Nah, I don’t Need HDR
HDR is like RGB, sometimes cool if done really well but usually just a useless selling point.
Jokes on you I use NVIDIA
*Cries*
Been watching this drama about HDR for a year now, and still can’t be arsed to read up on what it is.
HDR or High Dynamic Range is a way for images/videos/games to take advantage of the increased colour space, brightness and contrast of modern displays. That is, if your medium, your player device/software and your display are HDR capable.
HDR content is usually mastered with a peak brightness of 1000nits or more in mind, while Standard Dynamic Range (SDR) content is mastered for 80-100nit screens.
How is this a software problem? Why can’t the display server just tell the monitor "make this pixel as bright as you can (255) and this other pixel as dark as you can (0)?
In short: Because HDR needs additional metadata to work. You can watch HDR content on SDR screens and it’s horribly washed out. It looks a bit like log footage. The HDR metadata then tells the screen how bright/dark the image actually needs to be. The software issue is the correct support for said metadata.
I‘d speculate (I’m not an expert) that the reason for this is, that it enables more granularity. Even the 1024 steps of brightness 10bit colour can produce is nothing compared to the millions to one contrast of modern LCDs or even near infinite contrast of OLED. Besides, screens come in a number of peak brightnesses. I suppose doing it this way enables the manufacturer to interpret the metadata to look more favorably on their screens.
And also, with your solution, a brightness value of 1023 would always be the max brightness of the TV. You don’t always want that, if your TV can literally flashbang you. Sure, you want the sun to be peak brightness, but not every white object is as bright as the sun… That’s the true beauty of a good HDR experience. It looks fairly normal but reflections of the sun or the fire in a dark room just hit differently, when the rest of the scene stays much darker yet is still clearly visible.
HDR is almost useless to me. I’ll switch when wayland has proper remote desktop support (lmk if it does but I’m pretty sure it does not)
Seems like there’s a bunch of solutions out there:
As of 2020, there are several projects that use these methods to provide GUI access to remote computers. The compositor Weston provides an RDP backend. GNOME has a remote desktop server that supports VNC. WayVNC is a VNC server that works with compositors, like Sway, based on the wlroots library. Waypipe works with all Wayland compositors and offers almost-transparent application forwarding, like ssh -X.
Do these not work for your use case?
I did try those, but it might be the fault of my nvidia card for not working. The issue was that I wasn’t able to understand nor fix any problems that popped up. I’ll try it out again when I get a new GPU
Yeah, Nvidia really sucks on Linux unfortunately and they simply do not care very much.
HDR? Ah, you mean when videos keep flickering on Wayland!
I will switch when I need a new GPU.
videos? everything flickers for me on wayland. X.org is literally the only thing keeping me from switching back to windows right now.
Does wine run on wayland?
Edit, had to look up wth HDR is. Seems like a marketing gimmick.
Anti Commercial AI thingy
Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11
#!/usr/bin/env nix-shell #!nix-shell -i bash --packages xautomation xclip sleep 0.2 (echo '::: spoiler Anti Commercial AI thingy [CC BY-NC-SA 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11 ```bash' cat "$0" echo '``` :::') | xclip -selection clipboard xte "keydown Control_L" "key V" "keyup Control_L"It isn’t, it’s just that marketing is really bad at displaying what HDR is about.
HDR means each color channel that used 8 bits can now use 10 bits, sometimes more. That means an increase of 256 shades per channel to 1024, allowing a higher range of shades to be displayed in the same picture, and avoiding the color banding problem:
Thank you.
I assume HDR has to be explicitly encoded into images (and moving images) then to have true HDR, otherwise it’s just upsampled? If that’s the case, I’m also assuming most media out there is not encoded with HDR, and further if that’s correct, does it really make a difference? I’m assuming upsampling means inferring new values and probably using gaussian, dithering, or some other method.
Somewhat related, my current screens support 4k, but when watching a 4k video at 60fps side by side on a screen at 4k resolution and another 1080p resolution, no difference could be seen. It wouldn’t surprise me if that were the same with HDR, but I might be wrong.
Anti Commercial AI thingy
Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11
#!/usr/bin/env nix-shell #!nix-shell -i bash --packages xautomation xclip sleep 0.2 (echo '::: spoiler Anti Commercial AI thingy [CC BY-NC-SA 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11 ```bash' cat "$0" echo '``` :::') | xclip -selection clipboard xte "keydown Control_L" "key V" "keyup Control_L"yes, from the capture (camera) all the way to distribution the content has to preserve the HDR bit depth. Some content on YouTube is in HDR (that is noted in the quality settings along with 1080p, etc), but the option only shows if both the content is HDR and the device playing it has HDR capabilities.
Regarding streaming, there is already a lot of HDR content out there, especially newer shows. But stupid DRM has always pushed us to alternative sources when it comes to playback quality on Linux anyway.
no difference could be seen
If you’re not seeing difference of 4K and 1080p though, even up close, maybe your media isn’t really 4k. I find the difference to be quite noticeable.
yes, from the capture (camera) all the way to distribution the content has to preserve the HDR bit depth.
Ah, that’s what I thought. Thanks.
If you’re not seeing difference of 4K and 1080p though, even up close, maybe your media isn’t really 4k. I find the difference to be quite noticeable.
I tried with the most known test video Big Buck Bunny. Their website is now down and the internet archive has it, but I did the test back when it was up. Also found a few 4k videos on youtube and elsewhere. Maybe me and the people I tested it with aren’t sensitive to 4k video on 30-35 inch screens.
Anti Commercial AI thingy
Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11
#!/usr/bin/env nix-shell #!nix-shell -i bash --packages xautomation xclip sleep 0.2 (echo '::: spoiler Anti Commercial AI thingy [CC BY-NC-SA 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11 ```bash' cat "$0" echo '``` :::') | xclip -selection clipboard xte "keydown Control_L" "key V" "keyup Control_L"aren‘t sensitive to 4K video
So you’re saying you need glasses?
But yes, it does make a difference how much of your field of view is covered. If it’s a small screen and you’re relatively far away, 4K isn’t doing anything. And of course, you need a 4K capable screen in the first place, which is still not a given gor PC monitors, precisely due to their size. For a 21" desktop monitor, it’s simply not necessary. Although I‘d argue, less than 4K on a 32" screen, that’s like an arms length away from you (like on a desktop), is noticeably low res.
So you’re saying you need glasses?
No. Just like some people aren’t sensitive to 3D movies, we aren’t sensitive to 4k 🤷
Anti Commercial AI thingy
Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11
#!/usr/bin/env nix-shell #!nix-shell -i bash --packages xautomation xclip sleep 0.2 (echo '::: spoiler Anti Commercial AI thingy [CC BY-NC-SA 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) Inserted with a keystroke running this script on linux with X11 ```bash' cat "$0" echo '``` :::') | xclip -selection clipboard xte "keydown Control_L" "key V" "keyup Control_L"
