HDR vs SDR vs 1080P

Which image looks better

  • 1

    Votes: 7 31.8%

  • 2

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 3

    Votes: 14 63.6%

  • 4-All are equally good

    Votes: 1 4.5%
  • Total voters
    22
  • Poll closed .
Rane-2020 said:
I genuinely did not understand at first thats why i asked you.if i knew its just a silly timepass post i would not have commented on it.anyways have fun
Click to expand...
Yes for fun and to interact with FM's. Even though it is for fun it will give a rough idea once i reveal which is which and explain how it all actually looked in person for me. Not every one is microscopic and will know what will be the difference unless both screens are kept side by side. For example my wife does expect good picture quality and she couldn't make out the huge difference as she isn't going to research how an image looks but just watch the content. So she has set up the sony TV in the hall and made me withdraw the sale as well and liking it.
 
Seems like the 3rd image is the winner. Yes like some of you commented this is not the right way to judge and yes we all know a compressed pic through phone won’t give the actual image. But I just wanted to share my view on the subject as I moved to 4k recently from a 1080p tv. Well first thing first the 3rd image is 1080p in my Sony and the 1st is HDR in c9. The middle image is standard 4K in my C9. To keep it short 4K and HDR is meaningless unless it’s a big screen most importantly in a very good tv and watched in the right distance. In my other thread c9 vs A8 you can know that I only wanted to go for a 55inch tv and not for the sake of oled or 4K but for a big picture. I was 100% satisfied with my Sony picture quality and never had the urge to upgrade in terms of picture quality. But for a week I was auditioning 55 inches and I never got impressed and was wondering is 4k really worth it.It was when I started auditioning 65 inch I started noticing the difference. For people who are going to watch a lot of cable, sports in a bright room you dont even need a oled or a top model tv. In showrooms the mid range tv’s were excellent for such contents. Go for big Oled or top qled or FALD sets if majority of your viewing will be 4k Or HDR.Now coming to the topic on the three images the Sony image actually looks very good and almost equal to the standard 4K image. HDR is totally in a different league. In this image itself if you notice closely in the shoulder and face u get very sharp details. But more then the image quality what I enjoy most is the size. Like they say size matters ;). So to summarise while purchasing a TV don’t get tempted by fancy tech like oled, qled etc. What contents you watch and how you watch say dark or bright room is the important factor. And like I said go big if it’s 4k HDR. Keep it simple if cable and sports is your top priority.
 
Love4sound said:
Seems like the 3rd image is the winner. Yes like some of you commented this is not the right way to judge and yes we all know a compressed pic through phone won’t give the actual image. But I just wanted to share my view on the subject as I moved to 4k recently from a 1080p tv. Well first thing first the 3rd image is 1080p in my Sony and the 1st is HDR in c9. The middle image is standard 4K in my C9. To keep it short 4K and HDR is meaningless unless it’s a big screen most importantly in a very good tv and watched in the right distance. In my other thread c9 vs A8 you can know that I only wanted to go for a 55inch tv and not for the sake of oled or 4K but for a big picture. I was 100% satisfied with my Sony picture quality and never had the urge to upgrade in terms of picture quality. But for a week I was auditioning 55 inches and I never got impressed and was wondering is 4k really worth it.It was when I started auditioning 65 inch I started noticing the difference. For people who are going to watch a lot of cable, sports in a bright room you dont even need a oled or a top model tv. In showrooms the mid range tv’s were excellent for such contents. Go for big Oled or top qled or FALD sets if majority of your viewing will be 4k Or HDR.Now coming to the topic on the three images the Sony image actually looks very good and almost equal to the standard 4K image. HDR is totally in a different league. In this image itself if you notice closely in the shoulder and face u get very sharp details. But more then the image quality what I enjoy most is the size. Like they say size matters ;). So to summarise while purchasing a TV don’t get tempted by fancy tech like oled, qled etc. What contents you watch and how you watch say dark or bright room is the important factor. And like I said go big if it’s 4k HDR. Keep it simple if cable and sports is your top priority.
Click to expand...

Hi Navin,
Looks like your all time favourite Sony is the winner.:D
 
Love4sound said:
Seems like the 3rd image is the winner. Yes like some of you commented this is not the right way to judge and yes we all know a compressed pic through phone won’t give the actual image. But I just wanted to share my view on the subject as I moved to 4k recently from a 1080p tv. Well first thing first the 3rd image is 1080p in my Sony and the 1st is HDR in c9. The middle image is standard 4K in my C9. To keep it short 4K and HDR is meaningless unless it’s a big screen most importantly in a very good tv and watched in the right distance. In my other thread c9 vs A8 you can know that I only wanted to go for a 55inch tv and not for the sake of oled or 4K but for a big picture. I was 100% satisfied with my Sony picture quality and never had the urge to upgrade in terms of picture quality. But for a week I was auditioning 55 inches and I never got impressed and was wondering is 4k really worth it.It was when I started auditioning 65 inch I started noticing the difference. For people who are going to watch a lot of cable, sports in a bright room you dont even need a oled or a top model tv. In showrooms the mid range tv’s were excellent for such contents. Go for big Oled or top qled or FALD sets if majority of your viewing will be 4k Or HDR.Now coming to the topic on the three images the Sony image actually looks very good and almost equal to the standard 4K image. HDR is totally in a different league. In this image itself if you notice closely in the shoulder and face u get very sharp details. But more then the image quality what I enjoy most is the size. Like they say size matters ;). So to summarise while purchasing a TV don’t get tempted by fancy tech like oled, qled etc. What contents you watch and how you watch say dark or bright room is the important factor. And like I said go big if it’s 4k HDR. Keep it simple if cable and sports is your top priority.
Click to expand...

Thats rather unusual
HDR 4K on a top range should have yielded a lot more detail in the background with better gradation between light & dark
Instead, it’s the other way round.. i.e. the SDR image (#3) has far better contrast and gradation in the background

Hopefully it’s because the camera image processing mucked it up, else i would have guessed that HDR isn’t setup properly somewhere in the chain
 
superczar said:
Thats rather unusual
HDR 4K on a top range should have yielded a lot more detail in the background with better gradation between light & dark
Instead, it’s the other way round.. i.e. the SDR image (#3) has far better contrast and gradation in the background

Hopefully it’s because the camera image processing mucked it up, else i would have guessed that HDR isn’t setup properly somewhere in the chain
Click to expand...

Not necessary at all. HDR can be graded to use just like 10 nits or even 1 nit of dynamic range if the scene calls for it. In a scene that use the entire dynamic range of the TV, not even expensive DSLRs will be able to capture the dynamic range of HDR on the OLED, which is 21 stops according to LG.

SDR on OLEDs can also be pushed to have peak highlights of 450 nits; even more with dynamic contrast. Infact, you can push a dark movie scene from SDR source to be brighter than it'll be in the HDR mode, which requires tweaking tone mapping to increase brightness, and that's something most users don't have access to in settings. That's the reason why AI brightness was introduced and now Dolby Vision IQ is coming.
 
Marakk said:
Not necessary at all. HDR can be graded to use just like 10 nits or even 1 nit of dynamic range if the scene calls for it. In a scene that use the entire dynamic range of the TV, not even expensive DSLRs will be able to capture the dynamic range of HDR on the OLED, which is 21 stops according to LG.

SDR on OLEDs can also be pushed to have peak highlights of 450 nits; even more with dynamic contrast. Infact, you can push a dark movie scene from SDR source to be brighter than it'll be in the HDR mode, which requires tweaking tone mapping to increase brightness, and that's something most users don't have access to in settings. That's the reason why AI brightness was introduced and now Dolby Vision IQ is coming.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t referring to the peak highlights but the glass area/object behind the primary subject.
The SDR image (3) appears to have far better brightness rolloff thus making the darker sections clearly graded while the HDR image (1) seems to flatten everything into a single gray lump - exactly the opposite of what one would expect

Quite possible that the camera capture messed the image - but if this is what it’s like in person then there certainly is an issue somewhere
 
superczar said:
I wasn’t referring to the peak highlights but the glass area/object behind the primary subject.
The SDR image (3) appears to have far better brightness rolloff thus making the darker sections clearly graded while the HDR image (1) seems to flatten everything into a single gray lump - exactly the opposite of what one would expect

Quite possible that the camera capture messed the image - but if this is what it’s like in person then there certainly is an issue somewhere
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you, but that single gray lump just might be the HDR grade. That was my point. Even if everything is right, and I think there's plenty of issues in this test and that's why I didn't even vote, HDR by default isn't going to just look better in taking images. Better brightness roll off just might be the camera clipping some highlights, even though HDR image here seems to not be utilizing the even half of the spectrum, which would have meant a lot more clipping of either highlights or blacks depending on exposure.
 
I didn't vote here, because I know it is not the correct way to judge. It could be that one TV has different picture settings and placed completely different location than other one. Also one scene might be good in LED tv and another will be great in OLED. For eg, any dark scenes like the one shown in JerryRig video comparison between OLED and QLED, some images will not be visible in qled at all.

Anyways, I do have exactly similar setup as yours except mine is 55C9 and W950D 43inch. Till I bought oled, i used to think Sony is great. Of course no doubt, W950D great until I started watching OLED. But whenever i watch something in w950D, I don't get the same satisfaction as I get in OLED. There's something will be missing in w950D. My TV content is mostly the online streaming, especially Netflix series too good to watch in OLED. It's not like day and night difference, but as I said, there will be something that you will miss in the w950D.

Having said that, if possible give the source of this image, let me also check it out in my environment, since I have exactly similar setup as yours. W950D, 55C9 and iPhone Xr :)
 
superczar said:
Thats rather unusual
HDR 4K on a top range should have yielded a lot more detail in the background with better gradation between light & dark
Instead, it’s the other way round.. i.e. the SDR image (#3) has far better contrast and gradation in the background

Hopefully it’s because the camera image processing mucked it up, else i would have guessed that HDR isn’t setup properly somewhere in the chain
Click to expand...
Actually the camera wasn’t able to capture HDR properly. The background, shadow details and contrast is way better in person. But yeah the shadow details in dark scenes are slightly bright in the Sony.
smnrock said:
I didn't vote here, because I know it is not the correct way to judge. It could be that one TV has different picture settings and placed completely different location than other one. Also one scene might be good in LED tv and another will be great in OLED. For eg, any dark scenes like the one shown in JerryRig video comparison between OLED and QLED, some images will not be visible in qled at all.

Anyways, I do have exactly similar setup as yours except mine is 55C9 and W950D 43inch. Till I bought oled, i used to think Sony is great. Of course no doubt, W950D great until I started watching OLED. But whenever i watch something in w950D, I don't get the same satisfaction as I get in OLED. There's something will be missing in w950D. My TV content is mostly the online streaming, especially Netflix series too good to watch in OLED. It's not like day and night difference, but as I said, there will be something that you will miss in the w950D.

Having said that, if possible give the source of this image, let me also check it out in my environment, since I have exactly similar setup as yours. W950D, 55C9 and iPhone Xr :)
Click to expand...
That something is mainly size and yes obviously the magic of oled.If you notice the Sony is way better in motion and handles stutter better.And also while comparing play 1080p videos and 4K. Comparing 950 is already not fair with c9 and HDR is totally cruel with a 4 year old led TV.

 
In general Sony is better in motion handling, no doubt about that. And this is mainly in sports or fast moving scenes. Anyways the comparison is not about 4 year old tv, its about the oled vs led. Sony's latest 9500 series is far worse than the OLEDs, even QLED was better.
 
Love4sound said:
Actually the camera wasn’t able to capture HDR properly. The background, shadow details and contrast is way better in person. But yeah the shadow details in dark scenes are slightly bright in the Sony.

That something is mainly size and yes obviously the magic of oled.If you notice the Sony is way better in motion and handles stutter better.And also while comparing play 1080p videos and 4K. Comparing 950 is already not fair with c9 and HDR is totally cruel with a 4 year old led TV.

Click to expand...

Ah! I mentioned both these points before crashing. Since SDR is graded to have only 100 nits of dynamic range, modern TVs have a lot of headroom to boost that, but since it's a uniform global boost, if you increase backlight, shadow details will also become brighter. Now on the HDR, TV is already using the entire range of the set by default and then displaying based on signal. OLED light can't be increased anymore, which is why to boost shadow details tone mapping needs to be tweaked.

Camera not capturing the entire range. I suspected that too. Was the HDR Standard mode tweaked in any way? That mode is highly inaccurate actually. Color Temp is also really blue.
 
smnrock said:
In general Sony is better in motion handling, no doubt about that. And this is mainly in sports or fast moving scenes. Anyways the comparison is not about 4 year old tv, its about the oled vs led. Sony's latest 9500 series is far worse than the OLEDs, even QLED was better.
Click to expand...

Motion being better on W950C is also because of different techs. LCD, even though they get faster than plasma, still have lower response time than OLEDs, which means smoother motion with all interpolation off. When reviewers say Sony is better in motion, they mean Sony's interpolation algorithms are the best. They work well to remove stutter with minimum artifacts. LG has caught up, but still a tad behind. But for this, you need to turn motion interpolation on. Are you using Trumotion on your C9?
 
smnrock said:
In general Sony is better in motion handling, no doubt about that. And this is mainly in sports or fast moving scenes. Anyways the comparison is not about 4 year old tv, its about the oled vs led. Sony's latest 9500 series is far worse than the OLEDs, even QLED was better.
Click to expand...
Sony A8 and A9 is very good. They have priced it very bad. The display looks sharp and rich and only reason from me to not go for Sony was c9 offered more VFM and isn’t far behind Sony interms of picture quality
Marakk said:
Ah! I mentioned both these points before crashing. Since SDR is graded to have only 100 nits of dynamic range, modern TVs have a lot of headroom to boost that, but since it's a uniform global boost, if you increase backlight, shadow details will also become brighter. Now on the HDR, TV is already using the entire range of the set by default and then displaying based on signal. OLED light can't be increased anymore, which is why to boost shadow details tone mapping needs to be tweaked.

Camera not capturing the entire range. I suspected that too. Was the HDR Standard mode tweaked in any way? That mode is highly inaccurate actually. Color Temp is also really blue.
Click to expand...
I don’t use standard mode. In Sony I liked standard but in c9 I use cinema mode for HDR and technicolour for other contents
 
Love4sound said:
Sony A8 and A9 is very good. They have priced it very bad. The display looks sharp and rich and only reason from me to not go for Sony was c9 offered more VFM and isn’t far behind Sony interms of picture quality

I don’t use standard mode. In Sony I liked standard but in c9 I use cinema mode for HDR and technicolour for other contents
Click to expand...

In which mode was the HDR photo taken?
 
Audiolab 6000A Integrated Amplifier
Purchase the Audiolab 6000A Integrated Amplifier at a special offer price.
Back
Top