Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

prolost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 214 posts

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

#171

Post by 1-6 »

Androider wrote: post #57
crazygringo wrote: post #36

Wow, that's crazy, it actually works -- just tried out the sample videos in QuickTime on my 2016 13" MBP (P3 gamut, running Big Sur) and confirmed working. Basically: if I set my display to ~75% brightness and open the video, the whites in the video are 100% brightness, way brighter than #FFF interface white on the rest of my screen. But if I increase my display brightness to 100%, the whites in the video are the sam…

> it's flawlessly undetectable in terms of brightness -- the interface white and grays don't change at all. In order to pull this off, you need to know exactly how many nits bright the display is, as well as having complete software control of the actual hardware brightness. On Windows, you have neither. Enabling HDR mode completely throws off your current colors and desktop brightness and you have to reset both your…

I'm with you on vertical integration. I've been looking at haptic feedback mouses and there are ones from gaming companies but no one has pulled it off well enough to enrich the gaming experience.

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

#172

Post by strombofulous »

kccqzy wrote: post #58
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…

> I never spent even remotely as much money on a display, so I cannot speak from first-hand experience. Translation: I don't understand this display. > But a quick search for graphics-design displays yields several competitor products that have similar or better specs, at generally even lower price tags. Translation: Despite my lack of knowledge, I feel qualified to say Apple sucks. Typical HN.

Ok, so then what knowledge is GP missing to explain why it costs so much?

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

#173

Post by [deleted] »

sgerenser wrote: post #153
Qerub wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> […] but for the past several years they default to a scaled display mode. For anyone not familiar, the frame buffer is a higher resolution, and scaled down for the display, trading sharpness for screen space. My understanding of how scaled resolutions in macOS work is that graphics are always rendered at the display's native resolution. The scaling factor only decides the sizing of the rendered elements. Can you po…

deergomoo is correct, Apple’s “Retina” displays work by displaying all screen elements using images/icons/text rendered at 2x the liner number of pixels as their non-retina counterparts. Since it’s a fixed 2x scaling, the only way to have anything other than the native panel resolution (with elements that are 2x their non-retina number of linear pixels) is to render at a frame buffer size larger than the actual scree…

[deleted]

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

#174

Post by [deleted] »

deergomoo wrote: post #98
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. Ironically this is now somewhere they could stand to improve. The MacBook displays are excellent, particularly when it comes to colour reproduction, but for the past several years they default to a scaled display mode. For anyone not familiar, the frame buffer is a higher resolution, and scale…

[deleted]

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

#175

Post by kuschku »

valuearb wrote: post #145
kuschku wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're both IPS panels with locla area dimming, the same amount of halo effect, the same color accuracy, and relatively similar brightness and dpi, especially considering there's a price difference of 4× inbetween. What's so "mediocre POS" about them in your opinion?

Build quality for one. That halo effect grows quickly over time. And there is a huge difference between 4K and 8k, and a much higher DPI.

You've got a typo there, it's 4K at 27" with 163dpi vs 6K at 32" with 215dpi, so 1.5× vs 2× resolution. Which actually has an interesting effect when working with content, as the Pro Display XDR either has to show a letterbox around UHD content, or has to stretch it in a very blurry way with GPU upscaling which definitely isn't useful for content production workflows.

And the halo effect actually is an artifact from the backlighting which can be resolved with the backlight recalibration cycle, which the Pro Display XDR does automatically and invisibly during times with purely SDR content, while it has to be manually run and is very obtrusive on the Dell one, that much is true.

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

#176

Post by samatman »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #93
rbx wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtd7UzLJHrU Comparison with the 40k display here. Apple doesn't come very close. Sure it's much cheaper. But then why compare.

Yeah, this, it really irks me how some people here keep parroting Apple's marketing without checking any facts/tests. Their monitor is great for a consumer or prosumer monitor but just because it has PRO in the name doesn't mean it can dance in the ring with the actual PRO displays that are used to master million dollar motion pictures.

Of course not.

The point of the 6k Pro HDR wasn't to compete with the one or two $40k monitors used to master million dollar motion pictures.

It was to replace the five to ten other $40k monitors used in other parts of the production pipeline, by being accurate/wide/bright enough for that purpose, and to provide good-enough accuracy to a whole swath of jobs where it was dearly needed but far too expensive.

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

#177

Post by amscanne »

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 really is beyond belief that an organization with so many employees can fail to adhere to a uniform vision and standard and focus on correcting details.

If you’re not spent time in a huge company, this might seem to be the case. But really, Apple’s uniform standard really is the exception. I’m sure there are other organizational costs for this, such as it being harder to take risks with products or execute quickly.. but gosh they are good at producing a cohesive, mostly consistent set of products. I deeply appreciate their attention to detail and long term commitment.

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

#178

Post by DiabloD3 »

pram wrote: post #166
DiabloD3 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WDDM's ability to do that has been progressively enhanced since Vista. Today's OSX is about where Windows was during Vista, and it really shows on Macs that are older, but still supported, usually shown via latency in normal situations, eg, just moving a window around on the screen (something every OS gets correct except OSX). Today's WDDM, however, is snappy as hell, even on my MBP from 2012, but OSX is, and always…

Quartz has been GPU accelerated since 2002 my dude

Yes, it has. It doesn't mean it does it well.

Quartz today is Vista's WDDM of yesterday.

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

#179

Post by dmitshur »

skavi wrote: post #6

> This EDR display philosophy is so important to Apple that they are willing to spend battery life on it. When you map “white” down to gray, you have to drive the LED backlight brighter for the same perceived screen brightness, using more power. Apple has your laptop doing this all the time, on the off chance that some HDR pixels come along to occupy that headroom. This is a bit misleading. The backlight isn’t at a h…

I wonder if this contributed to Apple removing the light-up Apple logo on the backs of MacBook screens. If it were still there, it would give it away when the backlight brightness is changing and potentially become distracting.

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

#180

Post by grishka »

crazygringo wrote: post #36

Wow, that's crazy, it actually works -- just tried out the sample videos in QuickTime on my 2016 13" MBP (P3 gamut, running Big Sur) and confirmed working. Basically: if I set my display to ~75% brightness and open the video, the whites in the video are 100% brightness, way brighter than #FFF interface white on the rest of my screen. But if I increase my display brightness to 100%, the whites in the video are the sam…

So is this the reason why they removed the glowing apple on newer macbooks? Since it was powered by the backlight, it'd give that trick away real quick.
Post reply on HN