Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays

#121

Post by floatingatoll » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:18 PM UTC

ben0x539 wrote: post #119

floatingatoll wrote: post #95

I have one regret from this article, and that’s the explanation that sRGB hex color #ffffff (255, 255, 255) is being remapped. It’s not. The OS simply isn’t restricting the display pipeline to sRGB anymore, and that allows content which exceeds sRGB to do so. #ffffff is L=100%. What is L=800%? It exists in HDR content, and we can’t just make the web color #ffffff a dim gray to the eye. We must start thinking in terms…

> and UI elements have little reason to use this extended opportunity space It's gonna be five minutes before everybody's extra important call-to-action buttons and probably ads are max brightness too

That's already possible today, yes. Safari shipped support for all this live in production some time ago and I assume Chrome and Firefox are either already there or working towards it.

I've always wondered what it'll take for the major OS manufacturers to implement an anti-seizure filter for the content they transmit to their screens, and I'd bet that a flickering ad at HDR max brightness causing seizures worldwide one day will finally compel them to do so.

Re: Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays

#122

Post by mattparcher » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:45 PM UTC

manigandham wrote: post #111

blauditore wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple is able to set entire new standards of expectation for customers that are _very_ hard for competitors to follow. The cheaper version of this display has a price tag of $5k, the more expensive one $6k. I never spent even remotely as much money on a display, so I cannot speak from first-hand experience. But a quick search for graphics-design displays yields several competitor products that have similar or bette…

There are both cheaper and far more expensive displays used for graphics design to special effects and major film mastering. In this case, Apple seems to be trying to bridge the gap with the XDR and create a new middle tier of price and functionality. As for bleeding edge, Apple has pioneered plenty of technology. It's true that it builds upon foundations of technical designs and scientific discoveries by others but…

As Steve Jobs would say, “real artists ship”. (Except now, they’re shipping at a much larger scale...)

Re: Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays

#123

Post by valuearb » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:48 PM UTC

CharlesW wrote: post #113

peregren wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No sure about bleeding edge, because for the most part their products work but at different times they have defined: - Phones, (Original iPhone way ahead of competitors) - MP3 players (Original iPods) - Tablets, (Pretty much the only serious tablet as far as I can see) - Smart Watches, (Apple Watch still defines the category) - Ultra Books, (First MacBook Air) - All in One Desktop (iMac) - Mobile CPUs (Apple silicon…

> No sure about bleeding edge, because for the most part their products work but at different times they have defined: I'm ex-Apple and an Apple fan as much as anyone, but I also have the benefit of being old. Not to take anything away from Apple's collective accomplishments, in many of these categories I'd say they "redefined" more than "defined". There were many smartphones before the iPhone (the Palm Treos were gr…

There were many computers before the Xerox Alto.

Xerox never made the Macintosh because they missed key innovations such as regions, the Finder, consistent UI guidelines, the ability to put a usable GUI OS in an affordable package.

Re: Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays

#124

Post by valuearb » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:52 PM UTC

kuschku wrote: post #43

dijit wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the XDR came out it was competing with monitors that were 40,000 USD and up. (With some compromises like the stand which is just an art piece and the viewing angles being squiff). If the competition is now priced competitively then that’s very good for consumers.

The competition was also before the XDR similarly priced. Asus had 2 or 3 at that price point, and Apple had the XDR. And then there's the Dell UP2718Q, almost entirely the exact same specs, but only 4K, at 1600€. Released 2017, years before the XDR.

I use a UP2718Q every day (used to use two of them).

Did you just compare that mediocre POS to an XDR?

Re: Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays

#125

Post by HeWhoLurksLate » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 12:01 AM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #110

qubitcoder wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just in recent weeks: - M1 [0] - A14 in the iPhone 12 Pro (first 5-nanometer chip with 11.8 billion transistors) [1] Previously, they introduced the first 64-bit CPU in a mobile device, which stunned competitors at the time [2]. Not to mention their excellence in hi-dpi displays. In 2012, Apple launched the MacBook Pro a with "retina" display. It took _years_ for non-Apple alternatives to materialize. In fact, the on…

> In 2012, Apple launched the MacBook Pro a with "retina" display. It took _years_ for non-Apple alternatives to materialize. In fact, the only comparable laptop display in existence today would probably be the Dell XPS 17" UHD+ (which I own, and it's excellent). Uhh, both Sony and Dell had 1080p, 1200 vertical and then QHD laptops in form factors down to 13" before Apple. I owned both before I moved to Apple myself.…

Wow, people talking about getting a 512gb SSD in their laptop for $2.5K as a good deal is kinda amazing- I think my $450 HP Pavilion with a 1050 and AMD 3500H might just be faster in every single way (but it definitely has lower build quality...)

It's amazing how far we've come

Re: Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays

#126

Post by floatboth » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 12:02 AM UTC

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #88

boromi wrote: post #85

It seems to me that Microsoft really makes no effort to improve subtle aspects of Windows and hardware integration. In fact, their OS is in such shambles and is a disoriented mess with respect to UI consistency. They introduced Vista, Metro, and now Fluent. Yet there's almost no coherence and the UI is now a mish-mash of XP, Metro, and Fluent era elements. By the time they announce their next UI, you can bet you'll n…

>It seems to me that Microsoft really makes no effort to improve subtle aspects of Windows and hardware integration. Latest Windows 10 iteration is by far the snappiest OS I've used in a long time since it uses GPU acceleration for the desktop window manager. You can check this in task manager. The icing on the cake, if you gave a laptop with 2 GPUS(Optimus) is when you can run a demanding 3D app like a game in windo…

> since it uses GPU acceleration for the desktop window manager

Uh, Windows started doing that in Vista.

Re: Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays

#127

Post by musicale » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 12:08 AM UTC

CharlesW wrote: post #113

peregren wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No sure about bleeding edge, because for the most part their products work but at different times they have defined: - Phones, (Original iPhone way ahead of competitors) - MP3 players (Original iPods) - Tablets, (Pretty much the only serious tablet as far as I can see) - Smart Watches, (Apple Watch still defines the category) - Ultra Books, (First MacBook Air) - All in One Desktop (iMac) - Mobile CPUs (Apple silicon…

> No sure about bleeding edge, because for the most part their products work but at different times they have defined: I'm ex-Apple and an Apple fan as much as anyone, but I also have the benefit of being old. Not to take anything away from Apple's collective accomplishments, in many of these categories I'd say they "redefined" more than "defined". There were many smartphones before the iPhone (the Palm Treos were gr…

> I'd say they "redefined" more than "defined"

Pretty much, and they did a pretty good job too.

It's kind of the difference between invention and innovation.

Apple certainly does invent things, but they are a superlative innovator.

Re: Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays

#128

Post by musicale » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 12:09 AM UTC

valuearb wrote: post #123

CharlesW wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No sure about bleeding edge, because for the most part their products work but at different times they have defined: I'm ex-Apple and an Apple fan as much as anyone, but I also have the benefit of being old. Not to take anything away from Apple's collective accomplishments, in many of these categories I'd say they "redefined" more than "defined". There were many smartphones before the iPhone (the Palm Treos were gr…

There were many computers before the Xerox Alto. Xerox never made the Macintosh because they missed key innovations such as regions, the Finder, consistent UI guidelines, the ability to put a usable GUI OS in an affordable package.

PARC was also bound to Xerox which had trouble seeing beyond its photocopier business.

Re: Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays

#129

Post by crazygringo » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 12:14 AM UTC

janci wrote: post #108

no_op wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On conventional LCD displays you are presumably losing some contrast in SDR content here, because running the backlight brighter to allow for this will also elevate black. The rumor mill suggests Apple is planning a move to Mini-LED displays with thousands of local dimming zones, which would handily address this.

Not only contrast, but also the gamut. If display is capable of 255 levels of color and you remap 255 to e.g. 128 to leave the rest for HDR you have only half of the possible colors available for SDR. Or how is this supposed to work?

Well it's not really a big deal since only your UX gets a smaller range... when you're presumably watching the content?

But it seems like Apple might be gradually moving from 8-bit to 10-bit displays. They don't really advertise it clearly, but if the technical specifications say "millions of colors" it means 8-bit, if they say "billions of colors" it means 10-bit. (256^3 vs 1024^3.)

So if you've got the iMac model with the 4K screen, it's 10-bit and therefore capable of 1,024 levels of color. So remapping the UX to e.g. 512 will still be fine, assuming (safely, I think?) the compositing is all done using 10-bit color.

Re: Apple’s “Extended Dynamic Range” Brings HDR to Non-HDR Displays

#130

Post by valuearb » Sun, Dec 06, 2020, 12:18 AM UTC

musicale wrote: post #128

valuearb wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were many computers before the Xerox Alto. Xerox never made the Macintosh because they missed key innovations such as regions, the Finder, consistent UI guidelines, the ability to put a usable GUI OS in an affordable package.

PARC was also bound to Xerox which had trouble seeing beyond its photocopier business.

Doesn't matter what PARC's limitations were, what matters was the Macintosh was a huge innovation that created what the Xerox Alto and Star were missing.