HDR on Youtube - next big thing? Requirements?

[Kisaha]

@Phil A yep, you are probably right, especially if it ain't true 10bit, I haven't read a lot about it except the Atomos marketing stuff but it makes sense for the price, still is a 19" monitor with good brightness for monitoring purposes (director's, focus puller monitor), inside the studio as an additional monitor (I am no pro colorist or editor so for most things it seems sufficient as a 3rd monitor, my other's are plain sRGB panels anyway), real broadcast monitors cost a leg and an arm, or two legs and an arm Somali wouldn't expect similar performance (true Such monitors go to 30.000€ at least). It is a recorder too!

It was in my "to buy" list for next year, but I may start with the Small HD Focus for the simple start, and take it from there.

[jonpais]

@Kisaha Professional colorists may scoff at the idea of using the Ninja Inferno as an editing monitor, but as of just last year, professional HDR monitors sold for as much as $250,000, and an affordable one could be had for about $30,000. I don't know whether I could get that much money for one of my arms or legs!  An HDR TV may be the way to go, and that's exactly what Nick Driftwood used for his film 'Isobel'. However, unless someone can convince me otherwise, at the present time, I believe the Ninja Inferno is still the way to go for monitoring HDR when recording with the GH5. The Focus is already dated tech, and I fully expect most of the major players to be offering HDR capable monitor/recorders in 2018.

Source

A little over seven years ago, it would have cost some $30K to get Resolve; now anyone can download Resolve Lite for free.

[jonpais]

Wolfcrow denigrates HDR, calling it 'old wine in a new bottle'. And it's true that consumer cameras have been able to shoot ten or more stops of dynamic range for a while now (supposedly the GH5 can capture as many as twelve). But up until quite recently, we haven't been able to actually see that tonality - our displays have been limited to 100 nits brightness and five, or at most, six stops or so of dynamic range, depending on whom you read. And it's only recently that 500 nits and beyond is becoming the new norm (iMac 27" 2017, 500 nits;  iPhone X, 726 nits). I'm not going to lie and say there aren't disputes over how brightness is actually measured, and it may well be that those incredible levels may only be able to achieved momentarily over a small portion of the screen, but so be it... But no way do I buy Wolfcrow's assertion that we should wait until our sets are capable of 10,000 nits to invest in the new tech, because even if we're only able to afford a display with a tenth of that brightness (1,000 nits), but are still able to realize a couple of stops gain in dynamic range, it's worth it to me. That's right - I'll settle for being able to see a mere nine stops of DR. I can wait until 2025 to see seventeen. Wolfcrow argues that even with today's brighter sets, you can't control the amount of ambient light in your viewing environment, which destroys any gains in DR. That clearly isn't true for everyone however. There must be at least ten people in the world who can view a Netflix program on an OLED screen in complete darkness without bright glossy white walls directly behind them. Of course, until I do a survey, I won't know for sure!

[Vesku]

26 minutes ago, jonpais said:

 I'll settle for being able to see a mere nine stops of DR. I can wait until 2025 to see seventeen.

Your LG OLED can show in theory the infinite amount of dynamic range in black room. For example from 0.001 Nits to 700 Nits = contrast ratio 700 000:1. It is about 20 steps of light intensity difference. Another thing is how much the files contains captured dynamic range and how coarse is the reproduction of that brightness scale. 10bit has less banding and smoother gradations than 8bit but the extreme whites and blacks are the same.

So there are at least 3 different factors of dynamic range:

1. captured (scene) dynamic range (GH5 about 12-13 stops, Cine camera 15 stops)

2. Display contrast ratio difference from black to white (LCD about 1:2000 and OLED 1:infinite).

3. Display/file ability to show smooth gradations between black/white and ability to show wide range of colors in all brightness levels (LCD better in whites, OLED better in dark tones).

To show extreme dynamic range we dont need super bright display. We can have better dyn range also by darkening the blackest black levels. It is the difference (contrast ratio) what matters.

[Kisaha]

As @Vesku mentions, HDR is different for different technologies, and I elaborate, with some added points on monitoring.

1) OLED isn't the Holy Grail, as what you earn on blacks, you loose on whites (brightness), and the difference is vast. That is why there are different standards depending the tech of ones monitor. I would say, there is space of improvement in all fields, as brightness of OLED ain't bright enough for all uses, and blacks of the others ain't black enough for most uses anyway. There are some other issues with OLED technology as of yet, too.

2) right now is almost impossible to find a right use for HDR content, it is a very limited market, and remember that a few posts ago I declared my certainty that HDR is here to stay,  up it ain't here yet. I still haven't delivered, not one, 4K video, I do not see myself delivering any 4K in 2018 either (not that they are 100% connected, just saying how the market works, mostly). Our TV channels (the big ones) just this year became full HD, and we deliver in 1080, 4:2:2 8bit.

3) There are NO computer monitors with true HDR, just Dell and Samsung gimmicks that do not even work semi-right [I could link a dozen review about "Dell HDR" and Samsung's new VA monitors that cost to the thousand(s) and fail dramatically even in the slightest], even cheaper HDR advertised TVs are not true HDR. Of course, if I was buying a TV now, it would be absolutely HDR, and at least 55". But I will wait the tech to catch up a couple more years probably (or one year!)

4) to truly have real 10bit HDR workflow takes an investment than no semi pro, or amateur,  can afford right now, or next year I presume. No way. 

5) I was the one suggested a Sumo as an ok all a rounder for a few jobs in production and in post, but I have worked with Blackmagic 5", a few of 7", Zaccuto viewfinder with mirrorless/C cameras/JVC LS300 and nothing was convenient. A smaller, lighter and brighter 5" is the holy grail of monitoring, I doubt that Focus is, but is the most logical way (price wise also) to go. If you do a little search around, even in obvious YouTubers and forums, it is the darling of everyone right now, and I just named a few reasons. Also, I do not see anyone else producing anything similar for a similar price range. SmallHD -almost- nailed it with this one, and almost is good enough for most!

 

[jonpais]

The best display for both editing and viewing HDR content is an OLED TV. 55” models could be found for as little as $1,400 last year.

This from Display Mate

The LG OLED TV is far better than the best Plasma TVs in every display performance category, and even better than the $50,000 Sony Professional CRT Reference Studio Monitors that up until recently were the golden standard for picture quality. In fact, based on our detailed lab tests and measurements the LG OLED TV has the highest Absolute Color Accuracy, the highest Absolute Luminance Accuracy, and the highest Contrast Ratio with perfect Black Levels of any TV that we have ever tested, so it even qualifies as a Reference Studio Monitor.

[jonpais]

Alexis Van Hurkman writes eloquently about the advantages of HDR, which he firmly believes is the future of video. Most of you are probably familiar with Hurkman as the writer of the user manuals and online tutorials for DaVinci Resolve. This is taken from the About Me page at his blog:

I divide my time working as a writer, director, and colorist. Based in Saint Paul, Minnesota, I do color correction for a wide variety of broadcast programming including narrative and documentary features and shorts, spots, and experimental subjects. I’ve color-corrected programs that have aired on The History Channel, The Learning Channel, BBC Four, and WNET; features and shorts I’ve graded have played at the Telluride, Sundance, Tribeca, Hamptons, and Amsterdam film festivals, among many others; video art pieces I’ve worked on have been exhibited at the NYC Museum of Modern Art (MOMA), the Whitney Museum of American Art, and San Francisco’s Yerba Buena Center for the Arts. You can check my IMDB listing to see my latest specific credits.

So I think there is little doubt about his credentials. His article entitled HDR, Resolve, and Creative Grading is definitely worth a look.

[Axel]

@jonpais

regarding Wolfcrow. He doesn’t seem to have fully understood HDR. I like the phrase ‘old wine in a new bottle’ though. Because you can judge wine by it’s vol% of alcohol (~ resolution) OR by more complex parameters. If one day we’ll record the same scene with a contemporary DSLR and with a camera fully covering all rec2020 requirements, we will agree to new wine in new bottles.

@Vesku

A deeper black actually doesn‘t help to distinguish more shadow nuances, for that you‘d need brighter dark greys and MUCH brighter highlights. On the recording side, you have to avoid true black anyway because right above a hypothetical ‘no signal’ stretches a zone of BAD signals, which you usually don’t record (ETTR).

@Kisaha

Yes, it’s not affordable for me. Mapping any rec709 or 8-bit LOG video to 2020 shows the limits in the waveform already. And even though I have no HDR monitor yet, I do see how little dynamic then remains for the midtones. The closest are some old raw recordings from my Pocket (12-bit), but also all artifacts (moire, color fringing) are accentuated.

[Vesku]

44 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Alexis Van Hurkman writes eloquently about the advantages of HDR, ...... His article entitled HDR, Resolve, and Creative Grading is definitely worth a look.

Thanks, very interesting and deep. One little fact popped to me:

" ...the standard for peak luminance in the movie theater has long been only 48 nits..."

Even SDR videos/movies looks more vivid and colorful at home with at least 100 nits TV and even brighter. HDR in big TV is many many times more life like than a dim film in theater. I was in IMAX theater last weekend and the image was very dim and low contrast. I think it was about 25 nits but the screen was big. There was no true color and no whites. I also watched earlier The Revenance in big 4k theater and the image was very dim in big screen. 

[jonpais]

@Axel One of the things that drove me nuts with my previous sets was the junk black level, which was a dark gray. I'd say it was the most annoying thing about those sets: almost, if not more infuriating than the moire and aliasing I used to see with some of my first digital cameras, like the GH3 - but at least moire and aliasing are temporary phenomena, while weak black levels destroy the whole viewing experience from start to finish. The black level of OLED is indistinguishable from the bezel of the screen, which makes colors pop. The contrast also makes the picture appear sharper. In a dance video I watched recently, the studio would fill with water mist, and you'd think you could see each individual droplet hanging in the air - not because the image was any sharper, but because the perceived contrast was higher. This was on YT btw.

[Axel]

There is an old trick for getting subjectively deeper blacks and therefore a subjectively clearer and sharper preview: backlight. If your monitor is set to 6500K, you put a 6500K light right behind it. The improvement is dramatic. Unfortunately, the viewer might have his TV hanging on a cinnamon colored wall, with some 3200K lamps somewhere to provide ambient light. Because it looked better with our modern furniture, we recently painted the wall behind the (4 year old Samsung-)TV from white to matte black. Night scenes can’t be watched anymore. All of a sudden it had become apparent that the damn thing couldn’t show black, just because the background now is several “stops” darker.

Should one buy a GH5 (because of HLG in 10-bit) or an Ursa Mini (raw)? 

If very good and bright LG or Samsung HDR TVs are the new bottles, how will old wine - the terribly crippled 709 stuff we are now proud of - taste from them? 

[Vesku]

From Alexis Van Hurkman tutorial:

"The basic idea is that the HLG EOTF (electronic-optical transfer function) functions very similarly to BT.1886 from 0 to 0.6 of the signal (with a typical 0 – 1 numeric range), while 0.6 to 1.0 segues into logarithmic encoding for the highlights. This means that, if you just send an HDR Hybrid Log-Gamma signal to an SDR display, you’d be able to see much of the image identically to the way it would appear on an HDR display, and the highlights would be compressed to present what ought to be an acceptable amount of detail for SDR broadcast."

GH5 HLG looks very different than normal SDR profiles in SDR display. It is unusable without grading unlike the theory above.

[Axel]

On 14.11.2017 at 11:36 AM, Vesku said:

From Alexis Van Hurkman tutorial:

"The basic idea is that the HLG EOTF (electronic-optical transfer function) functions very similarly to BT.1886 from 0 to 0.6 of the signal (with a typical 0 – 1 numeric range), while 0.6 to 1.0 segues into logarithmic encoding for the highlights. This means that, if you just send an HDR Hybrid Log-Gamma signal to an SDR display, you’d be able to see much of the image identically to the way it would appear on an HDR display, and the highlights would be compressed to present what ought to be an acceptable amount of detail for SDR broadcast."

GH5 HLG looks very different than normal SDR profiles in SDR display. It is unusable without grading unlike the theory above.

Would like to have a snipped in 10-bit HLG from the GH5. 

The theory above ...

Can it be that you have to expose HLG like you would rec_709, that you more or less cramp everything of normal brightness below 100, and the extreme bright parts - some rare reflexes, outlines from backlight, lights shining directly into the lens - get captured at higher values. And in grading that you are supposed to leave those extreme values in the stratosphere, and - more important - leave the brighter midtones there instead of pushing them over 100 to better use the additional headroom.

I wrote I can't monitor HDR, but I do my best to come close. Just learned that my 5k iMac has 480 nits, which according to van Hurkman is not too bad at all. Just went for WCG/rec_2020 in FCP and dialed up my LOG footage to +110, where it clipped. Looked really way-y-y better than Standard (rec_709) - but how to export it? I am really curious about the long-awaited FCP upgrade, for which Apple casually mentioned "HDR". If anything, Apple will adopt something if they can make it easy and straightforward.  

With an iMac, how would I connect an Inferno? So that the output is not being flagged as standard video? There is a very long thread on the Dell UltraSharp UP2718Q (1000 nits) in a german forum and how to make Resolve feed it the correct signal through a Decklink card. 137 postings, but no satisfying, reassuring answer yet. 

[kidzrevil]

On 11/12/2016 at 7:18 AM, Justin Bacle said:

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.

Same. It’s not going to add or take away from my work especially when TV sales are plummeting and there are few devices that support the newer technologies. I will continue to shoot for the lowest common denominator which is 1080p 8 bit delivery that way my shit is viewable EVERYWHERE and as I intended for it to look ??

On 11/10/2017 at 7:07 AM, Kisaha said:

 

2) right now is almost impossible to find a right use for HDR content, it is a very limited market, and remember that a few posts ago I declared my certainty that HDR is here to stay,  up it ain't here yet. I still haven't delivered, not one, 4K video, I do not see myself delivering any 4K in 2018 either (not that they are 100% connected, just saying how the market works, mostly). Our TV channels (the big ones) just this year became full HD, and we deliver in 1080, 4:2:2 8bit.

3) There are NO computer monitors with true HDR, just Dell and Samsung gimmicks that do not even work semi-right [I could link a dozen review about "Dell HDR" and Samsung's new VA monitors that cost to the thousand(s) and fail dramatically even in the slightest], even cheaper HDR advertised TVs are not true HDR. Of course, if I was buying a TV now, it would be absolutely HDR, and at least 55". But I will wait the tech to catch up a couple more years probably (or one year!)

Dude you are so right about that ! I bought a 43” 4K LG tv so I can get a glimpse of how my work would look on bigger screens and I was shocked. I couldn’t tell the difference between 4K and 1080p at normal viewing distances. I know @Mattias Burling ran a couple of tests before proving that most people can not see the difference between 1080p & 4K. Now im seeing 4K has more benefits as a capture format than for delivery. As far as HDR is concerned I don’t think it’s going to be the holy grail people think it is.

The average user can barely distinguish the 16.7 million colors we already see with 8 bit so the billion+ shades in 10bit most HDR displays can’t even display the whole color gamut. Some 4K displays are listed to cover 98% of SRGB which we were lead to believe was such a teeny tiny outdated color space

another thing we are forgetting is that some of us will have to relearn how to expose our images for that extended dynamic range and more importantly how to use it artistically. Last but not least if one exposes the image for HDR delivery then your video will not look as intended when shown on SDR. This is going to be another gimmicky gold rush like 3D tv’s were. Production companies aint about to rework their hardware and their workflow to cater to the 2 people with HDR displays. Its going to end up being an “icing on the cake” feature not an industry standard.

[jonpais]

@Axel i just sent you a couple HLG clips. Check your email.

On 11/10/2017 at 7:07 PM, Kisaha said:

As @Vesku mentions, HDR is different for different technologies, and I elaborate, with some added points on monitoring.

1) OLED isn't the Holy Grail, as what you earn on blacks, you loose on whites (brightness), and the difference is vast. That is why there are different standards depending the tech of ones monitor. I would say, there is space of improvement in all fields, as brightness of OLED ain't bright enough for all uses, and blacks of the others ain't black enough for most uses anyway. There are some other issues with OLED technology as of yet, too.

2) right now is almost impossible to find a right use for HDR content, it is a very limited market, and remember that a few posts ago I declared my certainty that HDR is here to stay,  up it ain't here yet. I still haven't delivered, not one, 4K video, I do not see myself delivering any 4K in 2018 either (not that they are 100% connected, just saying how the market works, mostly). Our TV channels (the big ones) just this year became full HD, and we deliver in 1080, 4:2:2 8bit.

3) There are NO computer monitors with true HDR, just Dell and Samsung gimmicks that do not even work semi-right [I could link a dozen review about "Dell HDR" and Samsung's new VA monitors that cost to the thousand(s) and fail dramatically even in the slightest], even cheaper HDR advertised TVs are not true HDR. Of course, if I was buying a TV now, it would be absolutely HDR, and at least 55". But I will wait the tech to catch up a couple more years probably (or one year!)

4) to truly have real 10bit HDR workflow takes an investment than no semi pro, or amateur,  can afford right now, or next year I presume. No way. 

5) I was the one suggested a Sumo as an ok all a rounder for a few jobs in production and in post, but I have worked with Blackmagic 5", a few of 7", Zaccuto viewfinder with mirrorless/C cameras/JVC LS300 and nothing was convenient. A smaller, lighter and brighter 5" is the holy grail of monitoring, I doubt that Focus is, but is the most logical way (price wise also) to go. If you do a little search around, even in obvious YouTubers and forums, it is the darling of everyone right now, and I just named a few reasons. Also, I do not see anyone else producing anything similar for a similar price range. SmallHD -almost- nailed it with this one, and almost is good enough for most!

 

 

12 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

Same. It’s not going to add or take away from my work especially when TV sales are plummeting and there are few devices that support the newer technologies. I will continue to shoot for the lowest common denominator which is 1080p 8 bit delivery that way my shit is viewable EVERYWHERE and as I intended for it to look ??

Dude you are so right about that ! I bought a 43” 4K LG tv so I can get a glimpse of how my work would look on bigger screens and I was shocked. I couldn’t tell the difference between 4K and 1080p at normal viewing distances. I know @Mattias Burling ran a couple of tests before proving that most people can not see the difference between 1080p & 4K. Now im seeing 4K has more benefits as a capture format than for delivery. As far as HDR is concerned I don’t think it’s going to be the holy grail people think it is.

The average user can barely distinguish the 16.7 million colors we already see with 8 bit so the billion+ shades in 10bit most HDR displays can’t even display the whole color gamut. Some 4K displays are listed to cover 98% of SRGB which we were lead to believe was such a teeny tiny outdated color space

another thing we are forgetting is that some of us will have to relearn how to expose our images for that extended dynamic range and more importantly how to use it artistically. Last but not least if one exposes the image for HDR delivery then your video will not look as intended when shown on SDR. This is going to be another gimmicky gold rush like 3D tv’s were. Production companies aint about to rework their hardware and their workflow to cater to the 2 people with HDR displays. Its going to end up being an “icing on the cake” feature not an industry standard.

In the arguments against HDR above, replace 4K, OLED and HDR with the word sound and see how well they hold up.  

Yet most American movie theaters, especially outside of urban areas, were still not equipped for sound: while the number of sound cinemas grew from 100 to 800 between 1928 and 1929, they were still vastly outnumbered by silent theaters, which had actually grown in number as well, from 22,204 to 22,544.[59] The studios, in parallel, were still not entirely convinced of the talkies' universal appeal—through mid-1930, the majority of Hollywood movies were produced in dual versions, silent as well as talking.[60] Though few in the industry predicted it, silent film as a viable commercial medium in the United States would soon be little more than a memory.

- Wikipedia

OLED isn't the holy Grail: Most reviewers, and more importantly, professional colorists I've read and listened to in podcasts and in interviews believe that OLED delivers near perfect picture quality. CEO and General Manager of Flanders Scientific Bram Desmet has gone on at length about the superior picture quality of OLED. At the risk of repeating myself, DisplayMate considers the recent line of OLED televisions from LG good enough to qualify as Studio Reference Quality.

Right now is almost impossible to find a right use for HDR content, it is a very limited market...Our TV channels (the big ones) just this year became full HD, and we deliver in 1080, 4:2:2 8bit:  Technicolor, Samsung, Walt Disney Pictures, Netflix, DirecTV, Warner Brothers, 20th Century Fox, Panasonic, Universal, Sharp, LG, Dolby, Sony, Philips, Amazon, DreamWorks, Microsoft, Arri, Intel, Hisense, THX, NVIDIA, and Toshiba are only just a few of the members of the UHD Alliance. Netflix, Amazon, YouTube and others are already streaming 4K HDR content today.

Production companies aint about to rework their hardware and their workflow to cater to the 2 people with HDR displays: Netflix alone, with over 104 million subscribers worldwide, rolled out over 150 hours of HDR content by the end of last year, and Amazon Prime had plans to double HDR content to 200 hours by early 2017. It would appear as though there are significantly more than two people in the world with HDR television sets.

@Mattias Burling ran a couple of tests before proving that most people can not see the difference between 1080p & 4K: That is an indisputably reliable, scientific study. They should try sitting a little closer to the set. They won't get radiation sickness! I don't have to squint to see the dramatic difference in detail between my 2013 iMac and my 2017 5K iMac. The same goes for my LG C7 compared to my dated Samsung HD television. And it's not just about the number of pixels. HDR has higher local contrast, giving the impression of greater sharpness.

There are NO computer monitors with true HDR: It will only be a matter of time before HDR grading monitors are plentiful and reasonably priced. Even calibration software priced in the thousands of dollars a few years ago is now available at no cost. Several companies, like Atomos and Small HD, have already released HDR capable external monitors and soon, all NLEs will also be on board, with FCP X entering the end of this month. Someone said earlier that colorists over at liftgammagain scoffed at the idea of using an Atomos Sumo or Ninja Inferno as a grading monitor, but I imagine they'd be just as horrified to see the laptops and computer monitors many of us use to grade rec 709 footage right now!

To truly have real 10bit HDR workflow takes an investment than no semi pro, or amateur,  can afford right now, or next year I presume. No way: There are already numerous HDR videos being uploaded to YouTube every day by people like you and me. As far as cameras and lighting go, according to Hurkman, if you already own a camera with reasonably wide latitude, HDR won’t be an excuse to buy another one, and it seems to me that there’s nothing extra you need to buy for the camera or lighting departments if you want to shoot media for an HDR grade.

TV sales are plummeting and there are few devices that support the newer technologies:  IHS Markit forecasts that HDR TV shipments will grow from 12.2 million in 2017 to 47.9 million in 2021. Several smartphones by manufacturers like Sony, Samsung and LG already support HDR. It may come as a shock, but it's entirely possible to watch movies and TV shows in HDR10 and Dolby Vision on the iPhone X.

Last but not least if one exposes the image for HDR delivery then your video will not look as intended when shown on SDR: This is not accurate. Colorists make a trim pass for SDR delivery as well, so content can be viewed on your brand new HDR set in the living room or on the small SDR set in your kitchen. When uploading to YouTube, you can either use YouTube's SDR Metadata Tool or your own cross conversion LUT. Unless you mean your HDR video won't look as good on an SDR set, which is undeniably true!

[Orangenz]

On 05/11/2017 at 2:17 PM, jonpais said:

@Cinegain ? Wish I’d been warned first that this was a wolfcrow production... 

 

On 05/11/2017 at 1:32 PM, Cinegain said:

lol, dies guy xD

"So it's a stupid idea to shoot HLG, please ignore those people who say that you need to shoot HLG for more high dynamic range, they obviously have no idea what they're talking about. [..] Ignore it completely."

Uhhhh... bro! Like they'll just add a feature for shits 'n giggles. Found his earlier stuff analysis of stuff interesting, but to dismiss and discourage HLG is bit messed up.

No he has special issues and incorrect things in all his stuff. Best to stay far far away from "india's best colourist". 

[Vesku]

Colors, sound, HDR, HFR...  The new frightening features to spoil our movie/video enjoyment.

All of these combined must be a horrible experience.

[Axel]

7 hours ago, jonpais said:

@Axel i just sent you a couple HLG clips. Check your email.

Thank you. 

Right now, there are but three apps on my Mac capable of playing back your clips: FCP X, AAE and VLC. QTX, Kyno and Resolve 14 (free version) say unsupported file type. I will try and import Optimized versions from FCP X to Resolve. Must get my head around this first, following van Hurkmans tips. Then I will also import:

1. Neumanns 10-bit Log footage (sunset)

2. Ordinary S-Log 2 8-bit

3. Pocket RAW

... and finally export a project with a few frames of each in ProResLT to share them. 

3 hours ago, Vesku said:

Colors, sound, HDR, HFR...  The new frightening features to spoil our movie/video enjoyment.

All of these combined must be a horrible experience.

I am the first to agree.

I was critical of the benefits higher resolutions (called them myths), I hated HFR in Hobbit, I never liked 3D. 

But we are rapidly moving away from old viewing habits. I used to say, resolution is not about quality, it's only about size. And what happened within a few years? I am sitting so extremely close to a retina screen that I actually need to wear glasses.

HFR says "live" or present tense, I used to say, LFR subconsciously says once upon a time. But HFR swallowes LFR, you can put 24p in 120p, but not the other way around. And 120p can look stunning, hyperrealistic, NOW. I imagine an extreme slomo with 120 fps as the real time basis. It will be sooo smooth. For an action sequence, you can put as much motion blur into it in post as is suitable to enhance momentum.

HDR has nothing to do with expanding film language's vocabulary. It's just aesthetically more pleasing. Enough reason for me.

[Vesku]

Can someone output 10bit HDR video with computer player to 10bit monitor or 10bit HDR TV? How can I use HLG profile with video player (VLC. Potplayer etc.)?

[kidzrevil]

Well I can say this much : I am not switching over to HDR anytime soon. Its too new of a display technology and there are as many arguments for it as well as there are against it.

Lets not forget each displays manufacturer adds their own mojo to their display units to stand out from other companies color science thus creating Yet another variable in how your HLG content is displayed. Even though some of these TV’s claim HDR and wide gamut color most barely hit 60% of DCI-P3 color space. These are one of the many reasons why I am personally sticking to SDR until the tech matures. HDR is reminding me of the 3D tv hype and thats my personal take. 

Shooting with an HDR camera is one thing...how it will be displayed is another. “Shoot for the lowest common denominator” is my personal mantra and it has not failed me yet. The lowest common denominator is still 1080 rec709 8bit @ 2.2 gamma. I know if my images look good within that srgb color space  and exposed so the important details falls within the rec709 6-7 stop dynamic range its going to look good everywhere period. If your display set has upscaling (which most do for full hd content natively) it’s going to fit in with the rest of the content in your home theater i.e. bluray movies ,tablet and mobile device.