support DV today, which clearly isn't the case.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
449 Posts
Just to reiterate for those unaware, Paul Williams of Panasonic and Vincent Teoh have confirmed that HDR10+ works over HDMI with HDMI 2.0b. HDMI 2.1 is not required.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,860 Posts
HDR10+ will have to prevail because it's part of the base HDMI 2.1 standard, dolby is a blackbox system and not "required" in any standard to implement. The licensing fees over time add up and will push content/panel makers away from dolby.

Dolby clearly weren't expecting to be blind sided and thought they would be the only "premium" option in the market place.
I don't know why you are calling it "blind sided", that implies HDR10+ was some massive secret that was suddenly revealed with a recent flourish! :)

The fact is, that HDR10 with dynamic metadata was first demonstrated in public over a year ago! Sixteen months ago, actually. (Video on THIS LINK from May 2016 ) . Samsung have actually been very open all along that they wanted a royalty-free solution for dynamic metadata for HDR10. There's been no "blind siding". Standards aren't done in secret - that's the whole point :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
Discussion Starter #207
HDR10+ will have to prevail because it's part of the base HDMI 2.1 standard, dolby is a blackbox system and not "required" in any standard to implement. The licensing fees over time add up and will push content/panel makers away from dolby.

Dolby clearly weren't expecting to be blind sided and thought they would be the only "premium" option in the market place.

=> Dolby Vision & open standards:
http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/ipr/Pages/open.aspx
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?p=13991492#post13991492

. Dolby Vision & HDMI Forum / SMPTE / CTA:
ST 2094-10 Dolby Vision dynamic metadata are also transferred across HDMI 2.1.
The transmission of SMPTE ST 2094 dynamic metadata (i.e. ST 2094-10 dynamic metadata of ST 2094 compliant Dolby Vision, ST 2094-20/30 dynamic metadata of Technicolor HDR or ST 2094-40 dynamic metadata of HDR 10 Plus) across HDMI is described in CTA-861-G (base document of HDMI 2.1)






. Dolby Vision & ETSI:
"Additional HDR, named HDR display management (DM) metadata, may be present at the input of the CCM system. [CCM: Compound Content Management]
The HDR DM metadata combines SMPTE ST 2086 static metadata [2] and SMPTE ST 2094-1/10 dynamic metadata [3] and [4], and is used to maintain the artistic intent when the content is mapped to the display capabilities."
http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/CCM/001_099/001/01.01.01_60/gs_ccm001v010101p.pdf




. Dolby Vision & ATSC 3.0:
"ATSC Candidate Standard: A/341 Amendment – 2094-10
This document describes technology documented in ST 2094-10 “Dynamic Metadata for Color Volume Transform — Application #1 ,” which is a technology for the use of dynamic metadata for HDR content."
https://www.atsc.org/standards/candidate-standards/




. Dolby Vision & DASH-IF:
http://dashif.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/UHD-IOP-DV-0.9.pdf






=> Dolby Vision licensing fee

A lot of people are concerned with Dolby licensing fee.

But

"You may hear about one other difference between Dolby Vision and HDR10. Some people will point out that TV manufacturers pay to have Dolby Vision in their displays, while HDR10 is free. While that’s true, the difference isn’t significant.
The royalty cost to add Dolby Vision ranges from less than $3 per TV to lower than $2 per TV"
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dolby-vision-hdr10-what-format-war-giles-baker

and

TCL delivers Dolby Vision for under $600: TCL 55P605 / 55P607, best value TV of 2017 (FALD …).
http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-tv/
Also the streaming media player Google Chromecast Ultra, compatible with Dolby Vision / HDR10 / YouTube HDR, is available only at $70, Dolby Vision "licensing fee" included.



=> Artificial HDR format war

Why contribute to create an artificial HDR format war? It won’t bring any benefit to consumers!

Facing inherently incompatible formats like Blu-ray vs HD DVD, consumers have to choose a side.

It is not the case with HDR formats.
Consumers can just require Dolby Vision TV makers or HDR10+ TV makers to just add a piece of HDR software in order to be compatible with the other HDR format. This upgraded TV will remain the same: same panel, same electronic parts, same mechanical parts!
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/465-h...al-hdr-compliant-displays-4.html#post50302361

For example, the Sony Z9D doesn’t support Dolby Vision at launch.

Sony already made the announcement - no Dolby Vision support.
Someone mentioned that Samsung's dynamic metadata HDR10 proposal passed with the competent authorities and perhaps we will see something like a dynamic HDR update on the Z in the future, but this is pure speculation.
Nobody should buy this set expecting a DV upgrade in the future - it simply ain't happening.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-l...ead-no-price-talk-please-60.html#post46372345

Then, the Sony Z9D will get Dolby Vision with a free software upgrade.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/40-ol...c-july-12-july-13-2017-a-14.html#post54095697
Thank you, Sony! A real consumer-oriented TV maker!

Universal HDR TV is a big plus for consumers: consumers can watch any existing HDR content they want!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
I don't know why you are calling it "blind sided", that implies HDR10+ was some massive secret that was suddenly revealed with a recent flourish! :)

The fact is, that HDR10 with dynamic metadata was first demonstrated in public over a year ago! Sixteen months ago, actually. (Video on THIS LINK from May 2016 ) . Samsung have actually been very open all along that they wanted a royalty-free solution for dynamic metadata for HDR10. There's been no "blind siding". Standards aren't done in secret - that's the whole point :)
Maybe blind sided isn't the right word, but certainly Dolby wasn't expecting Samsung to be stubborn enough to push through with implementing HDR10+. They were probably expecting they would eventually roll over like others and give them their licensing cut.

Also people say $3 isn't a lot, in the chipset business that's a decent fee and it multiplies across the whole device chain and media. It adds up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
Discussion Starter #209
...
Also people say $3 isn't a lot, in the chipset business that's a decent fee and it multiplies across the whole device chain and media. It adds up.
So what?

TCL delivers Dolby Vision for under $600: TCL 55P605 / 55P607, best value TV of 2017 (FALD …).
Also the streaming media player Google Chromecast Ultra, compatible with Dolby Vision / HDR10 / YouTube HDR, is available only at $70, Dolby Vision "licensing fee" included.
Then, the Sony Z9D will get Dolby Vision with a free software upgrade.

Usually, the licensing costs are passed along to consumers.

The Dolby Vision licensing costs are not significant for the consumers:
. Dolby Vision licensing fee: $3 per TV
. UHD film: +$20 per film
https://www.engadget.com/2017/08/29/apple-tv-4k-movie-price/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Samsung also supports HLG.

Richard
I've said it before and I'll say it again here: Allegedly Samsung supports HLG in their 2017 and even 2016 sets but it seems they cannot be persuaded to admit they do. Despite repeated requests to several Samsung officials I have to this date not seen a single official statement syaing they support HLG.

I do not know why this is, just that it is like this. Perhaps they're afraid of distracting from the message of HDR10+ or otherwise causing confusion?

If you find an official statement somewhere, do let me know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
1. Samsung is also supporting HLG
As I've explained many times, I'm still waiting for Samsung to admit they do.

2. Oppo is also supporting HLG
I'll fix that. It needs some explanation in the footnotes as it's confusing since HLG has no use on UHD BD and they don't support OTT apps, only DLNA streaming and such.

3. Google is supporting HDR10, Dolby Vision & HLG [link omitted]
Better make that 'Android'. Chromecast and Google Play are also Google but have different HDR format support.

4. Roku is also supporting Dolby Vision
Also this I've explained to you before, Dan. Roku's platform support DV, but only in other brands' TV sets such as TCL's. That's why I've placed TCL there. I'll move Roku there when they add support for DV in their own stand-alone products.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,860 Posts
I've said it before and I'll say it again here: Allegedly Samsung supports HLG in their 2017 and even 2016 sets but it seems they cannot be persuaded to admit they do. Despite repeated requests to several Samsung officials I have to this date not seen a single official statement syaing they support HLG.
Guessing who you are, it's nice to see you here :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
Discussion Starter #213

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,236 Posts
@Yoeri

https://twitter.com/UHD4k/status/902232583882379264











I'm wondering if the Apple TV 4K is also compatible with HLG.



Apparently, the iPhone X is only compatible with Dolby Vision and HDR10.

https://live.theverge.com/apple-liv...6.1873431171.1505214695-1158001304.1504879765







https://www.apple.com/apple-tv-4k/specs/

Video Formats
H.264/HEVC SDR video up to 2160p, 60 fps, Main/Main 10 profile
HEVC Dolby Vision (Profile 5)/HDR10 (Main 10 profile) up to 2160p
H.264 Baseline Profile level 3.0 or lower with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps per channel, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
MPEG-4 video up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 by 480 pixels, 30 fps, Simple profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
@Yoeri
I'm wondering if the Apple TV 4K is also compatible with HLG.
[/IMG]
Apple have a tendency to only support formats their itunes stores will publish, so I'd assume they have zero plans to use HLG in their itunes movies. I was under the impression HLG is more advantageous for broadcast tv, especially since it's compressing SDR/HDR into a single stream.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
Discussion Starter #216 (Edited)
All features in HDMI 2.1 are optional

Just to reiterate for those unaware, Paul Williams of Panasonic and Vincent Teoh have confirmed that HDR10+ works over HDMI with HDMI 2.0b. HDMI 2.1 is not required.


http://www.avsforum.com/forum/465-h...al-hdr-compliant-displays-6.html#post54128881
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/465-h...al-hdr-compliant-displays-7.html#post54757846


According to Jeff Park, Director of Technology at HDMI LA, a HDMI 2.0a/2.0b => HDMI 2.1 firmware upgrade is possible if the HDMI chipset was designed to be upgradable.
https://cepro.ehmedia.co/webinar-confirmation11710499


The HDMI 2.1 features are:
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_2_1/
. Dynamic HDR (i.e. transmission of SMPTE ST 2094 dynamic metadata across HDMI)
. eARC
. VRR
. 48 Gbps ([email protected] HFR, …).


According to Rob Tobias, CEO & President at HDMI LA, all features in HDMI 2.1 are optional.




For example, Microsoft will certify the Xbox One X Project Scorpio for HDMI 2.1 VRR when the HDMI 2.1 spec is finalized.






Marantz can certify the new Marantz AVRs for HDMI 2.1 eARC when the HDMI 2.1 spec is finalized.
"eARC (Enhanced Audio Return Channel) supports the transmission of 3D audio from your TV apps with a single HDMI connection for the simplest setup. This feature will be enabled via a future firmware update."
http://us.marantz.com/us/Products/P...CatId=AVReceivers&SubCatId=0&ProductId=SR7012

HDMI Audio Return Channel
https://www.cnet.com/news/what-is-audio-return-channel-arc/
http://developer.dolby.com/news.aspx







High-end TV makers can commit to upgrade to HDMI 2.1 "Dynamic HDR", i.e. transmission of ST 2094-10 dynamic metadata of ST 2094 compliant Dolby Vision, ST 2094-20/30 dynamic metadata of Technicolor HDR or ST 2094-40 dynamic metadata of HDR10Plus across HDMI.

High-end TV makers can support all operational and being standardized (i.e. via committed upgrade) HDR formats: a win-win for consumers and HDR TV makers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,860 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
992 Posts
Discussion Starter #219
Push for Temporal Sub-layering HFR for backward compatibility

David Wood, Chair, DVB CM-UHDTV, shares his expert view into 120fps High Frame Rate. [See page 46]
http://www.csimagazine.com/eblast/Digital_Editions/September_v2/CSI_September_2017.pdf
"…
UHDTV is clearly on the rise in 2017, but there are different roads that could be taken from here. The word on the street is that “the best UHDTV set to buy is the one that comes on the market ten minutes after you’ve bought one”.

High Frame Rate could almost be called the Forgotten Feature of UHDTV. There was never any doubt that doubling the Frame Rate would significantly add to UHDTV image quality when there was movement in the scene.
But doubling the Frame Rate seemed likely to seriously affect production resources, and need larger storage and higher clock rates for the decoder. In other words it was going to be expensive.
The decoder makers told DVB several years ago that HFR would call for development of a new decoder IC, and a faster HDMI interface [HDMI 2.1]. They looked us in the eye and said that they could only do it if there would be large scale usage by broadcast and broadband providers. We have a ‘chicken and egg’ situation.

The road to HDR seems relatively certain. It remains to be seen what proportion of UHDTV sets include HDR capability, and what kind of screen brightness they will have. But in ten years’ time it will probably be the norm.

The road to higher frame rates is possible but less certain. The reality is that HFR will only happen if broadcasters and broadband providers are convinced that (as they say in France) the game is worth the candle. Only if they say so, will the decoder manufacturers set in motion the receivers for HFR. Its success probably rests on whether sports producers are convinced and sport fans demand it.


If HFR will come, the temporal sub-layering HFR profile will likely be used for backward compatibility with current 60fps UHDTV.


http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?p=14112531#post14112531


http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/101100_101199/101154/02.03.01_60/ts_101154v020301p.pdf


While remaining functional for many years to come, universal HDR TV shall be able to play any HDR / HFR content if the industry shall commit to support only the Temporal Sub-layering HFR profile for backward compatibility.


 
201 - 220 of 619 Posts
Top