HDR/Dolby Vision discussion for elevated black levels & calibration issues. (1 Viewer)

[ghostwind]

Damn! I wish they would have released a new Blu-ray alongside the 4K. This sucks in a major way. No purchase for me unfortunately, and there will probably never be a good 1080p Blu-ray. Sad what UHD is doing to great films..

 

[Tino]

Sad what UHD is doing to great films..

Huh??

 

[ghostwind]

Huh??

I've posted before my thoughts on UHD. The problem with the spec/standard is that no consumer display device can adhere to it, so each one does things differently in terms of reproducing accurate/proper colors and black/white levels, etc. So it's all over the place, and thus not reliable. You cannot calibrate any consumer device for HDR/DV/etc., so you never know what you are looking it, if it's correct, etc. With 1080p Blu-rays, you CAN calibrate and know that what you are seeing is exactly what was intended when the disc was mastered. 1080p standards can be reproduced even on a $500 display, while 4k UHD on 0.

I'm happy that 2001 also includes a new, remastered Blu-ray for example (as do many), and am always hoping that any new 4K (like this Superman one) would include the same. As it doesn't, it sucks..Same thing happened with Blade Runner 4K UHD.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I've posted before my thoughts on UHD. The problem with the spec/standard is one that no consumer display device can adhere to it, so each one does things differently in terms of colors and black/white levels, so it's all over the place, and not reliable. You cannot calibrate any consumer device for HDR/DV/etc. So you never know what you are looking it, if it's correct, etc. With 1080p Blu-rays, you CAN calibrate and know you are seeing exactly what was intended when the disc was mastered. 1080p standards can be reproduced but even a $500 display. 4k UHD by 0 displays.

I'm happy that 2001 also includes a new, remastered Blu-ray for example (as do many), and am always hoping that any new 4K (like this Superman one) would include the same. As it doesn't, it sucks..Same thing happened with Blade Runner 4K UHD.

That's not the format's fault, it's the fault of Warner not doing the right thing because they cut costs and didn't supply us with the new Blu-ray instead of some old stock from the previous BD release.

Edit: I've moved some posts from two other threads as they were being sidetracked due to discussion about elevated black levels and the ability or inability to properly calibrate HDR/Dolby Vision to compensate for any type of issues like elevated black levels.

 

[Dave H]

I've posted before my thoughts on UHD. The problem with the spec/standard is one that no consumer display device can adhere to it, so each one does things differently in terms of colors and black/white levels, so it's all over the place, and not reliable. You cannot calibrate any consumer device for HDR/DV/etc. So you never know what you are looking it, if it's correct, etc. With 1080p Blu-rays, you CAN calibrate and know you are seeing exactly what was intended when the disc was mastered. 1080p standards can be reproduced but even a $500 display. 4k UHD by 0 displays.

I'm happy that 2001 also includes a new, remastered Blu-ray for example (as do many), and am always hoping that any new 4K (like this Superman one) would include the same. As it doesn't, it sucks..Same thing happened with Blade Runner 4K UHD.

I partially agree with that you're saying - HDR10 should have been rolled out completely differently. The way the industry rolled out things with this was a mess.

However, with much improved tone mapping solutions (such as Panasonic 820) I really like what I am seeing with UHD BD. And you can calibrate color accurately (P3 with the 2020 container) as well as set black level properly. And the improved resolution and encoding is a treat for those of us with larger screens in particular. (I use a FP set-up). Maybe something like a Dolby Vision/HDR layer that maps to your display's peak brightness and a bt2020/SDR option would have been ideal for UHD BD? But it is what it is. But let's also keep in mind there was no standard gamma for Blu-ray; they've been mastered anywhere from 2.2 to 2.4. Bt1886 came out several years ago as an attempt to standard based on a display's black level ability, but I'm not even sure how many new BDs are actually mastered to that level.

Every UHD BD disc I've looked at is an improvement over the remastered BD including The Matrix, Halloween (1978) Unforgiven, Goodfellas...and by all accounts 2001 from what I read as I still have to see that one.

 

[ghostwind]

That's not the format's fault, it's the fault of Warner not doing the right thing by cutting costs and not supplying us with the new Blu-ray instead of some old stock from the previous BD release.

Correct, but I was replying to the "Huh??" reply to my "Sad what UHD is doing to great films..".

The format's fault is that it's making things look "like a box of chocolates". You never know what you're gonna get with 4K UHD.

 

[ghostwind]

I partially agree with that you're saying - HDR10 should have been rolled out completely differently. The way the industry rolled out things with this was a mess.

However, with much improved tone mapping solutions (such as Panasonic 820) I really like what I am seeing with UHD BD. And you can calibrate color accurately (P3 with the 2020 container) as well as set black level properly. And the improved resolution and encoding is a treat for those of us with larger screens in particular. (I use a FP set-up). Maybe something like a Dolby Vision/HDR layer that maps to your display's peak brightness and a bt2020/SDR option would have been ideal for UHD BD? But it is what it is. But let's also keep in mind there was no standard gamma for Blu-ray; they've been mastered anywhere from 2.2 to 2.4. Bt1886 came out several years ago as an attempt to standard based on a display's black level ability, but I'm not even sure how many new BDs are actually mastered to that level.

Every UHD BD disc I've looked at is an improvement over the remastered BD including The Matrix, Halloween (1978) Unforgiven, Goodfellas...and by all accounts 2001 from what I read as I still have to see that one.

I don't want to hijack this thread and go off topic. There's plenty of stuff out there to read r.e. calibrating UHD - it's not working in consumer displays (trust me, I tried it myself over and over until I learned to give up), but this one article by Steve Shaw is a good start: https://www.lightillusion.com/hdr_calibration.html

If studios are not including updated Blu-rays for cost cutting measures, that's a bad thing IMO going forward.

 

[Tino]

Correct, but I was replying to the "Huh??" reply to my "Sad what UHD is doing to great films..".

The format's fault is that it's making things look "like a box of chocolates". You never know what you're gonna get with 4K UHD.

Thanks for explaining your opinion. I don’t agree as I’m very satisfied with my UHD purchases.

 

[ghostwind]

I partially agree with that you're saying - HDR10 should have been rolled out completely differently. The way the industry rolled out things with this was a mess.

However, with much improved tone mapping solutions (such as Panasonic 820) I really like what I am seeing with UHD BD. And you can calibrate color accurately (P3 with the 2020 container) as well as set black level properly. And the improved resolution and encoding is a treat for those of us with larger screens in particular. (I use a FP set-up). Maybe something like a Dolby Vision/HDR layer that maps to your display's peak brightness and a bt2020/SDR option would have been ideal for UHD BD? But it is what it is. But let's also keep in mind there was no standard gamma for Blu-ray; they've been mastered anywhere from 2.2 to 2.4. Bt1886 came out several years ago as an attempt to standard based on a display's black level ability, but I'm not even sure how many new BDs are actually mastered to that level.

Every UHD BD disc I've looked at is an improvement over the remastered BD including The Matrix, Halloween (1978) Unforgiven, Goodfellas...and by all accounts 2001 from what I read as I still have to see that one.

I don't want to hijack this thread and go off topic. There's plenty of stuff out there to read r.e. calibrating UHD - it's not working in consumer displays (trust me, I tried it myself over and over until I learned to give up), but this one article by Steve Shaw is a good start: https://www.lightillusion.com/hdr_calibration.html

If studios are not including updated Blu-rays for cost cutting measures, that's a bad thing IMO going forward. One reason why 4K discs look better, is well because they are newer. When you have a 4K and 1080p Blu-ray released at the same time, like 2001, you won't see much difference.

 

[Dave H]

That's not the format's fault, it's the fault of Warner not doing the right thing because they cut costs and didn't supply us with the new Blu-ray instead of some old stock from the previous BD release.

I really haven't been super impressed with Warner's BD remasters. The Matrix remastered looked blown out. I think they are simply using some type of automated software to down convert HDR to SDR and there are some oddities to be sure. Even looking at the 2001 screencaps, it looks like some shadow crushing is happening on the remastered BD.

 

[Dave H]

I don't want to hijack this thread and go off topic. There's plenty of stuff out there to read r.e. calibrating UHD - it's not working in consumer displays (trust me, I tried it myself over and over until I learned to give up), but this one article by Steve Shaw is a good start: https://www.lightillusion.com/hdr_calibration.html

If studios are not including updated Blu-rays for cost cutting measures, that's a bad thing IMO going forward.

My set-up is calibrated by one of the very top full-time traveling calibrators in the country whose using $35,000 worth of calibration equipment. So good results are possible.

However, I go by my eyes versus what paper says at the end of the day and I keep selecting the UHD BD every time over the BD version and I have BOTH choices. If my eyes were to tell me otherwise, I have no problem going with a BD.

 

[ghostwind]

My set-up is calibrated by one of the very top full-time traveling calibrators in the country whose using $35,000 worth of calibration equipment. So good results are possible.

I know a few of them, and trust me, no amount of gear can calibrate something that is not possible. If you read that article I linked, and many others that are technical in nature, you will understand why.

However, I go by my eyes versus what paper says at the end of the day and I keep selecting the UHD BD every time over the BD version and I have BOTH choices. If my eyes were to tell me otherwise, I have no problem going with a BD.

That's fine, but realize it's subjective and not true to the master.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Was just able to preview the disc on a Sony OLED, and the difference between 4k projection and OLED is amazing. Gorgeous blacks, great whites, and wonderful shading.

I’d give up size for OLED on this one.

Thanks for confirming my impression on my OLED.

 

[dpippel]

On my LG OLED, I found black levels in many of the space shots slightly elevated and somewhat inconsistent. My panel is calibrated, but I had to drop brightness two clicks to compensate.

 

[Bill McCamy]

Was just able to preview the disc on a Sony OLED, and the difference between 4k projection and OLED is amazing. Gorgeous blacks, great whites, and wonderful shading.

I’d give up size for OLED on this one.

Perhaps this discovery warrants an addendum to the review?

 

[Dave H]

I know a few of them, and trust me, no amount of gear can calibrate something that is not possible. If you read that article I linked, and many others that are technical in nature, you will understand why.



That's fine, but realize it's subjective and not true to the master.

rec 2020 on a display cannot be calibrated? 6500K greyscale cannot be? MLL cannot be set? I don't think any calibrator would agree with you. I think there is some misunderstanding on your part. What's going to vary is the EOTF.

Blu-ray true to the original master? Ha, that's funny. And which gamma would that be? Rec 709 doesn't even come close to the gamut of film and the encoding on BD typically doesn't match what's possible on UHD BD. UHD BD is also 10 bit, BD 8 bit.

I have to ask: have you actually watched or compared the BD to a UHD? Or are you arguing from an armchair perspective?

 

[Robert Crawford]

On my LG OLED, I found black levels in many of the space shots slightly elevated and somewhat inconsistent. My panel is calibrated, but I had to drop brightness two clicks to compensate.

I wonder if some people are more sensitive to such issues as I never noticed that condition with my LG OLED?

 

[ghostwind]

On my LG OLED, I found black levels in many of the space shots slightly elevated and somewhat inconsistent. My panel is calibrated, but I had to drop brightness two clicks to compensate.

Yep. This is exactly one of the issues I’ve been posting about. Welcome to 4K UHD. All you can calibrate is the grayscale (at the expense of color accuracy). Compare black levels with the 1080p Blu-ray SDR.

 

[dpippel]

Yep. This is exactly one of the issues I’ve been posting about. Welcome to 4K UHD. All you can calibrate is the grayscale (at the expense of color accuracy). Compare black levels with the 1080p Blu-ray SDR.

I have. Same issue with black levels on the 1080p encode, but the 4K UHD definitely looks better.

 

[dpippel]

I wonder if some people are more sensitive to such issues as I never noticed that condition with my LG OLED?

I'll admit that I *am* very sensitive to black level, which is the main reason I chose an OLED panel over LCD. I also haven't watched this 4K UHD of 2001 in its entirety yet. I've only sampled various scenes to get a feel for what it looks like. While I'm mostly very pleased, the black level issues are there. Immediately after sampling 2001, I watched Blade Runner 2049 without the lowered brightness setting. Talk about inky blacks! Then again, BR 2049 is what I consider to be a reference 4K UHD title, both visually and aurally. Maybe I'm expecting too much from WB on 2001, and yes I do realize that they're miles apart as far as source material is concerned.