HDR on Youtube - next big thing? Requirements?

[Axel]

Here.

What do you think?

[jonpais]

1 hour ago, Axel said:

Here.

What do you think?

There's no box for 'super interested, but haven't updated anything yet.'

[Justin Bacle]

Same as 4K, 3D or HFR distribution... don't really care. But when I'll see it in theaters I'll be able to say something interesting about it.

[BookMark]

the TV industry version of HDR, to my simple mind, is just a way of setting minimum requirement for brightness to simulate real life bright objects. i do welcome it after seeing some examples on HDR TV sets. Much less gimmicky compared to 3D and VR.

i tried the Youtube HDR video on my TV (HDR compatible), but i believe google is restricting HDR mode only on Chromecast Ultra, i.e. native TV app did not go into HDR mode. 

[hmcindie]

I don't get it. I've had great contrast since I bought a Pioneer Kuro plasma ages ago. Soooo... I'm supposed to buy a shitty lcd with a lower contrast to see "hdr"?

[markr041]

I produced an HDR video, edited in Resolve and followed Youtube's instructions to the letter. When i uploaded the 10bit, 4:4:4 REC 2020 DNxHR with metadata signaling HDR injected by Resolve video to Youtube, Youtube did not recognize it as HDR. So it did transcode it and it can be streamed, but it is all washed out in SDR and viewed on a tv in HDR mode it is colorful in an odd way compared to the original. Early days.

[Kisaha]

Very early, but it is here to stay. As of the TV HDR, people have to realize that cheap models of 2015-2016 have NO real HDR. Actually, for 2015 only 3 "normal priced" Samsungs, 2 Sonys e.t.c had real HDR, plus, the consortium has something like "ultimate HDR", which is going to be the HDR to get for the next couple of years.

Next Christmas, will probably be right to acquire such a TV, with maybe prepared to accept the next gen 4K HDR consoles and hardware, right now it is either very expensive, or not worth it. The standards are kind of liquid right now.

Do yoy do HDR on post? What is the procedure?

[Axel]

36 minutes ago, markr041 said:

Early days.

Yes. But a few years from now - three, four? - all our videos may look faded, who knows. Right, you can't make your stuff future-proof really, and for most videos it isn't worth the headaches. But for some it is.

 

30 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Do yoy do HDR on post? What is the procedure?

I wouldn't know how to monitor it. Perhaps it's sufficient to keep an ungraded flat 10-bit or raw version of your edit. Is that so?

[Policar]

I've seen demos of cutting edge HDR displays. Unfortunately, a small screen screen consumes nearly as much power as a small house (due to the need for a bank of air conditioners behind the unit) to cool it. But the image is unbelievable. Much bigger jump from HDTV to HDR than from 1080p to 4k. As big as SD to HD, easily.

The high end first-gen sets are likely very impressive so it's good to see YouTube pushing the technology. It does seem immature. The ecosystem is very immature. But HDR is mind-blowing. 

[Inazuma]

What cameras can record in HDR?

Why is a HDR screen required to display HDR when you could just bake the dynamic range into a normal video file?

[TheRenaissanceMan]

Basics on what HDR means in terms of display spec:

https://www.cnet.com/news/what-is-hdr-for-tvs-and-why-should-you-care/
https://www.cnet.com/news/how-hdr-works/

[Policar]

1 hour ago, Inazuma said:

What cameras can record in HDR?

Why is a HDR screen required to display HDR when you could just bake the dynamic range into a normal video file?

The camera spec I believe is 15 stops, but I saw film and F65 footage that looked fine as HDR.

That's similar to asking why an HD screen is required to view HD when you can downscale to SD. Truth is, tone mapping only goes so far. With HDR, it's the difference between listening to a very compressed (dynamic range compressed while mastering, not MP3 compressed but that too) track on your iPhone with bad headphones vs being at the concert live. It's the difference between a cheesy tone mapped image and being there. It's really incredible and difficult to describe because no screens exist now that can approximate the high end test beds.

Imagine that the image you're seeing of a day exterior isn't an image, but instead a window, with as much contrast as your eye can see and as many colors. Or even colors that you have never seen before. The sun can be so bright on an HDR set that it's unpleasant to look at. Imagine if your tv could get as bright as looking into a 60w bulb and as black as pure darkness. Sure you can compress that range, but why would you want to?

[Mat Mayer]

Interesting topic, thanks for the links explaining it. One links to this which may also be helpful https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7126552

I was set on getting the GH5 but if HDR takes off and it doesn't tick all the boxes we may have an issue. There is also Dolby Vision which I think means 12 bit (and other things). I don't think 8k will come to the mass market, instead smaller tweaks/improvements are more likely like HDR. This is possibly because it is taking so long for 4k to take hold.  

If it is going to be the next big thing hope we see more talk about it here.

Has anyone heard anything about when Youtube will accept H.265 uploads?

[markr041]

REC709 version of HDR video mentioned above:

https://vimeo.com/190925903

HDR version uploaded to Youtube:

https://youtu.be/0c--s8UMb0g

Recorded from 10bit 4:2:2 Vlog L 12-stop HDMI stream from GH4 to Atomos Shogun Inferno recorded in ProRes HQ. Edited in Resolve in REC202 with Resolve HDR color management and rendered in 12bit DNxHR 444. Monitored in HDR on the Shogun Inferno in HDR (10bit, REC2020, 1500 nits).

 

[jonpais]

3 hours ago, markr041 said:

REC709 version of HDR video mentioned above:

https://vimeo.com/190925903

HDR version uploaded to Youtube:

https://youtu.be/0c--s8UMb0g

Recorded from 10bit 4:2:2 Vlog L 12-stop HDMI stream from GH4 to Atomos Shogun Inferno recorded in ProRes HQ. Edited in Resolve in REC202 with Resolve HDR color management and rendered in 12bit DNxHR 444. Monitored in HDR on the Shogun Inferno in HDR (10bit, REC2020, 1500 nits).

 

When viewed on my late 2013 iMac, the YouTube picture is dull and lacking any true whites or blacks. Have you figured out what the problem is? Other videos I've seen in HDR look fine.

[Axel]

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

When viewed on my late 2013 iMac, the YouTube picture is dull and lacking any true whites or blacks. Have you figured out what the problem is? Other videos I've seen in HDR look fine.

That's what I expected. The rec709 or sRGB image we usually see compresses the dynamic. The sky in this HDR-image would usually be 1000 x brighter than the houses' faces:

... but they are almost the same.

Also, in an additive color space, brightness (the white-point) comes from full saturation of RGB. The shadows are 'made' by little saturation. In a compressed 8-bit world this means that the midtones have to provide 90% of the color differentiation. That's why SDR (standard dynamic range) images have little vibrance.

I expected the HDR-clip to look that flat, and I can only guess that it will resemble the rec709 image when viewed on an HDR display. So my question again: If I want to make (10-bit or raw) video HDR-futureproof without being able to judge it right now, should I shoot log and keep this ungraded version for later?

OR is there a workflow (like ACES? I have to admit, I haven't fully understood this so far), by which you can grade in LDR for HDR, and in three years everything looks like sRGB, only better?

OR is HDR vs. SDR comparable to HD vs. SD in another way too? We all know that a DVD on a good modern TV set doesn't look upscaled five to twenty times. It isn't as brilliant, right. Until three years or so, my mother still had an old tube TV, native SD, and the image looked worse in every respect, even from a distance. Maybe the future Dolbyvision TV sets treat our poor old 709-trickle equally lovingly?

[markr041]

8 hours ago, jonpais said:

When viewed on my late 2013 iMac, the YouTube picture is dull and lacking any true whites or blacks. Have you figured out what the problem is? Other videos I've seen in HDR look fine.

Yes, you are not watching the video in HDR mode. Even if you had an HDR viewing device Youtube is not communicating to the viewing device that the video is HDR. When viewers force their HDR TV to HDR mode the colors emerge. Any nice looking videos that claim to be HDR that you see in SDR are not HDR. In HDR mode the video looks better than the SDR version I also posted, on SDR devices the HDR video looks flat and colorless. HDR seen on SDR screens is not like 4K seen on lower resolution screens, which looks more than fine. 

[Policar]

HDR is not tone mapping for video. It's video created for displays with much much greater brightness and contrast ratios than you've ever seen. 

If you don't have an HDR display what you're watching is irrelevant. It's either SDR or a weird flat image. If you're curious go to a trade show.

[Damphousse]

20 hours ago, Policar said:

I've seen demos of cutting edge HDR displays. Unfortunately, a small screen screen consumes nearly as much power as a small house (due to the need for a bank of air conditioners behind the unit) to cool it. But the image is unbelievable. Much bigger jump from HDTV to HDR than from 1080p to 4k. As big as SD to HD, easily.

The high end first-gen sets are likely very impressive so it's good to see YouTube pushing the technology. It does seem immature. The ecosystem is very immature. But HDR is mind-blowing. 

Cool.  Thanks for posting.  I haven't seen true HDR content on a true HDR display.  I look forward to it based on what you are saying.

I could probably agree it is the next big thing.  But the last big thing, 4k, still has minuscule penetration.  Honestly HDR might be a somewhat mature consumer product before 4k is in even 50% of the US households.  4k TVs are already selling for peanuts, relatively, and I don't know if we are even at 10% market penetration.

There are larger 4k TVs selling for a fraction of what I bought my 50" plasma smart TV for just a few years ago, but I am in no way tempted to upgrade.  The contrast and colors on the plasma are great and I never hunger for more resolution.  Honestly the compressed streaming shows are what need more resolution and less compression.  Current content isn't even utilizing the full capabilities of my HD TV.

Personally I would tell anyone who is interested in upgrading to stick to 1080p and wait for 4k AND HDR to mature.  It is crazy to throw out a 60" TV every 4-5 years.  A TVs lifespan should be measured in decades.  We have become a truly wasteful society.

[tugela]

Unlikely. 4K enabled sets are the bulk of models on sale today. Anyone buying a mid to high end set is going to have a 4K screen. In a few years those will be the only screens you can buy other than bargain basement models. HDR will NOT be a mature feature before 4K is.

Anyone who is buying a new TV and buys a 1080p screen is being very shortsighted.