nVidia does a thing - Computex SDR vs HDR monitor was rigged?

[zMeul]

 

this isn't right

you don't go in the settings and make one monitor look worse than the other just because you want HDR to succeed - what the fuck where nVidia's PR people thinking 

 

I have a HDR TV and I have experienced HDR content (both movies and games), the current content is not worth it

Dmitry is right, HDR is in the eye of the beholder and so far I haven't been blown away by it - I'll go as far as say some HDR movies look worse

[Princess Luna]

That is all opinions, for instance I say VR is not worth it, if someone wants to buy HDR 4k televisions for bragging rights and watch 720p cable content let'em do it [:

[Energycore]

7 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

That is all opinions

That the settings on the monitor were tampered with, or that the image on a SDR monitor at optimal settings looks better than what they presented, aren't opinions. Those are the cold hard truth.

[Sniperfox47]

16 minutes ago, zMeul said:

 

~snip. Can't snip the video on my phone for some reason~

...sends an SDR image of an HDR panel to our SDR monitors and asks us if we like HDR better... Clearly doesn't understand HDR...

 

 

In other news yeah. They crippled it. Since when is this new for display manufacturers or retailers? It may be shit but this is standard practice in the industry.

 

Also HDR displays are a big deal, but it's not something you can show on an SDR monitor. It's no different than trying to show the amazing black level benefits if AMOLED on an LCD monitor. The way he represents HDR in his video is just as misleading as Nvidia fucking with settings to exasterbate the differences of HDR.

[WereCat]

Classic marketing.

[Sniperfox47]

Also keep in mind that HDR gaming and HDR movies are completely different beasts.

 

HDR movies are all about how they're mastered and edited. They're about giving the director more artistic license to get the feel they want.

 

HDR gaming is about displaying higher accuracy in information that's already been there in the games 16-128 bit HDR rendering pipeline since the mid-2000's with OpenGL 1.4 and DirectX 9.0. It's there to allow more realistic lighting and textures by preserving more fine detail, especially when combined with Physically Based Rendering techniques.

[Enderman]

8 minutes ago, Energycore said:

That the settings on the monitor were tampered with, or that the image on a SDR monitor at optimal settings looks better than what they presented, aren't opinions. Those are the cold hard truth.

He checked both of the monitors' settings when he was at the demo?

Sorry, don't have time to watch the vid.

[Energycore]

Just now, Enderman said:

He checked both of the monitors' settings when he was at the demo?

Sorry, don't have time to watch the vid.

I'll be honest. I was more busy doing his "do a push up every time I say HDR" challenge rather than listening hard to the video

 

But from what I could gather Dmitry had the same monitor in office or he checked the monitor settings at the presentation, either or, and he could say for sure that the settings were changed from stock (gamma was reduced for instance)

[JAKEBAB]

If this is true its kinda messed up.... I will however say its pretty similar to Samsung (i think others do it too) displaying there own demo content to sell their tv even though realistically, nothing will look that good on it since not everything is made specifically for that tv like the demo.

[Prysin]

this might be the first time in a long time that me and @zMeul agrees

[Centurius]

40 minutes ago, Energycore said:

That the settings on the monitor were tampered with, or that the image on a SDR monitor at optimal settings looks better than what they presented, aren't opinions. Those are the cold hard truth.

The first part of that statement is likely a fact, the second is literally an opinion

[CyberneticTitan]

1 hour ago, Sniperfox47 said:

...sends an SDR image of an HDR panel to our SDR monitors and asks us if we like HDR better... Clearly doesn't understand HDR...

How else would he be able to make his point? The camera is there to simulate our viewing to bring about a comparison in the image quality. He's demonstrating relative viewing experiences, not absolute.

[ivan134]

It's most likely not just Nvidia though. He only found this out because Nvidia let him check the settings. AMD, Asus and Acer did not let him check settings, so it's possible they were all cheating too.

[Taf the Ghost]

I think the main problem was the game itself. It's great that the skys/backgrounds are clearer and more defined (you can make out more details in either very bright or very dark spots), but the foreground is just a mess. Lots of detailed shading that is actually hard to see and is very dark.

[Sniperfox47]

57 minutes ago, CyberneticTitan said:

How else would he be able to make his point? The camera is there to simulate our viewing to bring about a comparison in the image quality. He's demonstrating relative viewing experiences, not absolute.

That's my whole point. My point is that you can't compare relative viewing experiences of monitors superior to your monitor on your monitor...

 

Any video of a monitor to show off "ooh look what a great image this monitor has!" is inherently flawed because even the relative comparison between the two will be highly dependent on your existing monitor.

[mr moose]

Monster cables used to do this all the time (probably still do).   Demonstrating how good their component cables are while using s-video for the competition.  Lying and fraud is what it is.

[FloRolf]

5 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

...sends an SDR image of an HDR panel to our SDR monitors and asks us if we like HDR better... Clearly doesn't understand HDR...

Are you serious? Are you not able to see a difference between them in the video? 

Ofc we don't get the full experience by this but we still get to see the differences. 

[Notional]

To be fair, the HDR implementation in Mass Effect Andromeda is pretty bad. Also how is the demo setup up? The game has to render these things from the get go, so for that demo to work, it has to be 2 different systems showing the exact same scene. Maybe that's what they did, but I can't see that in the video.

 

Also bear in mind that many "HDR" tv's are not actually HDR. They are more similar to HD ready tv's back in the days. Remember those? So the contrast might not be high enough, and the colours might not be properly wide colour gamut. With all of that, you still need the source material to be proper HDR. If any point in the chain doesn't support or is correctly set up to HDR, the end result will not be proper HDR.

[Notional]

1 minute ago, FloRolf said:

Are you serious? Are you not able to see a difference between them in the video? 

Ofc we don't get the full experience by this but we still get to see the differences. 

If the HDR signal uses wide colour gamut using the correct look up table, everything from recording with a camera, to editing, to uploading on youtube, to you playing it back on an SDR monitor, will have completely wrong colours. SO those faded reds he is talking about might simply be a wrong look up table. You won't know by watching the video.

[mvitkun]

5 hours ago, Energycore said:

But from what I could gather Dmitry had the same monitor in office or he checked the monitor settings at the presentation, either or, and he could say for sure that the settings were changed from stock (gamma was reduced for instance)

If I understood it right what he claimed was that Nvidia 'calibrated' the brightness, contrast, and gamma on the SDR monitor in a non-optimal way that negatively exaggerated the differences between the two.  

These settings were different from the factory defaults so he assumes they did so to mislead attendees.

  

Since he said he checked THEIR monitor settings I'd have to assume that he did so at the presentation, you can't really check somebody else's monitor settings on your own monitor.

 

[mr moose]

56 minutes ago, mvitkun said:

If I understood it right what he claimed was that Nvidia 'calibrated' the brightness, contrast, and gamma on the SDR monitor in a non-optimal way that negatively exaggerated the differences between the two.  

These settings were different from the factory defaults so he assumes they did so to mislead attendees.

  

Since he said he checked THEIR monitor settings I'd have to assume that he did so at the presentation, you can't really check somebody else's monitor settings on your own monitor.

 

 

Reading your post, I am having trouble accepting that there are people out there judging how a picture might look on another monitor based on how they see it on theirs.  However I did just see a video recently of a gentlemen who took a spirit level on a plane to prove the earth was flat, so yeah, people not so good with the critical thinking.

 

 

[GoodBytes]

Not to defend Nvidia. But my guess, is that they did this so that when people comes with their non-HDR camera to film the comparison and it is viewed by our non-HDR monitors, it doesn't appear like shit.

 

Like this:

 

Which I have the same problem when taking a picture or filming my monitor, which isn't HDR, but is wide gamut monitor (which HDR requires to show more color details).  The reason is that the camera isn't wide gamut, it is standard gamut for sRGB color space which most people have. Beside the camera, the monitor by people watch on isn't HDR either. Not to mention video codec used. In my case, I can alleviate the problem by setting my problem to sRGB mode.. but I can't go "Look how better it looks/compare", as it will look worse on camera, but in reality it looks better.

[mvitkun]

20 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Reading your post, I am having trouble accepting that there are people out there judging how a picture might look on another monitor based on how they see it on theirs.  However I did just see a video recently of a gentlemen who took a spirit level on a plane to prove the earth was flat, so yeah, people not so good with the critical thinking.

Honestly I think his video is valid, yet to be seen how accurate his claims are, but you have to keep in mind that the image you see is not an accurate representation of what he's describing.

In other words his point would have been made equally well even if he hadn't referenced the footage.  

  

 

Anytime somebody compares/describes/reviews something like VRR (G-Sync/FreeSync) or HDR the credibility of the review depends entirely on the reviewer's own credibility. 

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, mvitkun said:

Honestly I think his video is valid but you have to keep in mind that the image you see is not an accurate representation of what he's describing.

In other words his point would have been made equally well even if he hadn't referenced the footage.  

  

 

Anytime somebody compares/describes/reviews something like VRR (G-Sync/FreeSync) or HDR the credibility of the review depends entirely on the reviewer's own credibility. 

I get that, it was the thought that people actually need to be told not to judge a monitor based on how it looks through their own on a video that threw me.

[GoodBytes]

3 minutes ago, mvitkun said:

Honestly I think his video is valid but you have to keep in mind that the image you see is not an accurate representation of what he's describing.

In other words his point would have been made equally well even if he hadn't referenced the footage.  

  

 

Anytime somebody compares/describes/reviews something like VRR (G-Sync/FreeSync) or HDR the credibility of the review depends entirely on the reviewer's own credibility. 

Same problem back in 2008-09 days when "affordable" IPS monitor that you can say is "game ready" was a thing (and not reserved for the professional space due to the high response time and cost) and you are trying to explain how good it is over TN panels. You can't show them.