| archer9234 said: Does anyone really care about HDR, that much? You're gonna tell me all of a sudden 1080p looks like shit. And I'm gonna be blown away with HDR. The example picture basically looks like someone just lowered the contrast, in the SDR one. This is basically like them just adding another speaker in surround sound setups. IF HDR was sooo important. Why wasn't it done when HDMI was first mapped out. The article even says "much closer to real life". So is there gonna be another upgrade to HDR in 20 years? UHDR? |
It was already mapped out when HDMI came out. HDMI already supports 10 and 12 bit color since 1.3 The problem was LCD display tech was not good enough to get anywhere close to CRT tvs. Deep color (10/12 bit), Super white, x.v.color all were present in the ps3 already.
It was supposed to be in 4K tvs from the start, yet manufacturers jumped the gun as it was a lot easier to manufactor hi-res 8 bit panels than 10 bit color panels. It's the same situation again as HD ready vs full HD. They even started selling 4K tvs before HDMI 2.0 standard was set and currently there are still 2 HDR formats competing.
HDR is a much bigger advantage than an extra speaker, more like going from 8 bit to 16 bit sound. Then yes we'll have another step up to 12 bit color and full rec.2020, like going from 16 bit to 24 bit sound. It will be less noticeable.
Now some comparisons:
Today’s TVs use the so-called BT.709 color gamut, which can reproduce only around 35% of the colors that the human eye can perceive. The first HDR-enabled TVs are capable of reproducing most of the DCI P3 color space that cinemas use. DCI P3 covers approximately 54% of the colors we can see. But the industry has proposed a new far more ambitious BT.2020 color gamut that covers almost 76%!
This new HDR standard is said to cover at least 93% of DCI P3, or about 50% of the human color vision, up from 35%.
