4K vs HDR

[Aspman]

4k and HDR will become the norm soon enough. Then there will be something else to tempt high end buyers.

 

4k content is coming on but you're only really going to see it through streaming services and no doubt they'll all over compress them so they look worse than SD.

 

It's a bit pointless unless you have a massive telly anyway. I struggle to tell the difference between HD and 4k content on the 43" set I have. I assume that HDR is more likely to be of benefit on smaller sets since the size doesn't matter as much.

Edited 26 October, 2016 by Aspman

[Lady Elanore]

This is why I reckon HDR is more important than 4K. So far I've watched 4K on Netflix and Amazon Prime as well as You Tube and sometimes you can't tell it's in 4K. I've then put a Blu Ray on and found the quality to be improved over the 4K. This doesn't surprise me too much, but the thing that eclipses all of these formats is HDR. It really does look stellar and Dolby Vision seems to be even better than the regular HD10 flavour of it. 

[wonkyewok]

Have now set up the tv, with help from a neighbour to lift it onto its stand. A 65" tv is massive compared to the 42" I had before. If it was available in 55" I might have gone for that.

 

The HDR demos from http://demo-uhd3d.com/categorie.php?tag=lg are amazing. It feels closer to being there than normal tv. I'm not sure that Netflix is showing in 4k HDR yet (on Daredevil series 1) so I'll have a dig around to see if it needs some settings tweaking. TV has been so grey and lacking in contrast on IPS LCDs that going to a PVA-type screen (cheap Panasonic) and now this with local dimming feels unreal. 

 

I thought the Android OS had crashed at first - it's meant to be a bit iffy on this model - but it turns out the remote's "Sony New Ultra" batteries lasted 5 minutes. New batteries in and all is fine.

[Lady Elanore]

Netflix and Amazon Prime are both doing some 4K HDR and also Dolby Vision (Daredevil) 

[Adam_]

I don't claim to truly understand these new tellies but having read a little for true HDR you need a 10 bit screen most 4k tellies have 8 bit screens but claim HDR but isn't true HDR. Much like the difference between 1080i and 1080p.

Does anyone really sit so close to the screen or own a screen so big that it is really necessary?

[Lady Elanore]

HDR is a spec that allows very large dynamic range in one image, you really don't need to sit near the screen to enjoy it. You do however need a telly that can go very very bright or incredibly dark. OLED tellys go completely dark and LCD tellys can go brilliantly bright. As yet, no one type of telly can really do both jobs at once, but the dynamic range of the best OLEDS and LCDs (LEDS etc) are so large, HDR really does start to shine...or not...depending on the scene. 4K however, needs either a very big screen, or you need to sit close to the tellybox to get the benefit to any real degree. The more I watch it, the more I am convinced that HDR is a far more useful thing than 4K. HDR tellys can also often show a huge colour gamut (for a telly that is) and so images can look rich and saturated.

 

The logo to look for if you want top telly images is 'Ultra HD Premium'. Of course you need a source that is in 4K and has HDR data  in it to see it. 

[wonkyewok]

The best hdr tvs now are expensive. But they should get cheaper over time. Hopefully.

[Aspman]

In a couple of years you'll be hard pushed to buy any tv without HDR. I'd though 3D would have been much the same but the arse appears to have really fallen out of that market and no one is really bothering with it now.

[Lady Elanore]

3D is probably the only thing the TV companies got wrong I reckon. 405 black and white telly gave way to 625 colour and we loved it. Then came Nicam stereo (thank you BBC) and it was much appreciated. Digital tv with widescreen 16:9 was the next big thing and again we bought new tvs and enjoyed that too. Lately we got 4K and the jury is out on it, but I think that although it is here to stay, it wont be appreciated much as on most tvs and typical viewing distances, it has a touch of 'The Emperor's new clothes' about it. HDR though is something that can be seen instantly on an appropriate telly and so I can see people appreciating it. The only problem that I can see is (apart from the implementation of either the HDR10 or Dolby Vision spec) is that the recording does need careful handling to avoid the picture looking to over-contrasty and a touch 'hyper-real'. 

[cheezemonkhai]

I quite like 3D for some films (Mainly cartoon/animations).

[Lady Elanore]

If I could afford a 120" OLED telly (assuming they ever make one) I might like 3D again, but I find my current telly just a wee bit too small to get the full 3D benefit. Mind you, if they start to do 4K 3D, then I could sit nearer the telly and it might work? 

[john999boy]

One of the things that put me off 3D TV was that it lowered the brightness to get the perspective.

[cheezemonkhai]

HDR could solve that though, if they calibrate 3D mode to take into account that loss.

[wonkyewok]

I tried 3d mode last night on the HDR Sony I bought recently. For normal viewing in daytime, brightness 15 is fine. (I've not looked to see if it's out of 50 or 100). For 3d the tv defaults to brightness "full", which would be nuclear for 2d. The glasses are the active shutter type. They're ok but not perfect - whenever there's white text on a black background I can see the bleed over of the other eye. I started getting a headache too which has never happened before. I've used 3d active glasses with a projector and that's been fine. Apart from 3d, the tv is extremely good as far as I can see.