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

51–60 of 214 posts

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

#51

Post by nagisa »

This reminds me of a recent submission about Wayland colour management and HDR work: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25159592.

In particular https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/swick/wayland-protocols/-/blo... was linked which discussed how a wayland compositor would have to display mixed "HDR" and SDR content on the same display. This document even has references to EDR. Ultimately this would end up achieving a similar result as what's described in the blog post here.

If you're interested in the technical details on what may be necessary to achieve something like this, the wayland design document might be a good read.

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

#52

Post by jjtheblunt »

blauditore wrote: post #37
bredren wrote: post #29

I’ve had the XDR Pro Display since June, and use it primarily for dev. I just trusted Apple in their focus on this direction. Suffice it to say I am very happy with it. What I like about conclusions of this piece is it points to how strategic Apple is thinking in its leverage due to the breadth of distribution of advanced hardware and software. Apple is able to set entire new standards of expectation for customers th…

> 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…

> Apple does many things, but certainly not bleeding-edge innovation.

What? Having been in the inner sanctum of engineering within Apple for years, that's exactly the engineering priority for groups I saw and worked within. I'm genuinely curious why you assert otherwise, find it surprising.

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

#53

Post by cmroanirgo »

Budabellly wrote: post #44
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…

If you pop open Digital Color Meter app (macOS system util), are there any differences between the whites in the video and the #fff interface whites?

FTA

> The operating system is complicit in this trickery, so the Digital Color Meter eyedropper shows “white” as 255, as do screenshots.

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

#54

Post by shock-value »

Androider wrote: post #47
AnssiH wrote: post #13

When still talking about mixed SDR+HDR content on a HDR display having differently mapped whites, the article says: > it’s strange and new, and possibly unique to Apple. But that is exactly how Windows 10 does it with HDR displays, too. So not really unique to Apple. To the article's benefit, it did say "possibly" :) I'm using Win 10 myself with an HDR display, and HDR white appears brighter than "desktop" white just…

The Windows HDR implementation is complete crap, exactly because they don't have have full control of the hardware stack as Apple does and can't change all the monitor settings like they would need to. When you toggle HDR on Windows, the desktop becomes dull gray and desaturated exactly because they pull down the previous desktop brightness to something less than 255. So you have to then adjust your monitor's brightn…

It can also be argued that Apple’s approach is a bit user-hostile. If someone wants their display at a 50% brightness ceiling (e.g. working in a darker room) it would be jarring to see HDR content overriding that, especially as such content becomes more prevalent.

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

#55

Post by mschuster91 »

renewiltord wrote: post #3

I wonder how a large organization does something like this successfully. Like you need your OS video driver team working with the application team and so on. My impression is that PMing this is really hard. And then each of the other guys is going to have an opinion that this shouldn't be done because it's so rare, etc. Something must be organizationally right for something like this capable engineering to have succe…

> My impression is that PMing this is really hard. And then each of the other guys is going to have an opinion that this shouldn't be done because it's so rare, etc.

It's easier when you control all parts of the stack. No way they could have pulled that one off with NVidia who were "famous" for breaking with Apple years ago when Apple demanded to code the drivers themselves... for valid reasons when one looks at the quality of their Windows and Linux drivers. The Windows ones are helluvalot buggy and the Linux ones barely integrate with Linux because NVidia refuses to follow standards.

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

#56

Post by ashtonkem »

dijit wrote: post #38
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…

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 stand makes a bit more sense when you consider this monitor for movie use. Reference monitors need to move from on-site racks for director use, to studio use for editing. The ability to easily detach it from a fixed stand and move it to a cart for on-site use is an important feature.

Overkill for developers though.

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

#57

Post by Androider »

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 physical monitor settings and dial in the new desktop white point with a software slider Microsoft buried in the advanced HDR settings (that almost nobody knows how to use) to hopefully be somewhere in the vicinity of what you had before.

When it comes to display technology, having vertical integration is a huge benefit. Look at high-DPI: state-of-art on Windows in 2020 is nowhere near as good from a software implementation or actual user experience point of view as it was on day 1 when Apple introduced Retina MacBooks back in 2012.

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

#58

Post by kccqzy »

blauditore wrote: post #37
bredren wrote: post #29

I’ve had the XDR Pro Display since June, and use it primarily for dev. I just trusted Apple in their focus on this direction. Suffice it to say I am very happy with it. What I like about conclusions of this piece is it points to how strategic Apple is thinking in its leverage due to the breadth of distribution of advanced hardware and software. Apple is able to set entire new standards of expectation for customers th…

> 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.

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

#59

Post by 1123581321 »

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 like that Dell display (I mostly use Dell and LG displays) and most people should certainly save the money. The areas where the specs aren't the same are really significant though (e.g., resolution, as you noted, is a major difference despite only being one of the specs. Brightness, dynamic brightness, and size are also quite significant and drivers of major cost differences in just about any monitor comparison.)

Here's a spec overview for those unfamiliar. https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/comparison/4f37c07a...

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

#60

Post by Budabellly »

cmroanirgo wrote: post #53
Budabellly wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you pop open Digital Color Meter app (macOS system util), are there any differences between the whites in the video and the #fff interface whites?

FTA > The operating system is complicit in this trickery, so the Digital Color Meter eyedropper shows “white” as 255, as do screenshots.

Thanks, apologies for missing that.

I wonder if other measurement tools (e.g. Adobe color picker) are also fooled by the OS in this case.

Post reply on HN