I hate HDR

[SDAVE]

Am I the only one that hates anything related to HDR?

I've started using Apple TV app lately to watch some shows and all of the shows have HDR. On my MacBook the screen is too bright and it takes me out of the story.

I understand it's a technical innovation to have brighter peaks etc., but it's truly a gimmick to me.

I constantly have to change my MacBook Pro's display from XDR > Apple Display to get rid of HDR.

I enjoy old movies without HDR much more.

 

[lostless]

I wouldn't say I hate HDR content, but the non uniform way it used and the lack of standards on how to use is what kills it for me. Basically they are taking the brightness range we can see and properly map it to the correct brightness (nits) on a screen. Up to the brightness your screen can do, sometimes up to 2000nits. But can keep the shadows too dark in a lit room as it’s not trying to boost any levels. While SDR is taking a portion of that brightness and stretching or compressing those levels to a range off 100nits. But then your backlight setting even stretches that out to 300-400 nit range. It’s not a gimmick and looks very good in a perfectly dark room with a calibrated screen. But SDR has a long history from photography, to film while HDR is the Wild West.

 

[maflynn]

Am I the only one that hates anything related to HDR?

You're not the only one. I'm not fan and I only watch TV on "SDR" and my monitor for my computer is also SDR

 

[SDAVE]

I wouldn't say I hate HDR content, but the non uniform way it used and the lack of standards on how to use is what kills it for me. Basically they are taking the brightness range we can see and properly map it to the correct brightness (nits) on a screen. Up to the brightness your screen can do, sometimes up to 2000nits. But can keep the shadows too dark in a lit room as it’s not trying to boost any levels. While SDR is taking a portion of that brightness and stretching or compressing those levels to a range off 100nits. But then your backlight setting even stretches that out to 300-400 nit range. It’s not a gimmick and looks very good in a perfectly dark room with a calibrated screen. But SDR has a long history from photography, to film while HDR is the Wild West.

I wonder if it'll get better, it's not like it's new. It's used as a gimmick marketing tool and they slap on HDR tag on devices that have 400 nits for peak

You're not the only one. I'm not fan and I only watch TV on "SDR" and my monitor for my computer is also SDR

100% glad I'm not the only one. I watch something and then out of nowhere BOOM a bright scene that burns my retinas.

I have HDR on my projector blasted on a 120" screen it works alright there, but then again my projector isn't very high end/not calibrated well to enjoy what it can do I guess.

 

[priitv8]

I think with MacBook problem #1 is sitting too close to the screen.
On a big screen the HDR is very enjoyable, IMHO.

 

[!!!]

The only time I experienced "HDR" was when I was trying out an iPhone 15 (I think) and I decided to test out some movie that had HDR. I picked some dark scene with some light flashes and it was not really a pleasant experience, it just felt like they were flashing the screen randomly.

HDR seems useful for photography to provide more accurate color ranges.

I ended up returning the phone because I get headaches due to the OLED PWM, so I have managed to avoid any HDR issues since then.

 

[priitv8]

HDR seems useful for photography to provide more accurate color ranges.

AFAIK in photography the HDR works in a completely different way to HDR on screen.
Photo HDR squeezes wider dynamic range into a smaller range of the media (originally paper). Whereas in video, they attempt to expand the brightness range of the media (display device).

 

[SDAVE]

The only time I experienced "HDR" was when I was trying out an iPhone 15 (I think) and I decided to test out some movie that had HDR. I picked some dark scene with some light flashes and it was not really a pleasant experience, it just felt like they were flashing the screen randomly.

HDR seems useful for photography to provide more accurate color ranges.

I ended up returning the phone because I get headaches due to the OLED PWM, so I have managed to avoid any HDR issues since then.

Photo HDR is truly a gimmick. If you shoot RAW, you already have giant dynamic range and can color correct properly.

I disable HDR in the Camera app which is on by default, it looks so cheesy.

 

[priitv8]

In photo, HDR is actually a compression technique, not expansion (like in video).

Is HDR the Same for Video and Photography?

Got a tech question for Sound & Vision? Email us at AskSandV@gmail.com A Does the metadata used to enhance video for high dynamic range TVs also work with still photographs? —George Yeoh / via e-mail

www.soundandvision.com

 

[bozzykid]

I'm confused as to why this was posted to the Apple TV section. You can disable HDR in the settings if you don't want HDR on an Apple TV.

 

[klasma]

One problem with HDR luminance is that it’s defined in terms of absolute brightness, whereas we watch content under different viewing conditions, in environments with different ambient lighting. HDR displays and software vary how they deal with the fact that people actually don’t want to watch stuff with a fixed absolute brightness. In many cases, it still results in content being displayed brighter than desired by the user, in particular in mixed contexts like a computer UI that is mostly SDR, but which may also be displaying HDR content in parts of it.

In addition, content may be misusing HDR by using higher luminance values than would be natural, just to emphasize that it’s HDR content. Proper use of the HDR brightness range would be rather subtle most of the time, and people wouldn’t typically notice a lot of difference from SDR (apart from orthogonal aspects like better color depth and wider color gamut).

 

[theluggage]

When color film/TV came out - everything was in garish, over-saturated color for a while, until producers got over the novelty.

You can tell you're watching a film shot in 3D because. at some point, something in a scene will fly towards you for no adequately explored reason other than to remind audiences of 20 years ago why they were wearing sunglasses in the cinema. I think people got over the novelty of 3D full stop, fortunately...

We're still waiting for producers to get over the fact that people have soundbars - so we have endless room-shaking explosions and can only look forward to. maybe, one day, going back to audible dialogue instead.

I'm sure there must have been some equally annoying trope back at the dawn of "talkies"...

Hopefully, at some stage, TV land will get used to the idea that HDR doesn't have to mean everything happening in near-darkness with occasional blasts of actinic light, and that some people like to watch TV with the lights on...

Positive note - the new Apple TV minus-the-plus ident no longer tries to flash-blind you like the old one did...

 

[iSayuSay]

Oh I love HDR so much so I upgraded all my TVs, monitor and devices to HDR display. Yeah I understand some HDR contents may seem a bit garish and too much. Color ca look awfully oversaturated, but that also happens on SDR with bad color-graded videos. When it's done right, HDR is night and day difference, I'd like to watch and rewatch most movies with HDR.