HDR issues with specific discs and displays, or, "Why is this disc so dark?" (1 Viewer)

[sbjork]

While it would be lovely if HDR was a set-and-forget, one-size fits all proposition, we all know that simply isn't the case. Thanks to variances in how different displays are manufactured, there's no consistency in how they implement HDR, and results can vary wildly. One frequent complaint is that a given UHD looks too dark when watching in HDR mode, or even after converting HDR to SDR. While it's true that some HDR grades really do seem dim compared to standard Blu-ray, in other cases, it's really the display itself that's at fault. When a display tone maps the content of the disc to match its own peak brightness level, it may do so by darkening the image to compensate for its own inability to display the actual peak brightness of the disc. So, the HDR version will look darker on that display, but that's not the fault of the disc.

Even the best possible tone mapping solution isn't perfect. JVC's frame-by-frame tone mapping is the best in the business, but it's still not set-and-forget. I have a calibrated RS2000, and while the tone mapping works for most discs without needing adjustment, occasionally something does look too dark. That's why JVC offers different mapping levels. Sometimes, I have to adjust it to "High" to compensate. (There's a "Low" setting as well, but I've never needed to use that.)

If there's any complaint about HDR in a thread regarding specific title on UHD, it's often about the disc looking too dark. Trying to solve that problem usually involves drilling down into questions about the specific display, source, and settings involved, so it may sidetrack the thread a bit. So, if a given disc looks too dim on your display, post any questions about that over here instead of in the other threads. This is your new home for HDR-related frustrations, and hopefully another member will have some suggestions for you. To quote Harry Tuttle, we're all in it together.

 

[OliverK]

Even the best possible tone mapping solution isn't perfect. JVC's frame-by-frame tone mapping is the best in the business, but it's still not set-and-forget. I have a calibrated RS2000, and while the tone mapping works for most discs without needing adjustment, occasionally something does look too dark. That's why JVC offers different mapping levels. Sometimes, I have to adjust it to "High" to compensate. (There's a "Low" setting as well, but I've never needed to use that.)

JVC has the best tone-mapping currently found in projectors and indeed low is very rarely needed but in cases like the one mentioned by RAH where highlights or whites look blown out it is worth it to try low. Another movie where this will probably help is The Meg - not that anybody would watch that one over here but I thought I would mention it for a friend

 

[sbjork]

JVC has the best tone-mapping currently found in projectors and indeed low is very rarely needed but in cases like the one mentioned by RAH where highlights or whites look blown out it is worth it to try low. Another movie where this will probably help is The Meg - not that anybody would watch that one over here but I thought I would mention it for a friend

I actually haven't watched The Meg since before JVC rolled out the first version of its frame-by-frame firmware. I remember that I did have to adjust the settings a bit, but that was still true of a lot of films when using the older firmware. I'm still doubtful that I'd prefer the new one set to Low for it, but I'll give it a try when I fire up the Casa Bjork Home Theatre later today.

The only disc that I haven't been able to solve to my satisfaction is the equally notorious Unforgiven. I even tried switching the lamp power to Low, and that gave me better results, but still less than perfect ones. I don't think that disc will ever work and play well with any projector.

 

[Robert Harris]

I actually haven't watched The Meg since before JVC rolled out the first version of its frame-by-frame firmware. I remember that I did have to adjust the settings a bit, but that was still true of a lot of films when using the older firmware. I'm still doubtful that I'd prefer the new one set to Low for it, but I'll give it a try when I fire up the Casa Bjork Home Theatre later today.

The only disc that I haven't been able to solve to my satisfaction is the equally notorious Unforgiven. I even tried switching the lamp power to Low, and that gave me better results, but still less than perfect ones. I don't think that disc will ever work and play well with any projector.

Unforgiven is early HDR, actually set up by one of the Lumiere boys. It’s one of those “dark as a bat’s groin at midnight” presentations.

I’ve never been able to distinguish who the actors are in some scenes.

Currently running a JVC RS3000, calibrated with upgraded firmware by Keven Miller November 2021.

 

[bujaki]

Unforgiven is early HDR, actually set up by one of the Lumiere boys. It’s one of those “dark as a bat’s groin at midnight” presentations.

I’ve never been able to distinguish who the actors are in some scenes.

Currently running a JVC RS3000, calibrated with upgraded firmware by Keven Miller November 2021.

Are you sure it wasn't Louis Le Prince, sometime before the Brothers?

 

[sbjork]

Unforgiven is early HDR, actually set up by one of the Lumiere boys. It’s one of those “dark as a bat’s groin at midnight” presentations.

I’ve never been able to distinguish who the actors are in some scenes.

Currently running a JVC RS3000, calibrated with upgraded firmware by Keven Miller November 2021.

Unforgiven was always dark as a bat's groin by design, with or without HDR, but it really causes issues with the HDR grade. That's one film that shouldn't even have had one. It's one of the few discs that I own that makes me wish that I had a 4K OLED to watch it on, instead of a projector.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Unforgiven was always dark as a bat's groin by design, with or without HDR, but it really causes issues with the HDR grade. That's one film that shouldn't even have had one. It's one of the few discs that I own that makes me wish that I had a 4K OLED to watch it on, instead of a projector.

Right, I watched the movie a couple of times in a movie theater and it was always dark by design. When I watch the movie on my 4K OLED, the 4K disc video presentation looks like I remembered it in a movie theater.

 

[titch]

Right, I watched the movie a couple of times in a movie theater and it was always dark by design. When I watch the movie on my 4K OLED, the 4K disc video presentation looks like I remembered it in a movie theater.

Unforgiven from Warner Bros. is unquestionably the most problematic of the 300 4K UHD titles I've purchased so far, on my projector set-up. Paramount's Arrival is also extremely dark as well as Lionsgate's The Green Knight. Those two I did see theatrically and thought they were dark with Christie projectors. I've owned Unforgiven since laserdisc and it's never been as dark as it is on the 4K UHD. In addition, there is a huge difference in colour grading, between the remastered blu-ray (which is not dark) and the 4K UHD, which is so dark, I've previously discussed this on the thread. The blu-ray has unnaturally pink/red skin tones, while the colour on the 4K UHD looks more realistic.

Unforgiven is one title Warner Bros. needs to go back and redo. None of their subsequent 4K UHD titles look anything like this one, although their 4K UHD releases are not as projector-friendly as titles from other companies.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Unforgiven from Warner Bros. is unquestionably the most problematic of the 300 4K UHD titles I've purchased so far, on my projector set-up. Paramount's Arrival is also extremely dark as well as Lionsgate's The Green Knight. Those two I did see theatrically and thought they were dark with Christie projectors. I've owned Unforgiven since laserdisc and it's never been as dark as it is on the 4K UHD. In addition, there is a huge difference in colour grading, between the remastered blu-ray (which is not dark) and the 4K UHD, which is so dark, I've previously discussed this on the thread. The blu-ray has unnaturally pink/red skin tones, while the colour on the 4K UHD looks more realistic.

Unforgiven is one title Warner Bros. needs to go back and redo. None of their subsequent 4K UHD titles look anything like this one, although their 4K UHD releases are not as projector-friendly as titles from other companies.

I seriously doubt, Warner will go back and redo the 4K UHD for a much smaller niche market of an already niche market. Money can be better spent on other titles not released yet on 4K UHD.

 

[OliverK]

I seriously doubt, Warner will go back and redo the 4K UHD for a much smaller niche market of an already niche market. Money can be better spent on other titles not released yet on 4K UHD.

I would much rather see a UHD release of The Outlaw Josey Wales than a re-release of Unforgiven.

 

[OliverK]

Unforgiven is early HDR, actually set up by one of the Lumiere boys. It’s one of those “dark as a bat’s groin at midnight” presentations.

I’ve never been able to distinguish who the actors are in some scenes.

Currently running a JVC RS3000, calibrated with upgraded firmware by Keven Miller November 2021.

It certainly isn't the calibration as Kevin Miller knows his stuff. I recently played with external tone-mapping on an RS3000 and in the end found out that the best result actually looked pretty close to what can be achieved with an OLED TV. The only problem is that it still didn't look good - neither on the projector nor on the OLED.

 

[sbjork]

It certainly isn't the calibration as Kevin Miller knows his stuff. I recently played with external tone-mapping on an RS3000 and in the end found out that the best result actually looked pretty close to what can be achieved with an OLED TV. The only problem is that it still didn't look good - neither on the projector nor on the OLED.

Like I said, I only got somewhere when I switched my lamp to low -- and it still didn't look that good, just a little better. In the case of Unforgiven, there's no doubt that the issues are with the disc, not the display. I think that there's an argument to be made that the same thing is true of Eternals. Most other discs that I've seen complaints about lately, that's not the case.

I'd also dearly love to see Pale Rider on UHD, but I'm skeptical about what they would do with an HDR grade on that one.

 

[titch]

I seriously doubt, Warner will go back and redo the 4K UHD for a much smaller niche market of an already niche market. Money can be better spent on other titles not released yet on 4K UHD.

I agree that Warner Bros. most likely won't redo Unforgiven. However, other companies have already redone previous released 4K UHD titles with new masters - The Witch, Halloween, Dawn Of The Dead and Dog Soldiers. So, it's not unheard of.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I agree that Warner Bros. most likely won't redo Unforgiven. However, other companies have already redone previous released 4K UHD titles with new masters - The Witch, Halloween, Dawn Of The Dead and Dog Soldiers. So, it's not unheard of.

Horror movies sell like no other film genre, no matter how many times you release them.

 

[Dave H]

I have a Chad B calibrated NP5 (RS1100). I've been using it for the last 6 weeks and I'm very, very pleased. My room is a black pit with a 9 foot wide ST100 scope screen. I'm using -2 for HDR setting and Low Lamp. I find the APL high enough and it's really nice to see highlights bright and resolved. HDR can truly looking stunning at times depending the movie, of course.

Prior to this, I had an RS440 using the Panasonic 820 for SDR2020. That did a decent job with tone mapping, but the DTM on the NP5 is in another league by quite a bit. It's also improved in every other area.

 

[OliverK]

I have a Chad B calibrated NP5 (RS1100). I've been using it for the last 6 weeks and I'm very, very pleased. My room is a black pit with a 9 foot wide ST100 scope screen. I'm using -2 for HDR setting and Low Lamp. I find the APL high enough and it's really nice to see highlights bright and resolved. HDR can truly looking stunning at times depending the movie, of course.

Prior to this, I had an RS440 using the Panasonic 820 for SDR2020. That did a decent job with tone mapping, but the DTM on the NP5 is in another league by quite a bit. It's also improved in every other area.

With your RS440 you may have wondered what you were missing.
Now that you got the NP5 you have your answer.
Good decision to get Chad B over - he knows his stuff.

 

[sbjork]

With rare exceptions like Unforgiven, I've always used the high lamp level for HDR with my previous-generations RS2000. That, plus I do have a 1.3 gain screen. It's a trade-off that slightly elevates the black levels as well, but it does give me HDR highlights that are a bit brighter, which pays off with some dazzling HDR grades like for Pacific Rim. Plus, I use the color filter, so it helps offset the light loss from having that in place. The other reason why I chose a high gain screen was for 3D. Using that, along with high lamp level, I get reasonably watchable results.

But regardless of generation, JVC's frame-by-frame tone mapping algorithms are the real game changer. There are other manufacturers out there making great hardware, but until they catch up with JVC on the firmware side, it's the only way to fly.

 

[Dave H]

Edit to above: Using mostly -1 for HDR although sometimes "Auto". But as I understand it, Auto reads the disc's metadata which may or may not be accurate. However, I noticed Auto is usually matching -1.

I have tried -2 for extra highlight expansion although I think I like the higher APL with -1.

 

[Kaskade1309]

Can someone else who owns Scream (2022) on 4K Blu-ray (Region 1/A) confirm something for me? I had asked about this in a separate thread, in which a member shared his thoughts regarding why what I am about to explain isn't necessarily a "problem" when talking about HDR, but I wanted to see if I could get some other thoughts/opinions on it...

We recently received this disc in the mail from Best Buy after waiting for it to come down in price a little, and I was shocked when I ran it through my system -- the HDR10 layer (our Samsung display doesn't support Dolby Vision) didn't seem to pop at all in terms of highlights or extreme light output, instead looking very much like the 1080p Blu-ray we originally rented (and which I remember) with regard to color saturation and "punch."

When I checked the metadata information on my Panasonic DP-UB9000, I was surprised to see that the average nit output wasn't even reaching 200 -- it indicated, on average, something like 197 nits or so if I'm not mistaken, which would have explained why the disc looked kind of "blah" to me.

What's more -- and not that I'm complaining about this -- there was little to no blooming occurring in the letterbox areas of my edge lit screen, which is NOT the norm when we view discs with HDR, also indicative of the transfer looking much darker than usual.

Has anyone else noticed this with the Scream 5 (aka Scream 2022) 4K Blu-ray? Could this have been an issue with the title's HDR10 layer? Doesn't seem like any online reviews are having anything to say about this disc looking dull without any real HDR highlights, but from everything I gathered, the reviewers were running the Dolby Vision layer; the only review I saw that mentioned anything about this was on YouTube (I think it was MovieGuy).

 

[sbjork]

Can someone else who owns Scream (2022) on 4K Blu-ray (Region 1/A) confirm something for me? I had asked about this in a separate thread, in which a member shared his thoughts regarding why what I am about to explain isn't necessarily a "problem" when talking about HDR, but I wanted to see if I could get some other thoughts/opinions on it...

We recently received this disc in the mail from Best Buy after waiting for it to come down in price a little, and I was shocked when I ran it through my system -- the HDR10 layer (our Samsung display doesn't support Dolby Vision) didn't seem to pop at all in terms of highlights or extreme light output, instead looking very much like the 1080p Blu-ray we originally rented (and which I remember) with regard to color saturation and "punch."

When I checked the metadata information on my Panasonic DP-UB9000, I was surprised to see that the average nit output wasn't even reaching 200 -- it indicated, on average, something like 197 nits or so if I'm not mistaken, which would have explained why the disc looked kind of "blah" to me.

What's more -- and not that I'm complaining about this -- there was little to no blooming occurring in the letterbox areas of my edge lit screen, which is NOT the norm when we view discs with HDR, also indicative of the transfer looking much darker than usual.

Has anyone else noticed this with the Scream 5 (aka Scream 2022) 4K Blu-ray? Could this have been an issue with the title's HDR10 layer? Doesn't seem like any online reviews are having anything to say about this disc looking dull without any real HDR highlights, but from everything I gathered, the reviewers were running the Dolby Vision layer; the only review I saw that mentioned anything about this was on YouTube (I think it was MovieGuy).

Are you talking about the MaxFALL number? 197/200 isn't necessarily unusual. It all depends on the disc. Blade Runner 2049 is even lower than that. I'm HDR10 only, since I run a projector, but on the other hand, mine does frame-by-frame tone mapping, so I might get different results. I don't have Scream to check, though. But not all discs are going to give you the "punch" that you're talking about. The UHD for Out of the Blue has an HDR grade that's nearly indistinguishable from the Blu-ray. That's not always a bad thing. Granted, that's an older movie shot on film, while Scream was probably captured digitally, and you might expect something more dramatic. But that's up to the cinematographer, or whoever handles the grade for home video.