HDR and color management. HDR400 is still awesome?

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,533
I don't know why people still continue to say that HDR 400 is useless but I don't agree with this.

I have an Acer XV273K monitor HDR400 and I can say that on my monitor enabling HDR improves the general quality by a wide margin.

HDR enables color management from the app and the color are improved by a wide margin.
Why people still say that hdr400 is useless?

Even HDR 100 can be useful if the monitor because you enter a color managed environment.
 

Drags

Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Messages
950
It might handle mapping of HDR content well but the issue with it is that it does nothing to improve the dynamic range (contrast ratio) which is the name of the game with HDR. there’s no local dimming capability so you only have the native panel contrast so no improvement over SDR for the most important HDR aspect
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,853
It might handle mapping of HDR content well but the issue with it is that it does nothing to improve the dynamic range (contrast ratio) which is the name of the game with HDR. there’s no local dimming capability so you only have the native panel contrast so no improvement over SDR for the most important HDR aspect
Contrast is certainly the biggest benefit of the full HDR 'experience', but just being able to properly handle an HDR signal is certainly a benefit as sblantipodi is saying above.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,853
It’s a benefit I agree, it’s just not HDR :)
With respect to what HDR is, there isn't a panel in existence that can actually do HDR. All fail, some more than others.

Particularly, LCDs do not have per-pixel infinite contrast, while OLEDs do not have the brightness. I personally prefer OLED, but after that, I'll take an IPS with no local dimming; if it can process HDR, well hell!
 

GNUse_the_force

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 27, 2014
Messages
427
With respect to what HDR is, there isn't a panel in existence that can actually do HDR. All fail, some more than others.
Particularly, LCDs do not have per-pixel infinite contrast, while OLEDs do not have the brightness.
True, but in the context of monitors do you want a HDR10+ panel pushing out 10,000 cd/m2 maximum brightness when your sat 2ft away from it ? Even if lets say it's only for spot effects (it's not it can be full frame 10k cdm, per frame) that's still some serious brightness when most of us probably sit in light controlled rooms when using a PC. I have my monitor at as close to 120cdm as possible but it's harder to get down to on larger w-led screens even without HDR, im okay with some HDR effects but not a sudden 10k laser burst into my retina in a dark room.


I'll take an IPS with no local dimming; if it can process HDR, well hell!
Yes.

(I do like the idea of expanded color range and corrected gamma for seeing more contrast between dark and bright area with HDR tbh. I wonder if you really need a per pixel display to do a 'good enough job' for this purpose when it comes to gaming on monitors)
 
Last edited:

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,853
True, but in the context of monitors do you want a HDR10+ panel pushing out 10,000 cd/m2 maximum brightness when your sat 2ft away from it ? Even if lets say it's only for spot effects (it's not it can be full frame 10k cdm, per frame) that's still some serious brightness when most of us probably sit in light controlled rooms when using a PC. I have my monitor at as close to 120cdm as possible but it's harder to get down to on larger w-led screens even without HDR, im okay with some HDR effects but not a sudden 10k laser burst into my retina in a dark room.
Whenever that becomes possible, I do hope that it comes with limiters to put a ceiling on brightness. LG is doing something like this now but more to preserve the panel itself, and even my 2017 model gets plenty bright in a dark room.

(I do like the idea of expanded color range and corrected gamma for seeing more contrast between dark and bright area with HDR tbh. I wonder if you really need a per pixel display to do a 'good enough job' for this purpose when it comes to gaming on monitors)
Gaming, not nearly as much in general; some games with details that you want to ensure are visible, maybe. Obviously just being close to an order of magnitude will still be very bright!

But for other stuff like text rendering or content creation or all of the other stuff people do with desktop computers, yeah, per-pixel backlighting is going to be necessary. At least with OLED, that's how it works by default. If LCDs hang on a bit longer, I'm really not sure. Honestly that's a technology that I cannot wait to die out.
 

sethk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
1,772
"Is HDR400 still awesome?" (emphasis added)
Not sure what the still represents, but I think you mean, "HDR is awesome, but is HDR400 still awesome as well?" and in that case, and IMHO, no. This is a very nice monitor and I had a chance to play with one for a while as part of a build for someone else. I have an actual FALD based HDR monitor, and there's just no comparison. Also with the inability to run high chroma HDR and the (in my opinion) quite bad tone mapping on this display, I wouldn't bother with HDR nor buy it for HDR.
Here's a quote from the techspot review:
"HDR isn’t worth touching because we’re looking at another fake HDR display. The DisplayHDR 400 certification means the XV273K fails two of the three key metrics for good HDR performance. Namely brightness is too low as it fails to hit 600 nits peak, and there’s no local dimming, so the contrast ratio stays fixed at around 1000:1 which is far too low for HDR content. We wouldn’t buy this monitor for HDR and we wouldn’t bother using the mode altogether."
https://www.techspot.com/review/1844-acer-nitro-xv273k/

I still think this is a good gaming monitor but not a HDR monitor, all IMHO, and no knock meant on the choice of this monitor.
 

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,533
I completely agree with everyone, HDR400 is not real HDR and it brings no benefit to what HDR is meant for but
on wide gamut monitors the possibility to accept and HDR signal is a big improvements, not for contrast but for colors beeing managed in a better way.

sincerely I never liked Wide Gamut monitors before in non managed software like games and most videos (I had a lot of EIZO monitors before) but now HDR contents
permit to wide gamut monitors to correctly display colors even in those software.

this is my point.

HDR signal/contents improves colors management on wide gamut monitors, and this is a huge benefit for me.
 

sethk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
1,772
I completely agree with everyone, HDR400 is not real HDR and it brings no benefit to what HDR is meant for but
on wide gamut monitors the possibility to accept and HDR signal is a big improvements, not for contrast but for colors beeing managed in a better way.

sincerely I never liked Wide Gamut monitors before in non managed software like games and most videos (I had a lot of EIZO monitors before) but now HDR contents
permit to wide gamut monitors to correctly display colors even in those software.

this is my point.

HDR signal/contents improves colors management on wide gamut monitors, and this is a huge benefit for me.
This is a really good point - there doesn't seem to be a separate "Wide Gamut" non-HDR mode that is well standardized and supported by games (or even most non high-end content creation apps), so this is the best result for wide gamut gaming outside of full HDR.
 
Top