Encoding 4K HDR 4:2:0 10bit BT.2020

[kolak]

And you do it with?
It's not easy at all to expand gamut, same way as it's not easy to convert eg. 8bit to 10bit.
Have you written some clever tool which does it?

[musicvideos4k]

And you do it with?
It's not easy at all to expand gamut, same way as it's not easy to convert eg. 8bit to 10bit.
Have you written some clever tool which does it?

I do it with several scripts including the HDR core, and a method nobody is doing for HDR grading, then i just call at the end the dithering to expand as it's supposed to do prior to encode in HEVC ST. 2084 BT 2020.

I know it's not easy to do, it's not i did this in 1 day. It took me several months to find the way to do this.

I can show you a lot of comparisons and in every scene, you have more gamut and range, with same color toning as it's supposed to be.

You get this: If you use any TV and change presets or add saturation to the original 709 SDR , colors looks over saturated, palette gets crowded in a milisecond, you lose details and it looks unnatural.

You do the same with mine and you get real color, details keeps the same and image is 100% natural. That's what HDR is about.

[kolak]

This makes much more sense now when you actually said what you do.
Maybe it's better to post some tiffs.

[musicvideos4k]

This makes much more sense now when you actually said what you do.
Maybe it's better to post some tiffs.

Give me the tiffs you want me to test this and i will do it today.

Though, difference is there.

Here you have a 1080p screenshot comparison:

http://imgur.com/a/ATBs3

Check details and palette on both.

[kolak]

Can you somehow show how many new/unique colors are introduced?
There is no way to say this on the grabs. It just looks different.
Needs some graphs, math.
This sort of graph:


http://flandersscientific.com/img/scopes/cie-scope.jpg


for Rec.709 surce, simple convert to Rec.2020 and your version. Don't make it HDR, just extend gamut.

[musicvideos4k]

Can you somehow show how many new/unique colors are introduced?
There is no way to say this on the grabs. It just looks different.
Needs some graphs, math.
This sort of graph:


http://flandersscientific.com/img/scopes/cie-scope.jpg


for Rec.709 surce, simple convert to Rec.2020 and your version. Don't make it HDR, just extend gamut.

Let me understand you. You want me to grab that image and "transfer" to what i do and show the same image with BT. 2020? I don't get what you want me to do.

I do HDR in BT. 2020 grading.

[kolak]

Nope. I want some proof that your method does something nice :) Looking at stills proves not much. How do I know there are more colors there (my monitor won't even display them) not that only they look different?

Simple conversion between Rec.709 and Rec.2020 won't really introduce new colors or make image better (again, same as simple 8bit conversion to 10bit).

[Groucho2004]

Nope. I want some proof that your method does something nice :) Looking at stills proves not much. How do I know there are more colors there (my monitor won't even display them) not that only they look different?

Simple conversion between Rec.709 and Rec.2020 won't really introduce new colors or make image better (again, same as simple 8bit conversion to 10bit).
I bet this is the first time he's seen a CIE1931 chromaticity diagram. :D

[musicvideos4k]

Nope. I want some proof that your method does something nice :) Looking at stills proves not much. How do I know there are more colors there (my monitor won't even display them) not that only they look different?

Simple conversion between Rec.709 and Rec.2020 won't really introduce new colors or make image better (again, same as simple 8bit conversion to 10bit).

You are joking?

How watching at a processed video won't look different to you? You need to watch it and use TV presets, play the video on different TV's. Then play the original and do the same with the presets/TV's.

HDR has been created to make things better looking, the whole point is to people to like it better than the older SDR technology with limited palette and range.

You have several issues, you need to watch it anywhere and compare the same input with the same panels/calibration. When something looks better, no matter what you believe is happening, that's the whole point.

[musicvideos4k]

<content deleted>

[kolak]

Prove me that your version is better than mine:

https://s12.postimg.org/so68haujx/F3_KCe1_Z_copy.jpg

Took me 10 sec to do. It's not 100% identical but prove me yours is better :) I think mine is better.
Just by looking at some computer screen you can tell nothing about which is better or worse, so this is what I asked. Prove me with math, graphs.
If you can't then you wasted months as I almost everyone can create the same version in 10 seconds :)

[musicvideos4k]

Prove me that your version is better than mine:

https://s12.postimg.org/so68haujx/F3_KCe1_Z_copy.jpg

Took me 10 sec to do. It's not 100% identical but prove me yours is better :) I think mine is better.
Just by looking at some computer screen you can tell nothing about which is better or worse, so this is what I asked. Prove me with math, graphs.
If you can't then you wasted months as I almost everyone can create the same version in 10 seconds :)

Lol. Mine is better, because yours is a jpeg image. Anybody can photoshop anything. But you can't see your jpeg image on an HDR TV in native HDR, either with MadVR HDR, because that's a jpeg image.

This is what i said all along: Watch a video in native HEVC HDR. But you said here it's pointless to watch a VIDEO in HDR because to you , an image shows the same.

But now... out of nothing you like to show images pretending it's the same as i do?

Do a clip from avatar with HDR grading and BT. 2020 spec, then show it to me. Actually, do the same as here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iy8MMxgKJ-0

Then upload it and show me "it took 10 seconds".

Show the MadVR Info and make it look better since you are a super pro guy. I want to see the same range amplified ( mountains on the back etc ) the color grading improved or even the same. Show us you are the PRO GUY.

[musicvideos4k]

And upload it to youtube, same as i did. Let's see the pro guy making it better.

[musicvideos4k]

It's taking longer than 10 seconds! Let's see native HDR in action from the guy that made HDR demo videos from Sony. Suddenly i begin to think this guy is working for free.

[kolak]

I did not use Photoshop but vs.
I can even do it faster without any processing. Just play Avatar Blu-ray, turn on fake HDR in TV, adjust few sliders and done. No need to waste time for any processing as TVs can do the same realtime. End result will be about the same.
Read this:

http://vanhurkman.com/wordpress/?p=3548

If you want real HDR forget about your Rec.709 sources, you need something way better to start with.

[musicvideos4k]

I did not use Photoshop but vs.
I can even do it faster without any processing. Just play Avatar Blu-ray, turn on fake HDR in TV, adjust few sliders and done. No need to waste time for any processing as TVs can do the same realtime. End result will be about the same.
Read this:

http://vanhurkman.com/wordpress/?p=3548

If you want real HDR forget about your Rec.709 sources, you need something way better to start with.

Lol. The problem here is you don't know what i do, and you don't know what HDR is either.

How you can say " TVs Do The Same" . TVs doesn't do any grading, toning, pre processing, dithering to 10-bits and later encode in ST. 2084 to bring you " real time HDR ".

Tv's just use white balances, saturation and contrast to make you believe you see HDR, but that's fake and unrealistic image, you even lose DETAILS in the process most people doesn't cares, but you???. Actually that sucks big time.

You see? You don't know what i do, therefore you come with me with a random post about something completely the opposite as im doing, proving you have zero idea on what i do and how i do it.

I will upload another video to youtube converted HDR signal with MadVR. Now tell me and ( SHOW ME ) TV can do the same image, range, color and contrast SHOWING MORE DETAIL on every frame, not by LOSING DETAILS = you won't since it's just impossible as what i do has nothing to do with a post process from a TV.
And it doesn't even matter being 709, i can do this process from any source. That's what scares you out.

[kolak]

Do what you want. If you want to show your videos fine. Start new thread. This one is about encoding h265 with HDR metadata. This what you do is wider topic.
If you post your scripts or at least discus something which is in them maybe people will be interested.

Your problem is that you don't tell what you do, just post some videos/grabs "graded" to crazy numbers. Why don't you do your processing to 1000nits and then watch it as HDR on TV which is able to display it. Don't get why your grade to crazy 10K nits and then use madVR to clip this to 3K etc. You do your amazing processing and later use madVR to do its own processing on top of your amazing HDR masters? What is the point? Do realistic version at 1K and watch as HDR or do straight away special SDR version.Why are you relying on madVR processing?

MadVR shows average light at 7K- as far as I can tell this is way to high for an average value. All these high values are just for peaks and TVs can display them for short time at 5% of the screen. Your "crazy" masters would not work with any TV out there, including Dolby 10K screen.

Do you have HDR TV at all, have you seen some HDR demo on Sony OLED or Dolby monitor?

Don't post next video/grab, just answer those questions.

[musicvideos4k]

Do what you want. If you want to show your videos fine. Start new thread. This one is about encoding h265 with HDR metadata. This what you do is wider topic.
If you post your scripts or at least discus something which is in them maybe people will be interested.

Your problem is that you don't tell what you do, just post some videos/grabs "graded" to crazy numbers. Why don't you do your processing to 1000nits and then watch it as HDR on TV which is able to display it. Don't get why your grade to crazy 10K nits and then use madVR to clip this to 3K etc. You do your amazing processing and later use madVR to do its own processing on top of your amazing HDR masters? What is the point? Do realistic version at 1K and watch as HDR or do straight away special SDR version.Why are you relying on madVR processing?

MadVR shows average light at 7K- as far as I can tell this is way to high for an average value. All these high values are just for peaks and TVs can display them for short time at 5% of the screen. Your "crazy" masters would not work with any TV out there, including Dolby 10K screen.

Do you have HDR TV at all, have you seen some HDR demo on Sony OLED or Dolby monitor?

Don't post next video/grab, just answer those questions.

Because grading to higher nits HDR looks just a lot better.

Why you believe studios grade in less nits, because "displays doesn't have more than 1000" ?

They do that so the displays stays on 1000 nits with crazy chips post processing, or the nano crystals and so on for "better color" and "stuff" = marketing, sells.

Lower nits grading makes HDR look too bright. You can read about this on HDTVtest UK where they actually explained today's HDR is too bright for "daylight". That and other stuff such as contrast HDR and details is over crowded for the low grading nits.

When you grade at higher nits you have more space and therefore you get better HDR, without having to get an stupidly bright image that has nothing to do with "real life" nits.

When you look up at a flower on the sun you don't see it like you were watching the same flower on the Sun ground, you can see it fine, with real life nits.

When you have HDR video graded on higher nits you can actually play the video from 400 nits to 10000 nits. When you don't have a TV with such nits output and you setup for example MadVR on 4000 nits you will see just lower bright image keeping the same contrast, details and higher range.

When you see a high graded HDR with 400 nits you will have LESS brightness than commercial 1200 nits graded = it will look more realistic and pleasant to watch. Contrast is gonna be better and details are going to be a lot better. Not to mention the color ouput, higher nits graded HDR makes color look fantastic. But hey, they want you to buy super displays with crazy post processing chips. It just doesn't fits.

And about this:
MadVR shows average light at 7K- as far as I can tell this is way to high for an average value. All these high values are just for peaks and TVs can display them for short time at 5% of the screen. Your "crazy" masters would not work with any TV out there, including Dolby 10K screen.

That's completely non sense. Higher graded nits HDR is gonna look better not worse. It will look better anywhere, not just on a dolby 10k screen. It will look better even on Oleds which only can output about 640 nits.

You don't understand how HDR works.

This is a test for Avatar graded in 10K Nits with MadVR output in 400 nits.

Watch out for the color reproduction and it's even toned down in 25% with preserve hue.

Watch out for the sun rays over the jungle, actually watch out for everything.

It looks a lot better OFF youtube, but you get the idea.

https://youtu.be/flrYLCtE_yA

This is why higher graded nits HDR looks better, because it expands the HDR to it's limit ( 10K nits for ST. 2084 ) . But like i said before, they want you to buy super displays with crazy things to make color amazing = marketing and people running to buy the new tv with crazy color.

[kolak]

There is something not right here. I get that 10K grade can be adjusted to 1K, 2K, 4K screen, but you are actually asking to watch it on TV without HDR mode, so it actually peaks maybe at 500nits. Clearly direct grade to 500nits can be optimised for best possible look. You clearly rely on madVR processing a lot to bring your crazy grades to more realistic world:)

Also- stretching your Rec.709 8bit BD source to 10K is asking for a lot of interpolation and this is later squeezed back by madVR.

If something looks great when converted by madVR from 10k to 2K then the same thing should look even better when converted directly to 2K (you have more control over whole conversion).

I've seen 4K nits image and it has big impact on your eyes. Brighter image is seen as "more saturated" as it stimulates your brain differently.
What you are doing is "flat HDR". If you have average light at 7K then your bright spots/moments won't be seen very bright at all as there is not enough difference to peak at 10K. This is exactly what HDR grade should not be about. Those peaks are reserved for few moments in the movie to give this kick and impact on viewer.
Your masters are bit unrealistic and because you have no way to see them as HDR on 10K screen you don't realise it. Typical street is probably no near these values even on bright day? Do you know what sort of values would this be? Rec.709 is very outdated and muted at 100nits, but we can't have 2H movie at average light of 7K as you won't be able to watch it.

Your amazing 10K HDR grade is clipped back to something like 400nits? (so that's why you have it at 7K by average, so you can enjoy constant video at e.g. 400nits which looks good) which at this moment has not much to do with real HDR. They are just very bright grades which will look better then Rec.709, but you can achieve this going directly to such a grade, not by some overdone, double stage process.

I would really like to give you ability to try to watch your 7K average grade master on Dolby 10K monitor, except it would be not possible as monitor would shut down due to overheating :)
I bet you you would not stand such a image for more than few minutes.
When it comes to real world TVs have ABL system which doesn't allow them to be to bright for to long time purely for energy use restrictions. Have you seen this:

http://uk.rtings.com/tv/tests/picture-quality/peak-brightness
?

Your problem is that you never saw your amazing 10K HDR (with 7K average light) master, but always see clipped version of it to e.g. 400nits?
I bet, you would not like you master if you were able to see it as is at perfect 10K TV.

[musicvideos4k]

There is something not right here. I get that 10K grade can be adjusted to 1K, 2K, 4K screen, but you are actually asking to watch it on TV without HDR mode, so it actually peaks maybe at 500nits. Clearly direct grade to 500nits can be optimised for best possible look. You clearly rely on madVR processing a lot to bring your crazy grades to more realistic world:)

Also- stretching your Rec.709 8bit BD source to 10K is asking for a lot of interpolation and this is later squeezed back by madVR.

If something looks great when converted by madVR from 10k to 2K then the same thing should look even better when converted directly to 2K.

I've seen 4K nits image and it has big impact on your eyes. Brighter image is seen as "more saturated" as it stimulates your brain differently.
What you are doing is "flat HDR". If you have average light at 7K then your bright spots/moments won't be seen very bright at all as there is not enough difference to peak at 10K. This is exactly what HDR grade should not be about. Those peaks are reserved for few moments in the movie to give this kick and impact on viewer.
Your masters are bit unrealistic and because you have no way to see them as HDR on 10K screen you don't realise it. Typical street is probably no near these values even on bright day? Do you know what sort of values would this be? Rec.709 is very outdated and muted at 100nits, but we can't have 2H movie at average light of 7K as you won't be able to watch it.

Your amazing 10K HDR grade is clipped back to something like 500nits (so that's why you have it at 7K by average, so you can enjoy constant video at e.g. 400nits which looks good) which at this moment has not much to do with real HDR. They are just very bright grades which will look better then Rec.709, but you can achieve this going directly to such a grade, not by some overdone, double stage process.

I would really like to give you ability to try to watch your 7K average grade master on Dolby 10K monitor, expect it would be not possible as monitor would shut down due to overheating :)
I bet you you would not stand such a image for more than few minutes.
When it comes to real world TVs have ABL system which doesn't allow them to be to bright for to long time purely for energy use restrictions. Have you seen this:

http://uk.rtings.com/tv/tests/picture-quality/peak-brightness
?

HDR mode does not exists. What HDR TV does is turn on the TV preset with metadata from blu-ray movies/demos graded in HDR10/Dolby Vision. For Dolby Vision it also uses a chipset, it's all about making proprietary every HDR processing and sell it to you and sell TV's.

MadVR does not limit anything, it process the HDR signal back to specific nits output, balancing the image with preserve hue's and compressing highlights ( to make it fit on specific nits display ).

The Image is going to look a LOT better than ANY SDR content.

This is not flat HDR, i watch this same movie in my display nits and it looks better than ANY commercial HDR movie by just making MadVR processing it + my personal TV preset for HDR.

That video on YT you just saw is from Avatar 10K graded being processed by MadVR on 400 nits and 25% Preserve Hue / Compressing the Highlights. The image looks completely different than the SDR version of the same movie at the same display output/calibration.

You can't generate the same output with ANY tv/monitor/real time tweaks or whatever, because the signal is being processed from a 10 HDR native graded stream.

There's new info, new range, new color gamut and new curve. Everything changes.

You don't understand what MadVR does with HDR native streams.

"I would really like to give you ability to try to watch your 7K average grade master on Dolby 10K monitor, expect it would be not possible as monitor would shut down due to overheating :)"

That's how they do it. If you play my HDR streams on any HDR TV it will look better than any other. Im trying to make you understand, if i get a good camera to record from the screen it won't be accurate either as in real person, but i will try to find one and record from TV screen, you will see you were all wrong the whole time here.

[musicvideos4k]

Your problem is that you never saw your amazing 10K HDR (with 7K average light) master, but always see clipped version of it to e.g. 400nits?
I bet, you would not like you master if you were able to see it as is at perfect 10K TV.

Clipped version? You really don't get it. It never clips, that's the whole point. OMG. Even on YT and at 400 nits MadVR you can see everything expanded and NO CLIPPING. Please man go watch avatar for Christ sake.

[kolak]

Yes, MadVR converts to some nits, but your TV (if not in HDR mode) will be no near these values. You have so many variables:
Rec.709 master->10K HDR->madVR processing->TV processing which changes whole image based on it's own ability and processing.
Do you see my point? Your HDR 10K grade becomes just some video with e.g. 400nits by average. I think you like your version because by average it's much brighter than HDR content out of studios. It just have big impact on you due to brightness. Point it that your 10K (7K average) numbers translates to something totally different when seen on TV.
Studio masters are done the way so HDR TV can actually display it as intended. There is not a chance any TV can do it with your HDR 10K master (forget about madVR processing), neither you would really like to watch it if such a TV would exists. I would hurt eyes.

[kolak]

Clipped version? You really don't get it. It never clips, that's the whole point. OMG. Even on YT and at 400 nits MadVR you can see everything expanded and NO CLIPPING. Please man go watch avatar for Christ sake.

Re-scaled, not clipped. Wrong word.

[musicvideos4k]

Yes, MadVR converts to some nits, but your TV (if not in HDR mode) will be no near these values. You have so many variables:
Rec.709 master->10K HDR->madVR processing->TV processing which changes whole image based on it's own ability and processing.
Do you see my point? Your HDR 10K grade becomes just some video with e.g. 400nits by average. I think you like your version because by average it's much brighter than HDR content out of studios. It just have big impact on you due to brightness. Point it that your 10K (7K average) numbers translates to something totally different when seen on TV.
Studio masters are done the way so HDR TV can actually display it as intended. There is not a chance any TV can do it with your HDR 10K master (forget about madVR processing), neither you would really like to watch it if such a TV would exists. I would hurt eyes.

HDR mode on TV's also converts to the display nits from the TV man. If the HDR TV has got 1000 * Samsungs SUHDs * the HDR is toned down to peak 1000 nits.

MadVR simulates HDR TV's processing, letting you choose what Nits to display as peak. The same as the "HDR MODE" from TV does with their display real peaks.

HDR is always better from higher grade nits, the " HDR MODE " only fits to the real display nits. The image you get changes in quality depending how it was graded, and that's why Samsung created the HDR1000 or Dolby the Dolby Vision.

If it were like you say, there would be no HDR proprietary processings at ALL. Because every single HDR processing is based on the same thing i do : ST. 2084.

Please, it's supposed you work for " sony ". Don't make me go on.

[musicvideos4k]

Re-scaled, not clipped. Wrong word.

There's no re scale, it fits the nits you select. Just like the TV's does with their " HDR MODES ".

The difference is HDR10 movies are going to have "LESS HDR" or just like you mistyped " FLAT HDR " than a higher grade one.

Maybe im talking in japanese and you can't get it.

And for the Record, Dolby Vision sometimes peaks at more than 4000 nits grading. Samsung's HDR1000 sometimes even peaks at 10k NITS. ( demos you can even download ) . And those HDR1000 demos are the best looking of them all. Do you know why?

[kolak]

Yes, but studios do it the way so master fits to TVs capabilities. They do it realistic. This is the reason why we have still Rec.709 as some TVs still can't even do this in terms of color space.
Studios can start grading to P3 tomorrow, but 90% of people will see desaturated picture, so what is the point? You have to be realistic and work to some standard which TVs can meet at least in some realistic margin.
Ok- again. Your 10K HDR grade, madVR set to 3K- what is the peak on your TV during bright scene? 400nits? It may not be even this if your TV is not in HDR mode.

Because new Samsung TVs peak above 1000, up to 1500?
Demos are made for specific TVs. This is the difference with studio work. They don't do things for a specific TV, but try to do according to some standard, so many TVs can display it as intended.

[musicvideos4k]

Yes, but studios do it the way so master fits to TVs capabilities. They do it realistic. This is the reason why we have still Rec.709 as some TVs still can't even do this in terms of color space.
Studios can start grading to P3 tomorrow, but 90% of people will see desaturated picture, so what is the point? You have to be realistic and work to some standard which TVs can meet at least in some realistic margin.
Ok- again. Your 10K HDR grade, madVR set to 3K- what is the peak on your TV during bright scene?

"They do it realistic" . WTF man? There's only possible way to grade HDR up to 10K nits and it's the same freaking way i do it.

Im using ST. 2084 not some HDR transfer characteristics that i invented on my garage.

It fits the same standard because it's the same freaking HDR processing.

You don't understand how even TV's peaks to 1000 and playback up to 10K nits graded that looks BEST than lower grade. It's the same grading i do.

And mine looks extremely realistic, the problem is you didn't watch it on your "HDR TV".

[kolak]

Your HDR 10K mazing master, bright scene what is the output from your TV?

[musicvideos4k]

Your HDR 10K mazing master, bright scene what is the output from your TV?

What do you mean output? I watch it on mine on 700 nits, which is the peak i found from the display. And it looks wonderful.

I will make a clip for you to try out on yours with the same settings i use. Then feel free to compare with with any HDR movie you got on there.

[kolak]

So imagine this peak at 10K :)

So you average is probably at 500?
This will be most likely higher than typical studio HDR movie, so that why you call your version "higher grade" They just don't push average to high.
So your TV is not really good- 700 for peak is quite poor.

[musicvideos4k]

So imagine this peak at 10K :)

So you average is probably at 500?
This will be most likely higher than typical studio HDR movie, so that why you call your version "higher grade" They just don't push average to high.
So your TV is not really good- 700 for peak is quite poor.

I really don't know if you are trolling right now or whatever.

I have explained to you how HDR works from 1 to 10.
I have explained to you how TV HDR works by toning down the original HDR graded stream up to 10000 nits ( such as Samsung's HDR1000 demos ) or Dolby Vision movies ( up to +4000 ) to the top display nits from the HDR "TVs" which are actually SDR panels: from 600 to 1500? .

Oleds have got no more than 640 top peak nits and they can play HDR10 movies with 1200 peak nits. Because the Software tones it down to 640 top peak nits by default.

The SUHD Tv's from 2016 line up are top 1000 nits. Software HDR tones it down to 1000 to play ANY hdr movie.

MadVR tones down up to whatever nits you want , because it's an open source software for HDR. The same you get on proprietary TV's but there you cannot change the display nits, it goes down to the real nits output from the display by Factory setting, so you get the "best possible HDR image", toned down from any graded HDR stream.

My movies are just like HDR1000 samsung demos toned up to 10k nits. Where those demos can be played on ANY HDR TV because the software tones down to the TV display nits for playback.

The same you do with my streams graded up to 10K and playback with MadVR ( same method the TVs do ) to your display nits.

I have 2 TV's one 4k's the other oled TV. I find better looking the 4K TV with 700 ( average ) nits. Because HDR looks best on higher nits displays , oled's just better black reproduction and color.

Are you learning now?

[kolak]

If studio master is done up to 1000 with rather low average most TVs won't touch it and will be displayed as intended.

[musicvideos4k]

If studio master is done up to 1000 with rather low average most TVs won't touch it and will be displayed as intended.

Dolby Vision movies are graded up to 4000. Any HDR TV is SDR and it has the same method for HDR output as MadVR: HDR to SDR toning down the nits and compressing highlights.

Don't tell me you didn't know that. As far as i know , you didn't. And that's why you were crying all the way from my first post on here.

A "REAL" HDR tv would have to be up to 10000 nits peak, from where ST. 2084 peaks and that would be " real HDR TV ". Otherwise, it's just the same as MadVR.

[kolak]

Dolby idea is to have controlled environment. Every Tv with DolbyVision has Dolby chip, so their processing from 4K to lower nits is done always the same way. When they grade they can simulate it and know how it will look at lower nits. Again, to have control and at least some idea how it will look at consumer TV.
This is also the reason why most TV companies don't want DolbyVision- they don't want their TV look the same as competition and also they don't want to pay Dolby licensing fees.

I still don't get how 10K master toned down to 3K is better than optimised 3K master, which TV interprets to its capabilities anyway :)

[musicvideos4k]

Dolby idea is to have controlled environment. Every Tv with DolbyVision has Dolby chip, so their processing from 4K to lower nits is done always the same way. When they grade they can simulate it and know how it will look at lower nits. Again, to have control and at least some idea how it will look at consumer TV.
This is also the reason why most TV companies don't want DolbyVision- they don't want their TV look the same as competition and also they don't want to pay Dolby licensing fees.

I still don't get how 10K master toned down to 3K is better than optimised 3K master, which TV interprets to its capabilities anyway :)

You are kidding me.

I can also know how it looks at lower nits when i grade. Because i use freaking MAdVR for toning down the nits. Exactly like the "dolby chip" does.

Man, you just don't get it.

There's no such thing as optimized 3K Master. A good HDR video is better when graded higher nits. Because the freaking ST. 2084 spec goes up to 10K, if you grade lower you just get limited range.

Please man, i thought you had a little idea about this but now i see you are completely newbie on HDR.

[kolak]

You can't know as your TV does 700nits peak, so how can you know how 3K is going to look? You assume a lot and just know how it looks on your TV.

You are stretching your Rec.709 source all the way up to 10K and few moments later squeeze it back to eg 1K. For me this can only cause more bad then good, specially if you have no high quality source.
Based on what you have said there is 0 point to grade to 1K, 2K, 4K- all should be graded to 10K and then let TVs do processing. Remember, there is no madVR with BD or when you play HDR files from USB- all done by TV.
Yet, no one in industry grades to 10K, but to realistic numbers based on TVs capabilities.
Sorry, but I'm not convinced that I have to use whole ST. 2084 range in order to get the best possible from current TVs (maybe in the feature people will be using whole range).

Tone mapping or any additional processing should be avoided if possible- not forced all the time.

Aslo- if all processing in the chain is perfect you should see no difference on your TV with any setting in madVR above e.g. 1K. Only when you start limiting it < your TV capabilities then it should show some real difference.

[musicvideos4k]

You can't know as your TV does 700nits peak, so how can you know how 3K is going to look? You assume a lot and just know how it looks on your TV.

You are stretching your Rec.709 source all the way up to 10K and few moments later squeeze it back to eg 1K. For me this can only cause more bad then good, specially if you have no high quality source.
Based on what you have said there is 0 point to grade to 1K, 2K, 4K- all should be graded to 10K and then let TVs do processing. Remember, there is no madVR with BD or when you play HDR files from USB- all done by TV.
Yet, no one in industry grades to 10K, but to realistic numbers based on TVs capabilities.
Sorry, but I'm not convinced that I have to use whole ST. 2084 range in order to get the best possible from current TVs (maybe in the feature people will be using whole range).

Tone mapping or any additional processing should be avoided if possible- not forced all the time.

Aslo- if all processing in the chain is perfect you should see no difference on your TV with any setting in madVR above e.g. 1K. Only when you start limiting it < your TV capabilities then it should show some real difference.

Oh please can you just stop talking like if you know what you are saying. It makes you look completely ridiculous.

I can because MadVR limits image to any nits output, it doesn't matter if your display " CANT SHOW REAL PEAK ON YOUR EYES " the video is going to look " less bright " when your display can't show specific nits output.

But you can see how it actually looks and you can even measure peaks as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7JHVq_oK_w

That is MadVR con 3500 nits peak and DCI-P3.

Now show me the UHD Blu Ray HDR looks " WAY BETTER " than mine because? They graded it? Come on...

HDR Grading is just that and you can test it with MadVR just fine. The problem is you have ZERO idea about all this.

You thought TVs are HDR, with that i leave you thinking that the next time please have some self respect.

[kolak]

Told you many times- your work has nothing to do with grading, you're just making images brighter so they look nice on your TV.
That's about it.

[musicvideos4k]

Told you many times- your work has nothing to do with grading, you're just making images brighter so they look nice on your TV.
That's about it.

LOL.

Do you even know what grading is about?

I can show you the same scene with different nits grading and it will look on a different range on every nit settings = grading.

You really have zero idea but you keep pushing it. Don't make me show you 10 shots from 400 to 10000 nits and make you look really bad publicly.

And my movies doesn't look nice on my TV. They look nice everywhere. That's about HDR transfer grading. The problem is you don't know how to do it and you bitch about it like some kid.

Here's from 400 to 4000 nits same scene, same power curve. Only changing the MadVR Internal HDR limiter nits.

http://imgur.com/a/uswi6

Yes i do movies just to make it look nicer on my tv. For Christ sake.

And please go watch The Shallows on Blu Ray 1080p SDR. That's from where i do it, and when you come back apologize.

[kolak]

Sorry, I need to see grabs every 1 nit.

[musicvideos4k]

Sorry, I need to see grabs every 1 nit.

You can't see, i don't even know why i keep on replying to you anyway lol.

I told you to explain and show and proof the commercial HDR version is better than what i do or at least prove mine is "for my TV" like you say every single 2 posts.

You can't, because it doesn't looks bad anywhere, even on your screen it looks just fine. And that's exactly why you keep on trolling on here every day. Otherwise you would just leave it on the first post you did here about my "flat not real not graded HDR" (????):p

Peace.

[Asmodian]

The hue is changing a lot in your examples, don't you care what color things are?

[musicvideos4k]

The hue is changing a lot in your examples, don't you care what color things are?

Really?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXiVwgLQR7A

I didn't know Avatar were not blue. Yet another funny doomer. They don't stop appearing !

Everything i show is either YT or jpeg images, if you watch the native stream it looks 10 times better, but im sure you didn't know that either.

Show me Avatar looking better and we continue to talk, otherwise you are another kolak guy to me.

[surami]

@musicvideos4k
Could you stop please? Write posts about encoding methods or please open another topic for your things.

You can't make real 10bit HDR BT.2020 4:2:0 from 8bit SDR BT.709 4:2:0, because you don't have the extra base information: +2-8bits more, wider color gamut and "higher" chroma subsampling. You need intermediate file (10bit+ master, hopefully with 4:4:4 chroma subsampling or 16-32bit RGB frames and wide color gamut) to do something and you have to grade it in editing programs (HDR mode).

What you do is simple fake, that's it.

[kolak]

No, he has madVR and magic wand so he can make 10x better HDR masters from Rec.709 compressed sources with Rec.2020 or P3 gamut (even if his TV can probably display just bit more then Rec.709- so how on earth does he see all additional colors?) than studios which have access to RAW camera assets and actually can see what they do on properly calibrated e.g. 2K nits monitor :)
Studios, you and all others know nothing about HDR- he is HDR-Gandalf, master of fake HDR which will soon rule the world :) He has done impossible- 8bit Rec.709 to real 10bit Rec.2020. You can shoot now with anything, e.g. phone, send it to him and he will make amazing 10K HDR master from it. Looks like RED, Sony and Arri etc. are out of business.

On more time- moderators please clean this thread. Delete all from last post about x265/ffmpeg commands.

[musicvideos4k]

@musicvideos4k
Could you stop please? Write posts about encoding methods or please open another topic for your things.

You can't make real 10bit HDR BT.2020 4:2:0 from 8bit SDR BT.709 4:2:0, because you don't have the extra base information: +2-8bits more, wider color gamut and "higher" chroma subsampling. You need intermediate file (10bit+ master, hopefully with 4:4:4 chroma subsampling or 16-32bit RGB frames and wide color gamut) to do something and you have to grade it in editing programs (HDR mode).

What you do is simple fake, that's it.

Oh sure i do, it's fake because you don't know how the whole process is done? the problem is you and anybody here knows how to do it. Be free to find the movie and watch it yourself and compare it, about +1500 people already watched my movies = better hdr. Like it... or not. There's no more to movies than watching it. If it looks good, then you must shut up and enjoy it. That's how i see things.

The problem is you see things "thinking" they do it better because ... bla bla bla bla bla blah and more blah. They can do it from " higher masters " and do it wrong too. You can do HDR from 709 8bits just fine if you know how to expand and dither the way i do it, the same a 8bit dither can look as good as 10 bit. Cheers.

[musicvideos4k]

No, he has madVR and magic wand so he can make 10x better HDR masters from Rec.709 compressed sources with Rec.2020 or P3 gamut (even if his TV can probably display just bit more then Rec.709- so how on earth does he see all additional colors?) than studios which have access to RAW camera assets and actually can see what they do on properly calibrated e.g. 2K nits monitor :)
Studios, you and all others know nothing about HDR- he is HDR-Gandalf, master of fake HDR which will soon rule the world :) He has done impossible- 8bit Rec.709 to real 10bit Rec.2020. You can shoot now with anything, e.g. phone, send it to him and he will make amazing 10K HDR master from it. Looks like RED, Sony and Arri etc. are out of business.

On more time- moderators please clean this thread. Delete all from last post about x265/ffmpeg commands.

Find the movies and watch it, then you can buy me a beer.

[Asmodian]

Really?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXiVwgLQR7A

I didn't know Avatar were not blue. Yet another funny doomer. They don't stop appearing !

Everything i show is either YT or jpeg images, if you watch the native stream it looks 10 times better, but im sure you didn't know that either.

Show me Avatar looking better and we continue to talk, otherwise you are another kolak guy to me.

Very convincing reply. I had no idea YT looked worse than the native stream. :rolleyes:

I was simply commenting on what I saw in your examples posted here. "blue" is not one color, there are a lot of shades of blue and your process seems to change the color A LOT. If I had a calibration that was that off in hue I would call it a failed calibration and not use it to watch anything. If you don't care what color things are as long as they are still "blue" or "red" or "green" then OK.

[musicvideos4k]

Very convincing reply. I had no idea YT looked worse than the native stream. :rolleyes:

I was simply commenting on what I saw in your examples posted here. "blue" is not one color, there are a lot of shades of blue and your process seems to change the color A LOT. If I had a calibration that was that off in hue I would call it a failed calibration and not use it to watch anything. If you don't care what color things are as long as they are still "blue" or "red" or "green" then OK.


OMG you are worse than the other guy. HOW THE HELL you know what BLUE is an AVATAR if it's a freaking fantasy computer animated creature? The HDR makes more gamut over the same blue color, there's no perfect BLUE for the HDR gamut, if it's blue and it's more "HDRISH" then it's just fine. When it's red and it's a nicer RED with expanded gamut then it's also fine.

See why people like you never do anything creative and innovative AT ALL? because you think the wrong way everything, thinking there's something perfect that "fits" when you are talking about being creative and animated creatures for Christ sake.

BUT WAIT, if the FOX guys tones the BLUE as they like , then it will be PERFECT, right? Because that's how you think. A little self respect.

Youtube is not what i told you to watch, find my movies and watch the actual streams.

Movies are toned in BT. 2020 , you can setup DCI-P3 or even use any TV color reproduction and it will look just fine.


Now go to the street and feel the air for a while, don't tell me air isn't good either because it feels different on every country.

:devil:

[Groucho2004]

the problem is you and anybody here knows how to do it.
Do what? And, if anybody here knows how do do "it", why would that be a problem?
The problem is you see things "thinking" they do it better becauseWhat?


At this stage it would seem that you just produce sentences with randomly chosen words. Again, you announced about 15 times that you would never post here again because nobody understands you, yet you keep posting your drivel and insults. You seem desperate to receive some validation for your colouring experiments but I can assure you that you won't get it here.