I'm narrowing it down to 3 tvs. Sharp LC43N7000U, Vizio M43 C1, or Vizio E43U D2? Which of 3 tvs is the best for gaming, sports, movies etc? I assume HDR is the way to go but am I really missing out on HDR?
High Dynamic Range
This should help.
I actually think HDR will be the biggest improvement in image quality since the switch from SD to HD at least.
Right now I would use what ever you have and if that is about to die, get a nice 1080p panel to bridge the time until HDR is mainstream.
The Sharp LC43N7000U and the M43 C1 both look promising. I'm going to stay away from E43U D2.
Vizio is releasing a firmware in the coming weeks for the new P and M series to support HDR10 so they will support both Dolby Vision and HDR10 standards which is nice. Alao the picture quality of the P series is very nice.
HDR could be a flop, i read something about how its so dark ontop of how dark already movies are and that most people watch movies in moderate living room light. Let alone people without OLED screens running washed out IPS panels or VA with poor gamma settings. But it might not be the case.
^ take a read.
HDR is a technology that isn't really here yet. First generation products are always crap. But HDR creates a demand for better display technology, better pixels. And Sony, Samsung, LG and what not will absolutely come up with new technology. Or it will drive the pricing for OLED down.
Sure it could flop. Wouldn't be the first time a really good idea gets driven into the ground by stupid marketing. But after 3D at least you won't need to have a battery driven piece of shit in your face to enjoy whatever it will be.
It's not that HDR isn't reference quality, it's that people don't consume media in a reference quality environment.
Also just to clear things up although im sure you know ( but you did mention 3D which isn't in the same context) HDR isn't quite the same as HDR image people create on a desktop wallpaper. Think of it more like the added range on 24bit 96khz audio.. the stuff that makes movie dialogue really quiet and then BAM huge SPL on some audio effect, making most people continually have to change the levels on their equipment. thats why centre channel boost and dialogue normalizers, audio compressors etc.. are on AV amps and why TV broadcasters limit dynamic range in order for people to actually hear whats going on in every day listening levels.
I do, but thanks.
I did understand you. And as I wrote, I think the TV companies will bring new technology to market to compensate for a lot of that. Also I think that it still will find customers. You mentioned audio as a comparison. Well, think about how much stuff has a night mode to compress the audio so you can hear everything on relatively low levels. Turn that around and you have a day mode for HDR TVs. Problem solved.
Of course. But then you have a HDR video product running a mode that isn't HDR, just like you have HDR audio modes that pretty much everyone uses that aren't HDR either ?
Fact is you can get a better Image quality in darkened rooms and you loose nothing during the day. No compromise for guests, no additional hardware. Nothing.
Explain how. Is the high dynamic range Curtailed to medium dynamic range ? Or is it the need for TV's with much higher contrast ratio's and luminance to overcome the 'dimness' of HDR ?
You didn't rebut my comment, you went straight to 'Fact is'. In the context of our discussion ( let's not make it an argument ) you said 'fact' as in you know what HDR will bring and you know that there will be a day mode that fixes everything, as quoted below..
Did i skip a part ? How will day mode fix things is it more luminance or a medium setting for HDR, what ? Most likely day mode will just be HDR auto off based on a light sensor in the TV.
And from the article:
5 cd/m2 is very dark, roughly the amount of light generated
by five lit candles; any switched-on room lamp is likely to exceed this
figure. With its usage pretty much restricted to a dark room (not
dissimilar to 3D if you think about it), 4K HDR Blu-ray is a niche
format that may become even more niche, although in fairness most video
enthusiasts would do their critical viewing in a dimly-lit environment
anyway. It will be interesting to see if HDR broadcast can succeed in
the average living room which is typically not light-controlled…
Just to be clear im not disputing an OFF mode, or a 'daytime mode' ( same thing ? ) giving SDR (standard dynamic range) Im saying for 99% of consumers it's a flop, a nice to have once in a bluemoon feature for enthusiasts, you might be that enthusiast in that fully darkened room and thats cool.
It's not a feature average people are evangelizing for. Ironically VR headsets could benefit the most as they are totally light controlled.
Tell me when you are done editing...
i am done.
edit, no wait .. now im done.
You turn off HDR if it is bright and sunny and shit, you turn on HDR when your room is darkened. Or the TV will do that for you. That is even mentioned in the article you posted. So yeah, that is a fact. Deal with it.
And yes, brighter displays with a wider range will come. Because money. That is a prediction.
It will be a feature that everyone can enjoy from day one unless it never gets dark where you live. It is a feature that doesn't require a big setup or additional hardware or a centered viewpoint or ... anything really. You turn it on and thats it.
Netflix is already streaming stuff in HDR. So content will be there.
Back to your audio analogy, surround sound is way more complicated to set up. Is that a flop? No. It is still here.
Just because something is not of use in every single scenario possible doesn't mean it is a flop.
I disagree with the premiss of this article.
And now I'm done with this.
My last post on this also. A flop isn't a failure of the feature just like you said with the audio analogy its still here but hardly anyone is using the feature. My definition of a flop is that mass adoption will take place as its an included feature , but mass usage will be low unless the TV compensates for the 5 candles level of brightness.
btw saying things like 'fact' , 'deal with it ' I'm done with this'. is aggressive i didn't bring any attitude to this and we were only having a discussion not an argument. you tend to do that a lot, not cool.
If calling a fact a fact offends you, I can not help you. And yes I get angry when I have to write the same thing multiple times.
But just as food for thought here is a challenge: Try to name one feature that is convenient for the customer, that did not succeed.