I hate HDR - what am I doing wrong?

T

thegreywizard

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
132
I hate HDR and I don't know if I'm doing something wrong. I usually run my tv in Dynamic Mode 24/7 because it's the brightest and best looking setting for everything it seems.

When I switch to HDR mode it makes everything so DULL. It reduces all color by at least 50% and makes everything unimpressive.

I have a 65" Samsung KS8000 & a Samsung K8500 4k player and I was trying to watch 4k Suicide Squad with a 4k HDMI cable.

Are there some additional settings withing HDR that I can adjust to bring up the color spectrum?

If not I don't think I'll ever use HDR - not that impressed when comparing it to Dynamic Mode.
 
The fact that you use a dynamic mode explains it all. You like the most unnatural overblown picture imaginable where as HDR aims to give as natural looking lighting and shadows as possible. But if you like to give a HDR picture a boost of brightness and vividness, bump up the dynamic contrast to low or medium. And watch in dark room, HDR is meant for that.
 
Suicide Squad isn't supposed to be a bright and colorful movie. Keep in mind that you want to control your room's ambient lighting to maximize the effect of HDR.
 
I have a JS8500 55" and turning brightness lower actually helped. It looked amazing after I tweaked everything. Out of the box it was rigged for a show room I guess...
 
thegreywizard said:
I hate HDR and I don't know if I'm doing something wrong. I usually run my tv in Dynamic Mode 24/7 because it's the brightest and best looking setting for everything it seems.
Click to expand...

ohjz.gif
 
SDR gives you the controls to mess with the image as you see fit.
It is intended to be viewed at 100 nits, but if you're watching it in dynamic mode with the backlight all the way up, you're probably viewing all SDR content at 5x its intended brightness or more.

Same thing with saturation.
By viewing SDR content in the TV's wide gamut mode, it oversaturates everything so that you get really bright vivid colors, but it removes the ability for the TV to display more subtle colors.

HDR takes most of the user control away so that content appears as it was intended to be seen.
So while HDR allows the brightness to go beyond the 100 nits of SDR, if a scene is intended to have a brightness of 200 nits in HDR - which would be twice the brightness of a properly calibrated SDR image - your blown-out SDR image is still going to appear brighter.

Likewise, if a scene is supposed to have a mixture of pastel colors and really vivid colors in it, the SDR image in wide gamut mode might turn everything into bright neon colors.
So the image is more vivid in SDR, though that's not how it's supposed to look.
 
Last edited:
Hmm. Ok thanks for all of the info, I will try adjusting some of those settings.

I will have to admit I do love how bright and vivid the colors are under dynamic mode.

How can I get dynamic mode in HDR? Someone commented it is possible?

And Suicide Squad is pretty visually amazing, I love the movie all of the way around.

I should probably watch a video on tweaking the dynamic settings maybe
 
thegreywizard said:
Hmm. Ok thanks for all of the info, I will try adjusting some of those settings.

I will have to admit I do love how bright and vivid the colors are under dynamic mode.

How can I get dynamic mode in HDR? Someone commented it is possible?

And Suicide Squad is pretty visually amazing, I love the movie all of the way around.

I should probably watch a video on tweaking the dynamic settings maybe
Click to expand...

Color brightness and color accuracy is the issue for you at the moment.

HDR is giving you far more true to life color which means you're getting less pop. If you're attracted to bright over exaggerated color (Which some are. I am too, to be honest.) It's not going to have the same effect.
 
I tried to watch NARCOS in 4k HDR from Netflix but it looked like shit.

I figured something was wrong. Maybe it's not HDR enabled. :shrug:
 
thegreywizard said:
Hmm. Ok thanks for all of the info, I will try adjusting some of those settings.

I will have to admit I do love how bright and vivid the colors are under dynamic mode.

How can I get dynamic mode in HDR? Someone commented it is possible?

And Suicide Squad is pretty visually amazing, I love the movie all of the way around.

I should probably watch a video on tweaking the dynamic settings maybe
Click to expand...


Play HDR content and select Settings -> Picture -> Picture Mode. Choose Dynamic.

But I implore you, first check out Dynamic Contrast under Expert Settings page. Low setting gives the HDR image more brightness and pop but does not yet ruin image fidelity. Medium is also usable for bright daylight viewing. And while you are at it make sure Colour Space is set to Auto. This goes for both Dynamic and Standard HDR modes.
 
StormClaw said:
I tried to watch NARCOS in 4k HDR from Netflix but it looked like shit.

I figured something was wrong. Maybe it's not HDR enabled. :shrug:
Click to expand...
Did you use Netflix in a browser like Chrome, or from the TV's native application? PC web browsers seem to do terrible with HDR content.
 
Panel said:
Did you use Netflix in a browser like Chrome, or from the TV's native application? PC web browsers seem to do terrible with HDR content.
Click to expand...
netflix only allows up to 1080p on the browser and windows app, no 4K and definitely no 4K HDR. have to go through one of the specific devices that support it, like with your tv's built-in app or a firestick or something like that.
 
For Netflix etc you should use the KS8000's own app as it does 4K and HDR. You'll also need the 4K plan for Netflix.

OP, please try some decent settings on your TV and try to get used to them. You'll eventually appreciate when all skintones aren't like Donald Trump's and other colors don't try to burn thru your eyes.
 
kasakka said:
You'll also need the 4K plan for Netflix.
Click to expand...
I canceled my Netflix subscription a few months ago seeing as how I was watching cable a lot. I was hardly ever using Netflix. However, I've recently begun to miss it and will likely re-subscribe. Can you give me a crash course on this 4K plan? It's the first I've heard of it.
 
Panel said:
Did you use Netflix in a browser like Chrome, or from the TV's native application? PC web browsers seem to do terrible with HDR content.
Click to expand...
Watched it on a Sony ZD9 TV trough a Sony built in app.

The HDR picture was simply retarded. Everything darker and so over-saturated like you're on acid.

Maybe some picture settings were miscalibrated, i don't know. Watching the regular version looked very good, so i was totally fine without the HDR.
 
Panel said:
I canceled my Netflix subscription a few months ago seeing as how I was watching cable a lot. I was hardly ever using Netflix. However, I've recently begun to miss it and will likely re-subscribe. Can you give me a crash course on this 4K plan? It's the first I've heard of it.
Click to expand...

If you look at your subscription options for streaming, the most expensive option (US$11.99/month for me) includes UHD streaming + four screens. That's only US$2/month over HD, so not that big of a deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Panel
like this
IdiotInCharge said:
If you look at your subscription options for streaming, the most expensive option (US$11.99/month for me) includes UHD streaming + four screens. That's only US$2/month over HD, so not that big of a deal.
Click to expand...
The price is pretty good, not too much more than regular. But… 4 screens? Are they limiting how many devices you can use now?
 
Panel said:
The price is pretty good, not too much more than regular. But… 4 screens? Are they limiting how many devices you can use now?
Click to expand...
they've been doing that for a long time. it refers to simultaneous use.
 
I came back to this thread to update my thoughts on HDR.

Resident evil 7 for PC has come out and has HDR support. I'm on the LG C6 OLED.

So things get much darker which to me was a problem at first. Then, I began switching it off and back on to see the difference.

The depth of color. The accuracy and the way colors pop within that darkness. The way the light flickers and reflects. Candles on a table for example.

I am completely blown away by the difference. It's fucking amazing.

I think the problem with HDR when I tried Netflix was that it was still streaming and not downloaded. I could tell there was a grainyness there.

In a game like this it's immensely different. Turning HDR off gives the whole thing like an incredible grey wash.

I'm a huge believer now. Unreal.
 
Well I think the biggest factors are the 3 below and need all 3 for HDR to be worth it. If you prefer a hyper-dynamic picture then HDR will seem washed out.

a. HDR encoded media

b. Hardware displaying HDR

c. Realistic user preference
 
Thanks for all the input guys. I haven't had a chance to play around with any of the settings when watching the HDR movie yet.

But I still do love the brightness of my Sun on dynamic. But I will give HDR a legit try again when I get all of the settings dialed in.

I don't see a "movie" mode btw? Only Gaming, sports & HDR - that walk thru above states to change settings within movie mode, so I guess I'm confused?
 
you really should get your TV calibrated if you want the best picture...all those modes such as Dynamic, Vivid etc are terrible for the most part...HDR10 is really nice but Dolby Vision takes it to another level...I'm looking forward to more support for DV
 
Some "HDR" tvs are 500nit and less peak brightness(HDR standards require at least 1000 nit and .05 black depth or better, hdr movies are encoded at 4000nit peak)and many use edge lit flashlights which ruin the contrast and black depth especially at the high or max brightness hdr uses.

Samsung's one model has FALD but they refuse to specify the number of zones. In CNET reviews it blooms. Poor implementations of FALD on some tvs have bad glow from brights on dark backgrounds

If using one of these untrue hdr displays you are probably better off running standard modes imo.
 
elvn said:
Samsung's one model has FALD but they refuse to specify the number of zones. In CNET reviews it blooms. Poor implementations of FALD on some tvs have bad glow from brights on dark backgrounds
Click to expand...

The 65'' KS9 flagship has 150 (15x10) dimming zones.
Of 2017 Samsung models only the 65'' and 88'' Q9000 will feature FALD.
There is a habit of not specifying the zones, most of the times reviewers have to count them.
I expect we won't have to deal with that obfuscation tactic with FALD monitors. Nvidia is making good first steps in that regard.
 
It's not just the number but how it's implemented.

Rtings ks8000
"The Samsung KS8000 wasn't able to brighten the little dot in our video that much. When local dimming is activated, it produces blooming around bright highlights, on a big vertical column".

CNET ks8000
"
Dim lighting: The KS8000 was a middling performer in my lineup in a dark room. Its black levels weren't as deep as the LG OLED, the JS9500, the Sony or the Vizio, leading to a more washed-out look in dark scenes. During "The Revenant," for example, the letterbox bars and shadows were noticeably lighter in the Chapter 4 scene where Hugh reassures his son Hawk at the campsite.

I also noticed more blooming on the KS8000, where bright areas would spill over and illuminate the letterbox bars and other dark areas, hurting the perception of contrast. The bottom edge of the TV, right next to the bottom frame, also often appeared brighter than the rest of the image, especially below a highlight. I chalk this issue up to limitations with the KS8000's edge-lit system, and it's something the edge-lit Sony and the full-array Vizio handled much more cleanly"

" Its lighter black levels and less-uniform screen were even more visible with HDR since it calls for a maxed-out backlight setting, and overall its HDR image fell short of the Sony and Vizio."

The point is, not all HDR and/or FALD displays are created equal so don't hate hdr and/or FALD themselves just because a display might not be implementing it as well as it should.
 
Last edited:
JMFitzy85 said:
I'm on the LG C6 OLED.
Click to expand...

I'm SUPER jelly! That's the TV I want sooo bad. 65" 2016 curved OLED. But at 3k it's far out of my price range right now.

I was able to grab a slightly used 65" KS8000 for $900 so I'm happy. But when using the 65" flat tv as a monitor, I really wished the edges were bent in. It makes a DRAMATIC difference when working within 2' of the tv for computer use.
 
elvn said:
It's not just the number but how it's implemented.

Rtings ks8000
"The Samsung KS8000 wasn't able to brighten the little dot in our video that much. When local dimming is activated, it produces blooming around bright highlights, on a big vertical column".

CNET ks8000
"
Dim lighting: The KS8000 was a middling performer in my lineup in a dark room. Its black levels weren't as deep as the LG OLED, the JS9500, the Sony or the Vizio, leading to a more washed-out look in dark scenes. During "The Revenant," for example, the letterbox bars and shadows were noticeably lighter in the Chapter 4 scene where Hugh reassures his son Hawk at the campsite.

I also noticed more blooming on the KS8000, where bright areas would spill over and illuminate the letterbox bars and other dark areas, hurting the perception of contrast. The bottom edge of the TV, right next to the bottom frame, also often appeared brighter than the rest of the image, especially below a highlight. I chalk this issue up to limitations with the KS8000's edge-lit system, and it's something the edge-lit Sony and the full-array Vizio handled much more cleanly"

" Its lighter black levels and less-uniform screen were even more visible with HDR since it calls for a maxed-out backlight setting, and overall its HDR image fell short of the Sony and Vizio."

The point is, not all HDR and/or FALD displays are created equal so don't hate hdr and/or FALD themselves just because a display might not be implementing it as well as it should.
Click to expand...
I hate to be a burden, but can you find out which Sony and Vizio the CNET review kept mentioning? I'm curious and want to look into whatever display's they're referring to.
 
They linked these two:

https://www.cnet.com/products/sony-xbr-x930d-review/

https://www.cnet.com/products/vizio-p-series-review-2016/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.cnet.com/products/sony-xbr-x930d-review/

I can't speak for my TV's cousin the P series but I believe the newer P series has 128 FALD zones and says HDR10 support but there is some firmware being worked on.
"
Update September 19, 2016: Last month Vizio issued the software update allowing the P- and M-series TVs to work with HDR10 sources like 4K Blu-ray players. Since then I've run some tests and watched some video with HDR10 on the P series, but according to the company it's not yet finished optimizing the TV. For that reason, I'm going to wait until at least one more software upgrade before I fully update this review. Vizio has yet to confirm when exactly that upgrade will be available."


--------------------------------------
I personally have the vizio M series
AVS forum Vizio-M review
which on my model isn't HDR, but it is VA and has FALD. It's 4:2:2 (not 4:4:4 but not 4:2:0 either), which looks fine to me.
"Calibrated Dark mode, yielded 31 fL peak white and 0.0038 fL for black, an 8157:1 contrast ratio."
"Vizio M65's VA panel delivered excellent contrast. It was commendably free of typical FALD LCD artifacts like clouding and obvious halos around bright objects."

I skipped the HDR and OLED until it (and the content) is more ubiquitous,
instead opting for the 70" 4k M-70 with it's great FALD black depth, contrast. 7625:1 out of box to 8157:1 calibrated. With FALD off in game mode it's 5882:1 contrast ratio and around 17ms input lag . It can also do 120hz native input at 1080p off a pc. The price was right at $1800 or less after tax at the time from sam's club. I've had it awhile now so I've already got a lot of enjoyment out of it, mainly for movies/shows.
---------------------------------------

It's worth noting that HDR movies are mastered at 4000nit peak with the HDR display standard being a minimum of 1000 nit peak, .05 black depth (500 and .005 for OLED). Most of these tv's do 400 - 950 nit peak and some show it with issues (backlight implementation). In HDR mode, the LG 65EF9500 is 399 nit, Vizio-P is 468nit, the sony xbr-65x930D is 923nit , samsung un65js9500 is 884nit.

I hope to get the PG27UQ .. 27" 4k 144hz 1000nit FALD G-SYNC P3 color gaming monitor by the end of the year for my desk. Eventually I'll upgrade my tv to a 70" OLED or VA that conforms to the real HDR standards like the HDR premium label, perhaps OLED when it matures. HDR (and OLED) are not ripe and ubiquitous enough for me atm.
 
I blame the edge-lit LCD. They just can't do HDR properly. Samsung is rumored to be going only edge-lit for 2017 TVs including the flagship model... lol what a fail.
 
Panel said:
I think I've just about decided on my setup for the next 2-3 years. I'm getting a pretty good local deal on an X800D. I can get it for around $500. It's used, yes, but I'll inspect it closely before buying. The previous owner just happened to be using it as a monitor too.

This summer, around June, I'll buy 2 KU6300s to join the X800D. I won't have the horsepower to drive all 3 at 4K in games (at least not for 2 years), but that's a massive amount of screen real estate for work. And of course, I'll have the option of running 3x at 1080p.

The X830C may be a better option, especially instead of the KU6300's, but it's price is insane and shows now sign of dropping like the KU.
Click to expand...
Okay, I'm quoting myself here because I'm starting to have some second thoughts about this. Specifically, I'm referring to my plan of buying either a Sony X800D or X830C right now as the main monitor. I've been reading this thread (and a few others that I'll likely post this message on), and it seems that the state of HDR right now isn't too great anywhere. When factoring in non-edge-lit backlighting, FALD, proper peak brightness, etc, only $1200+ TVs are really true HDR experiences, and even they have shortcomings. This is making me ask myself if it's even worth it to get the X800D as a center monitor, because in theory, it doesn't have true HDR either. Its better than having a KU6300/6920, but is it better enough to warrant the extra cost? Even with the $500 price I'm getting (used, mind you), does it make sense to spend that much instead of $300-ish?

My question for you guys essentially boils down to this: Is it better to just go with 3 KU6300/6290s, or is it better to go with 2 KUs and one X800D? Until now, I was confident of the answer. But now, having realized that these are all budget TVs not too far from each other in terms of performance, I'm not too sure.
 
If I can add one thing. I mentioned the X830C before. I feel like that's really the ideal display for me, largely because it seems a bit better suited for multi-monitor setups. It's IPS, so the viewing angles will be good. I feel like the angles on VA might become a problem when trying to position the 2 side displays. In addition, it's 120Hz at 1080p, which might prove useful for triple monitor gaming at 1080p. Rtings has claimed it's the best TV for monitor use, and I think I agree. I have 2 concerns though: The overall PQ will suck, rendering the other benefits useless, and that this thing is so overpriced. Does anyone know of anywhere to get them for a reasonable cost?
 
I find IPS for monitor use terrible due to its glow at >=27". Don't know if TVs make it better.
 
The 384 zone backlight on the upcoming (Q4) asus and acer IPS gaming screens should help a lot with glow and uniiformity assuming their backlight implementation is good. 384 zones with 1000nit peak brightness in a 27" 4k is a lot and will be the first pc monitors to have it, let alone full featured gaming monitors with g-sync, 144hz, low input lag, fast response time, modern gaming overdrive. The larger problem with IPS (and TN) is that their black depth and contrast ratios are poor, typically at 850:1 to 960:1, with black depths of .14 - .16 typically. Hopefully a large number of FALD zones will make a big difference there. I won't buy another display without FALD or OLED going forward personally.

Top IPS full-featured gaming panel (PG279Q) edge lit
989:1 contrast ratio .12 black depth 119nit calibrated

Modern VA quantum dot, full featured gaming panel (Samsung C24FG70) edge lit
2817:1 contrast ratio .06 black depth (at 40%/169nit brightness)
2913:1 contrast ratio .08 black depth (at 60%/233nit brightness)

Swift PG27UQ 4K IPS 144Hz G-Sync 384 zone FALD, 1000nit HDR monitor (Q4)
1000nit, 384 zone FALD, HDR10, P3 color, full featured gaming IPS
???? contrast ratio, ?????? black depth , ~1000nit peak even when calibrated via FALD

Eizo FG2421 VA
4845:1 and .04 black depth

Vizio M series TV, VA + FALD
8157:1 contrast ratio (FALD on), .021 black depth , 102nit, 520 nit peak
5882:1 contrast ratio (FALD off)

HDR Premium Standard/Label
1000nit minimum peak, .05 black depth , P3 color.
 
Last edited:
elvn is there any 50" (or smaller) 4K TV that currently has great FALD? Not HDR, but FALD. Any older models, perhaps?
 
MaZa said:
You like the most unnatural overblown picture imaginable where as HDR aims to give as natural looking lighting and shadows as possible.
Click to expand...

It's funny though because they advertise HDR as giving you a super bright and vibrant picture compared to SDR. But you're saying it's the opposite.

e.g.

781403996520989610-1.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top