Last of Us new HDR mode on PS4

Someone took this with their Samsung Galaxy phone. HDR enabled on top.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-dynamic-range_video
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_depth
digitaltrends.com/home-theater/hdr-for-tvs-explained/
pocket-lint.com/news/137367-what-is-hdr-what-tvs-support-hdr-and-what-hdr-content-can-i-watch
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

That "someone" is a fucking idiot.

FPBP

Doesn't really matter you can still see the difference...

Must look better in person

Incredible...

HDR is no joke but this is a poor way to compare the two. Side by side in person is the only way you're ever going to see the improvement and I highly recommend just going down to a store that has some non-HDR TVs next to the HDR ones displaying the same video. It's night and day in comparison.

Yeah I definitely got to pick up a HDR tv for my Pro

FPWP

Don't do it just for that. If you've got a good 1080p TV that has good contrast and what not I don't think it's worth it just for video games. But if you're heavily into movies and TV I say go for it if you have the money. Better off just waiting for a year or two when the prices will come right down.

I want a 4K HDR tv but yes the prices are high

Here's another one

Looks pretty good

The thing is that literally no TV, not even OLEDs, supports true HDR yet. The full HDR standard is 10,000 nits of brightness with the Rec. 2020 color space. The best TVs right now, branded "Premium UHD" only have 1000 nits and don't even fully cover the P3 color space, which in turn is only roughly 70% of Rec. 2020.

It's 3/4G and Web 2.0 all over again.

I'm still gonna get one anyway because I'm probably gonna sudoku before the year is out the way things are going, but for the non-immimently deceased it's stupid to get one now.

Idiot detected

>Must look better in person

No shit, you need a fucking HDR TV to actually see the improvement.

This is the power of a... PS4

whoah

The problem with the PS4 Pro's checkerboard 4K and HDR capabilities is that you need to see it for yourself running on a 4k hdr tv to see a difference
There's no way to show that in ads or photos

whoa.... they've finally done it.....they've unlocked the true power......of the PS4™..... incredible........

>There's no way to show that in ads or photos
Not really no, but they could do a better job explaining the technical side. Early adopters of tech are more likely to, at least, have the interest/patience to read through stuff like that.

If I were responsible for marketing them I'd be pushing for more information and awareness instead of least common denominator BEST PICTURR EVAR GUYZ nonsense. By the time those people start entering the market, the technology will be commonplace enough that most people will have seen glimpses and/or have access to a live set to see the difference for themselves.

Wow.... clouds.... $400.....

plus another 1000+ for the tv.

plus tip

It.. Looks good? Wtf

You don't need a HDR TV to see the difference in a photograph you retards.

The top is with HDR, the bottom is HDR enabled without an HDR TV.

The top could be achieved just fine without HDR using proper light levels, it's a huge gimmick outside of color replication in dark or light scenes. For most games there's barely a difference.

HDR is only good for games with deep blacks, like DOOM 3 or Alien Isolation

or battlefield 1

>playing TLoU on PS4Pro + HDR TV
>mfw Hotel Basement

No, it's good for bright games more than dark ones.

Sharts in pants looking for the key card

it's good for everything if it's implemented properly.

No shit you need to see it in person. The pics are just there to show that there's a difference.

if you already played that part you should know what to expect and just haul ass to the exit after picking up the key card.

Run and don't look back

>HDR
>in a jpg
Even if it was a proper hdr file no one here could display it. It looks different but what you're seeing is not the hdr but just the different exposure levels the photo was taken at.

It's not a png, you drooling retard. It's a photograph.

While this is true, even 70% coverage of Rec.2020 that TVs offer now is noticeably better looking than standard 709 color space. I have a Samsung KS8000 and am very happy with it, and the HDR demo videos I've played on it are extremely bright and vivid.

>I highly recommend just going down to a store that has some non-HDR TVs next to the HDR ones displaying the same video
I used to work in retail at a pretty big electronics store chain here in Germany and whenever we got a new model of TV they had a guy come in that calibrated the TVs we had set up. He always calibrated the cheaper models right next to the expensive ones wrong so the better ones looked way better in comparison than they actually were and the like, it was always quite a process. He'd set up cameras and measure how the light falls in the TVs at different times of the day and shit to make sure the good ones always looked as good as possible and all sorts of shit. They meticulously planned out which model has to stand where and what video has to play on it at which times of the day, it was pretty fucked

I'm jealous of anyone who has an HDR tv right now. I want to try this out...

How's the input lag? I was thinking of picking that up but that one eurogamer article about horrendous input lag scared me. Also the amazon reviews seem to really complain about motion blur, which is somewhat corroborated on rtings.

>The pics are just there to show that there's a difference.

Again, no shit.

What a pointless thread.

goddamn that looks fucking amazing

Well if you don't like last of us gtfo

Honestly it's pretty bad unless you are in gaming mode. When in gaming mode it's fine.

Are you retarded or only pretending?

or mafia 3

>mfw people think TV HDR is the same a shitty smartphone picture HDR


THEY ARE NOTHING ALIKE

TV HDR IS AN EXTENDED COLOR SPACE, MUCH BETTER CONTRAST, AND A HIGHER BIT DEPTH

CELL PHONE HDR IS BLOWN OUT SATURATION IN A LIMITED COLOR SPACE


THEY ARE NOT THE SAME REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Hyping up the $500 DOA VR headset wasn't enough for you retards huh?

>this ass blasted "YOU HAVE TO SEE IT TO BELIEVE" it drone who is already head over heels for this gimmick

What the fuck are you even on about.

Jpgs literally can not show anything hdr, no matter if it's a screenshot or a photo or whatever 5000$ camera it was taken with. HDR means more than 8-bits per color channel which jpg and normal use pngs cannot do by technical definition.
The difference you are seeing in those photos is a difference in exposure levels that was used to crunch down the hdr information back to non-hdr. The same effect could be achieved by upping the contrast or something.
I'm not saying that hdr does nothing, I'm saying that trying to show it through jpgs is stupid.

it's okay bro
keep telling yourself that

Ugh. Does HDR work in gaming mode? Does it look significantly worse?

The only way you can think HDR is a gimmick is if you don't fully understand what it is. It's a greatly improved color space and a higher bit depth to remove color banding. It's able to display much higher peak ranges of brightness than a normal color space, also. With proper HDR mastered video it looks really fantastic and far brighter and more naturally colored than anything a Rec.709 or sRGB monitor can display. I wish I could show you an example but I can't because nothing that isn't an HDR TV can show you what it really looks like. You'll see a lot of side by side pictures of SDR and HDR where one side is more saturated than the other, but it really doesn't look like that in person.

Read, and be educated:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-dynamic-range_video
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_depth
digitaltrends.com/home-theater/hdr-for-tvs-explained/
pocket-lint.com/news/137367-what-is-hdr-what-tvs-support-hdr-and-what-hdr-content-can-i-watch

Keep telling myself what? That jpgs have 8 bits per channel? Are ya daft or just a technically illiterate child?

tldr
you're worse than 3d shills.

It should, but I haven't tryed it with anything that can output HDR yet. It's Samsungs top of the line series of TVs, I can't imagine they wouldn't work with an HDR Xbox or PS4.

Whatever, man. Enjoy your color banding.

jpgs have 8 bits per channel you retard and there are shaders to remove all banding.

keep shilling gimmicks.

Not that user, but you clearly don't understand.
Hdr is not a gimmick, it's just like wide-screen, just like 'hd' 480p, full HD 1080p, and soon 4k. It's the next step and all tvs will eventually have it.

Your tv can only display a limited amount of colors, Hdr just greatly increases that. It means you can see much more detail in shadows and bright highlights and generally gives a much richer more natural image

All HDR is boost the capacity for contrast levels to be pushed to higher levels than what was previously available. The problem with this is clear in the photo comparisons - the colors intensity (contrast) is simply too high. It looks unrealistic and distracting. The additional blooming doesn't help either.

Unlike 4K (where the picture quality becomes visibly crisper), HDR doesn't objectively make things better. It's a completely subjective addition that not everyone is going to like.

no, it's a gimmick like 3d tv.

>jpgs have 8 bits per channel you retard
No shit, faggot. How am I going to show you a proper test between 8 bit and 10bit when your retarded monitor only outputs an 8 bit color depth anyways? It's called an example, you autistic retard.

>shaders to remove all banding
lol

You are never going to properly remove banding with an 8 bit depth, no matter how many retarded filters you put on the image.

Man that part was genuinely terrifying, I had to turn off the game for a couple hours. I just wasn't expecting that at all from it.

If the contrast is off and it looks unnatural then the TV has been configured wrong.

Literally all Hdr means is giving your TV more colors it can display, so it looks more natural.
Current tvs with a normal color space have to approximate a lot of the colors to something they can display, Hdr tvs are much more accurate to life

Yeah, nah.

>Current tvs with a normal color space have to approximate a lot of the colors to something they can display
Are there even channels that broadcast in hdr? I imagine that it might be rare to see actual hdr content unless you get some special movie BDs

Until TVs are capable of putting out as much light as the real world, there is no such thing as "too high." Does your TV screen get washed out when it's too bright outside(hint: the answer is "yes")? Then it still has a ways to go.

HDR is objectively more realistic. Some people may find that realism undesirable or, paradoxically, "uncanny," since they're not used to it. Like with 48fps. It's also possible early HDR content, particularly games, will go the lazy route and simply increase contrast without actually using real lighting information to drive it(sort of like those 3D movies that weren't filmed in 3D but done in post). But neither of those things has anything to do with how realistic or objectively better HDR itself is.

So is it about to be GOTY again thanks to this wonderful improvement even though everyone had forgotten about it?

>there are shaders to remove all banding.

Its the same as 4k was a few years ago.
You can download or stream hdr content, and blurays are starting to have it. I'm not aware of any broadcasters that are doing Hdr yet though, at least not for live tv

Just like 4k is objectively more pixels on the screen, HDR is objectively more color and light in one pixel. Sure it's pretty unnecessary right now but it might just become standard and thus much cheaper in the future.

It's literally just better better peak brightness and a much higher range of color. It's the natural evolution of TVs and monitors, it's just a better looking picture.

Pic related is an example. Image if every computer monitor and TV you've ever seen in your entire like could only display the colors inside the black triangle on the left. Now imagine seeing a TV that could display everything in the triangle on the right. That + a much higher peak brightness and deeper black levels (Imagine a movie scene that takes place outside on a sunny day being nearly as bright as being outside, but at the same time the dark parts are still really dark). This is basically what HDR is.

This guy is right. A lot of the displays you see in stores that run HDR have the colors all fucked up in order to "pop" out more. When one is properly configured it looks far more natural than a standard HD TV. Regular HD tv looks fake, compressed, and very flat looking after watching a lot of HDR content.

HDR is a meme. I know exactly what high dynamic range is and there is nothing in all this hardware and shit that does anything you could not do before.

For a very long time I have used high quality monitors with very good color reproduction because I do art. The blacks are very dark and the gamut is wide.

You are all getting scammed out of your money. Any perceived differences you "see" are you getting fooled by marketing, or some shitty gimmick that could be done on any standard hardware.

I was mistaken, HDR isn't what I thought it was. I thought the bottom portion of the comparison pictures was the HDR example, so I get it now. It does indeed look objectively better since the pixels aren't just uniformly bright.

Not yet. Right now HDR is limited to UHD blurays, Netflix, Amazon Prime, a couple other streaming services, and a few demo videos that Samsung and LG produce.

Let's explain HDR with this one simple trick: when you look at the sun, it usually hurts because it's so bright right? Well maybe this trick isn't so good because it implies you go outside but whatever.

Well when you look at the sun in a video game, it's okay, because it's not so bright because it's on a screen. Well, HDR makes it so that it'll actually hurt.

But wide gamut monitors are basically hdr monitors with a different marketing buzzword, user.

None of those things have anything to do really with what HDR is. All you described is a monitor. In fact, most phones and especially OLED phones will do all of this.

The rarest thing is finding full color space and most TV's fuck up their colors anyway to make them more saturated because normalfags (probably like you) think more color = better picture.

He is right though. HDR is 32 bit, and JPG's are shitty compressed 8 bit images.

Now if this actually means much to your viewing experience is one thing, but you cannot just say he's wrong because you think that.

>I do art
Lol get a load of this faggot
And hl2 did Hdr in 2004 too, right?

HDR doesn't make colors more saturated, it just makes more colors.

In real life there are more colors than the ones displayed on average TV's and monitors. HDR gets closer. That's it. It has nothing to do with saturation. The only reason they show you a more saturated picture with the "HDR" side is because if they showed what it actually was supposed to do (make darks darker and lights lighter) nobody would care that much.

Extremely dark darks are unnatural anyway. HDR is a fucking meme and wide gamut images are only useful for art.

What's the actual technical standard of HDR TVs though? I have a hard time imagining them actually being able to display 32 bit channel color. Isn't it something lower like 10 or 12 bit?

So you have a DCI-P3 10 bit capable monitor? That's essentially what and HDR TV is. HDR isn't a scam, it's essentially giving TVs the same color space capabilities your fancy monitor has but in addition the TV probably has a much higher peak brightness.

>Until TVs are capable of putting out as much light as the real world, there is no such thing as "too high."

This is the dumbest fucking post in this entire thread.

>It's fine if you go blind it's more realistic that way

See

I'm finding that HDR and 4K are both memes.
Half-generations were a mistake.

HDR10 uses a 10 bit color depth, Dolby Vision uses a 12 bit color depth.

4k TVs are so fucking retarded.
There is all of 5 shows that are actually distributed in 4k and upscaling just makes it look worse than having a normal 1080p TV. 4k monitors fuck yeah, but for TVs it's the biggest meme up there with 120 Hz

>Hackers hack your tv
>turn up brightness to 100%
>your whole family goes blind

i find it hard to care about this shit when there's not really any good devices that play wide gamuts at high frequencies and with no ghosting.

4K is great because it made 2k monitors commonplace and affordable.
I'm hoping the same thing will happen to hdr.

No they don't. I work on wide gamut monitors all day and any decent IPS monitor still looks fine.

I know. That's my entire point. Wide gamut monitors are only useful because you take the shit on them and print it, as in the colors will show up in real life when you print art, but it's meaningless to people watching TV or playing video games. It will not improve your experience at all.

My entire point is I've been using monitors with these "HDR" capabilities (nothing to do with HDR btw faggots) and I can safely tell anybody that thinks this is a "wait till you see it and are blown away!" thing that they are wrong.

The only thing the monitors are good for are to capture the dull and boring nuances of reality. Sony tried really hard to blow out shit with their PSPro shit using all those saturated blues and whatever, but the real use of these fucking monitors is just seeing normal shits colors properly.

It's literally to make it look more like real life. They do that great, but that is not even that visually appealing. Everybody is wasting their money on this shit.

Yeah dude, just like widescreen was a meme in 1997, and 480p was a meme in 2002, then the 1080p meme in 2006

Nobody really adopted those technologies, right?

With the PS4 Pro it's Last of Us Remastered Remastered.

TV's are all pieces of trash anyway because they have absurd amounts of input lag.

Playing on a 60 inch TV on your couch or whatever is a dumb meme. Get a 32 inch monitor and some modesty.

virgin detected

Its a patch and all standard ps4 discs will work on the pro

So why buy a 4k TV now? It's not going to become widespread for at least another 5 years and at that point significantly better models will be out and go for less than what the current ones?

...

Diminishing returns.

4k is probably necessary for large TV's, but 5k and above are pointless for essentially all consumer displays.

HDR is also pointless. TV's use such trash panels that people might notice the change if they get a new TV, but take a decent, calibrated 8 bit panel and the 10 bit panel and most untrained eyes will not notice the difference nor care.

It doesn't help that most people have watched non 10-bit panels all their lives and may not even really be able to see the differences without training their eyes. Color "literacy" isn't automatic.

Honestly the high end Samsung 2016 displays are already pretty good. Within 2 years the displays will probably will be approaching 90% Rec.2020 capabilities and won't have any noticeable problems like that as the tech gets more and more standardized.

UHD blurays are coming out for every movie, streaming services already offer 4k, 4k gaming is a thing on consoles as well as pc now, sports channels are starting to offer 4k, the list goes on...

You just have to ask yourself the question, are you willing to pay more now and enjoy the technology earlier?
fortunately I have a decent job and can afford a nice 4k TV. 4k tvs are already in their second or third generations so most of the teething issues are gone