I'm comparing LG G6 , SAMSUNG S8+ and SONY XZ Premium . Both of them are very good , but I don't know which of them has a 10-bit color depth display panel .
Thank you everyone
tenshikurabu said:
I'm comparing LG G6 , SAMSUNG S8+ and SONY XZ Premium . Both of them are very good , but I don't know which of them has a 10-bit color depth display panel .
Thank you everyone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what I found on the net:
S8/S8+: They have a Mobile HDR premium display (whose certification states that the color depth must be 10 bit)
G6: It has an HDR10 (so 10 bit of color depth) and dolby vision display
XzP: HDR10 but no dolby vision
Hope it helps =)
Killua96 said:
This is what I found on the net:
S8/S8+: They have a Mobile HDR premium display (whose certification states that the color depth must be 10 bit)
G6: It has an HDR10 (so 10 bit of color depth) and dolby vision display
XzP: HDR10 but no dolby vision
Hope it helps =)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you very much for your help, I think I will enjoy HDR videos on my new smartphone
OP see how easy it is to find stuff on Google......
rubiicon59 said:
OP see how easy it is to find stuff on Google......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In some pages , I saw members talking about it has 10-bit panel or not
Interesting, Smart question.
before answering your question let me point out that if you like to settle with inaccurate/incorrect answers then just settle with the answer above or stuff you find after googling that question.
I also like to point out the reason why this question is smart and interesting mainly because for some reason, bit depth related questions are not answered properly and there is a huge misunderstanding because of false information and details that you get on the internet or false advertising as some manufacturers falsely-advertised their panels as "10 Bit displays" (esp. if you're buying a monitor, be aware of these scams , pay attention to the details like the model and do a dedicated research on the subject)
Let's get into your question
Oh man, op, I'll be honest with you, you got yourself in a deep, deep vortex because the answer to that question packs a lot of information, I hope you read everything patiently because I didn't write this article-like long reply for nothing but educational purposes
First of all there is no such thing as "10/8 bit display" or "10/8 bit panel", 10 bit display likely doesn't exist and 8 bit display is atari content, 10 bit display is what you meant/referred to is likely the "bits per channel" which isn't the number you're looking for, as some panels could have 8bpc, but can have more subpixels which result in higher bitdepth than 24 bit (like rgbw, 8 bits for channel in rgbw allows true 32bit panel resulting in more colors/shades generated due to additional channel and additional data or 8 bits stored for that channel, plus the color combining by the usage of the additional subpixel to control each shade, in this case adjusting the saturation of the white subpixel, in a colored/white & black gradient testing these panels will subjectively and objectively give you the same color output and the same wavelengths) channels here stands for the subpixel, the actual bit depth of the display is the bit depth of it's pixel, which is 3 (likely 3, because many pixels use RGB color palettes/segments, but can differ as mentioned above) x bits per channel
So the formula of the panel's bit depth is generally like this :
No. Of colored subpixels X no. of bits per channel(subpixel or pixel)
Example: a given panel has RGB component, for each channel (subpixel) it stores 8 bits, the total bit depth of the display equals that number x 3 which equals 24 bit, also known as true color, more informations about the subject can be found here
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_depth
(Notice the "do not confuse with bpc" line, also notice that higher bitdepth than 24 bit or "true color" is also known as "deep color")
But manufacturers, oh they beg to differ, and will always publish the bit per channel instead of the actual bitdepth of the display just because they feel that their rgb display is unique for achieving 30 bit depth or bit depths more than 24 without the need for extra subpixel and honestly they have all the right to do it.
What you are looking for: whether LG G6/Sony xperia xz premium/galaxy note 7/galaxy s8 have 30/32 bit displays.
The answer: not definitive.
There is no definitive answer for your question, there aren't any websites on the internet who measure the actual output by determining each color's wavelength by using a spectrophotometer to determine that there are actual different shades in a gradient/artifact testing, plus spectrophotometers are expensive and not anyone is able to get an accurate tool.
Add the fact that standards like HDR by the UHD alliance or Dolby vision aren't trustworthy at all, many displays had bit depth more than 24 and had amazing contrast ratios, yet they didn't have the hdr standard because they are older than the standard itself, and many panels are given HDR standards or dolby vision, despite not having deep color (30 bit or more) most likely, these smartphones mentioned above, because all of them are listed to have "24 bit " instead of "30 bit" color on websites like gsmarena and devicespecifications and because deep color is really expensive, if you want deep color start searching from laptops and don't go below
How to test:
If you're lazy like most of us humans, grab these videos
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B68jIlCvW85gWFp0NVUwTFdTNFE/view
Extract them and run them both, see the difference in gradient like stepping in the lower side and no stepping in the upperside of both vids? Cool, enjoy your deep color panel
Also on how to make yourself a test without getting wavelength detectors/spectrophotometer (for devs and designers):
Do a gradient testing by making a .png, one for deep color, consisting of many rows side by side of close of sequential colors/grey tones grabbed from the 30bit colorspace and another one for 24 bit in the same way, take these .pngs and make an mp4 out of them or just place them one atop of another, voila! You made the test yourself
I hope you have been educated and benefited by this response, but I'd like to hear a response from you too after you test the phone yourself
So after testing my mi8 i can see clear the difference on 8 and 10 bit gradient. So it is 10bit?
On my acer tablet i see only the 8 bit(the same top and bottom).
Related
Bought the 10...love the way it runs but I bought it to show my photography work on (would use an ipad but I really detest the ios software).
The entire screen seems to be washed out overall with weak black levels and reds in particular are low saturation.
Sharp as a tack for sure....is it just mine? I see such conflicting reports in reviews although I am seeing more now about low saturation and contrast.
Very frustrating....unless someone out there knows some way of calibrating this display which I haven't found?
you are right
i am also a photographer (Canon 5D MkII)
i have watched some photos now(got my N10 yesterday) and as you said the screen is sharp as hell
i have never seen this amount of details with my DSLR photos.
im also doing hardware calibration and i see whats wrong right away and i have also tested it...the problem is that the gamma is to low.
The N10 has a Gamma Level around 1.4 - 1.5 where it should be 2.2!
(yeah that should make some attention hehe)
thats a fact and thats why we have washed out colors and bad contrast
but the good thing is that even at that low gamma we have a decent picture quality with good black levels!
i dont think the black levels on my device is washed out
it shouldnt be this good with this crappy gamma but it is
thats amazing and that tells that this is a quality screen above normal.
with correct gamma at 2.2 this screen will rock for sure.
so lets wait for some kernel guru to make some gamma adjustments
i have said i before that im willing to pay that person that makes gamma adjustment possible for the N10s.
You are correct...gamma is definitely too low.
As far as washed out reds go, I suppose I could process specifically for display on this tablet but that's a pain in the butt.
I wish the darned ipad wasn't such a restrictive ecosystem for the software. The colors rock on the ipad unfortunately but it's just too darned restrictive.
jfenton57 said:
You are correct...gamma is definitely too low.
As far as washed out reds go, I suppose I could process specifically for display on this tablet but that's a pain in the butt.
I wish the darned ipad wasn't such a restrictive ecosystem for the software. The colors rock on the ipad unfortunately but it's just too darned restrictive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
im waiting for a i1 Display Pro colormeter
when i get it i will do a hardware calibration.
but i have checked some stuff already and i think that the colors is right for its low gamma.
also the brightness for the colors seems the same for Red/Green/Blue and thats a good thing
also the contrast and black level is reference.
i also think the color temp is close to 6500k
that means that the grayscale is correct.
so the only thing that messes up this display is the low gamma.
(or wrong gamma curve/line)
you have some tests here that you can do without a colormeter,if you want to check it out
http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/
also you can download the AVSHD 709 Patterns here.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/948496/avs-hd-709-blu-ray-mp4-calibration
just copy the mp4 files to your N10 and run them.
one note that i can see is that it seems that the gamma is higher at the lower shades
it seems to be around 1.8 there
that could explain why we dont have completely washed out blacks.
but what you want is a plain straight gamma line at 2.2
the N10 seems to have a hill shaped line starting high at lower shades and lower around maximum white.
I have tested the N10 with a Pantone "hocky puck" and can confirm the observations posted above. As compared to overly saturated profiles most normal users are used to, it's no wonder many see the N10 as flat and dull. My N7 is horrible, not only flat but had a color temp that was blueish green.
Much of my publicly displayed work for general web based consumption, has the saturation pumped up farther then I like, but my "fans" (sarc) seem to enjoy my photographs when contrast and saturation is pushed high. Ironically, my over saturated photographs look good to me on the low gamma N10, lol.
Either way, most all of us would benefit from being able to adjust our N10s. As many of you know this is best done at the kernel level and the master of sound and color Samsung kernels is SuperCurio and his project Voodoo. I have heard hearsay that he is working on kernel code and color profiles that can support adjustments for the N10, but I have yet to confirm this myself.
As usual we are given hardware that needs code improvements to be fully realized and that seems to always be done by the development community. It will taken time but I am confident we'll get there to some degree soon.
As far as I could tell there is no gamma correction in the kernel because the Nexus 10 uses a new display port interface thats in the Exynos 5. Most devices I've seen have at least a static gamma table in the kernel but that doesn't appear to be true for the Nexus 10.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD
12paq said:
I have heard hearsay that he is working on kernel code and color profiles that can support adjustments for the N10, but I have yet to confirm this myself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
give him my money!
that sounds great
post in this thread if you hear more about it!
as i said in other threads i will pay around 50$ for the person that makes gamma adjustment possible for the N10.
btw: hockey puck?
are you serious ?
Anyone else notice this? I took some pictures comparing my iPad Mini (left) vs Nexus 7 2013 (right). The first attachment is from YouTube F4bnVZmdOKs @ 5:31 - notice the splotchiness in the darkest areas. The second is from G-R8LGy-OVs @ 3:56 - notice the halos around the stars. When I watch on my computer (HP LP2065 IPS LCD) it looks much more like the iPad's display.
Looks like video compression blockiness that you don't see on the iPad because of the horrible black levels. If you look at a black still picture do you see the splotches?
Dimethyl said:
Anyone else notice this? I took some pictures comparing my iPad Mini (left) vs Nexus 7 2013 (right). The first attachment is from YouTube F4bnVZmdOKs @ 5:31 - notice the splotchiness in the darkest areas. The second is from G-R8LGy-OVs @ 3:56 - notice the halos around the stars. When I watch on my computer (HP LP2065 IPS LCD) it looks much more like the iPad's display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with the above poster, the splotchiness is video compression artifacts, and if you look past them, and take a step back, you'll actually see that you're getting much more detail and a better gamma on the N7 vs. the iPad. On the iPad side, the woman is completely black, yet on the N7, you can see her face and clothing detail that are simply missing on the iPad.
I would guess that the halos around the stars are similarly missing information on the iPad. With the N7, you're getting the whole picture.
That ipad mini picture is terrible. Talk about crushing blacks. ..... Look at the detail in the nexus picture. I hope your TV is not calibrated like the mini.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app
I think its due to the high DPI. Try any HD video.
Actually the iPad Mini is quite terrible with the loss of dark details.
oh god that ipad looks awful dude.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
there's probably a video player out there that supports gamma adjustment if it's not to your liking.in a specific video. it's hard to tell from that picture how black crushing the ipad is but some would find it looks "better" when the video is of poor quality. one thing you might want to do is adjust the backlight first (no need to do it global if you've got something like mx player) as the new N7 is supposed to be very bright. in the old n7 you can get away with making mx player always use max brightness because the maximum brightness isn't very high.
Good points. I attached a comparison of the black level test from Lagom. On the Nexus 7 I can see the 1 square easily. On the iPad Mini I can see the 5 square fairly well and the 4 just barely (IRL; hard to tell from the picture). The brightness setting for this and the previous comparisons was 25% on the Nexus 7 and around 55-60% on the iPad Mini. The subjective brightness was similar.
I borrowed an iPad 3 (Retina) to do some more testing. This time to eliminate any variables with video streaming I downloaded the 720P MP4s on my computer and captured stills with VLC. I used Chrome on both Android and iOS to view the images. Same videos as before, roughly the same scenes. The first 2 attachments show the comparisons: iPad 3 on the top, and Nexus 7 2013 on the bottom.
The 3rd attachment is the black level test on the iPad 3. I can clearly see square 2 and if I stare enough I can faintly detect square 1 (IRL; hard to tell from the picture again). The 4th attachment is a comparison of a full white image to show that the brightness is matched fairly closely (easier to tell if you convert to greyscale to ignore white balance differences) - 25% on the Nexus and just a hair above 50% on the iPad.
The 5th and 6th attachments are the source images I used for testing. I converted from PNG to JPG to make the attachments fit, not that it matters much since it's from a lossy source.
I still get the feeling that something isn't right about the way the Nexus looks. I was able to simulate the effect almost identically by applying gamma correction of 1.6 in IrfanView. That would seem to indicate that the Nexus's gamma may be way off, but after I finally found a way to view Lagom's gamma test image without scaling on the Nexus it looked pretty much spot-on correct. It it possible that only the very dark areas are "shifted" in a way that wouldn't affect the gamma test image?
This leads to the last attachment - a new black level test on the Nexus. Again, the brightness was calibrated similarly to the iPad, and the camera was set on full manual mode with all the same settings, so you can directly compare it to the iPad black level test image. Notice how the squares get brighter way faster than on the iPad? It's a lot more pronounced in the darkest squares, but the difference shrinks by the time you get up to the 40 square (last one before full white).
For my final test, I took pictures of Lagom's contrast test image on the Nexus 7 2013 and iPad 3. I then applied a Gaussian blur, converted to greyscale, and determined the RGB value for the first 13 bars. The first attachment is a chart of the results. The brightnesses converge around the 10th bar (RGB = 79 in the source image), but before that the Nexus's brightness is inflated. This explains why the gamma test looked fine, because even in the 10% luminance test, the RGB value of the ideal point is 88. The 2nd and 3rd attachments are the Nexus and iPad (respectively) displaying the test image.
you should bring all this to the "yellow tint" thread. this is a nice showcase on what's wrong with Nexus screen.
I recently purchased an X-Rite i1Display Pro display calibrator. I used it to make really accurate luminance measurements* of the Nexus 7 (2013) and iPad Mini while displaying shades of gray from 0 to 255 in steps of 5. I then calculated the effective gamma** at each step to create the attached chart. It also includes the effective gamma of the reverse sRGB transformation.
My conclusion is that the Nexus is fine if sRGB is the ideal target. I'm not sure what the ideal target is though; in fact, I don't really think there is one. A display gamma calibration of 2.2 to 2.4 seems like the most common recommendation. But almost everyone ignores the fact that sRGB's effective gamma is a lot lower in darker areas. I get the feeling that most people calibrate to a fixed target. sRGB is probably more technically correct. But if fixed 2.2 to 2.4 is more common, does that make it a de facto standard? E.g. if professional movie studios edit their movies on monitors calibrated to fixed gamma, but I watch it with sRGB gamma, doesn't that mean I'm not viewing it as intended by the creator? I'm not saying this is necessarily the case. I'm really, really confused .
So anyway, I just wanted to share my results. You will have to draw your own conclusions.
* I used spotread.exe from Argyll with the -x swtich. The first number from the "Yxy" result is luminance in cd/m^2.
** Effective gamma meaning: the gamma value you'd have to use to get the same luminance value from the input value. Formula is log(luminance) / log(input), where luminance and input are percentages from 0 to 1. I adjusted the luminances to account for non-perfect black levels.
mannequin said:
you should bring all this to the "yellow tint" thread. this is a nice showcase on what's wrong with Nexus screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would say the iPad is just warmer (red) and the N7 looks more cooler (greenish-blue) Not by much though, just a few degrees off. No one device is perfect.
With the dark areas, it seems the brightness and/or gamma is too high. I use my screen at half brightness which seems on par with other devices and haven't noticed a big difference.
Hopefully we get a screen calibrator like on the N4 and can make adjust individual adjustments.
Sent from Nexus 7 FHD from XDA Premium HD
Dimethyl said:
My conclusion is that the Nexus is fine if sRGB is the ideal target...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
all the measurements that you did are only true to the device that you own. the screens in the wild would differ (sometimes drastically) from yours and from one another.
I totally agree with you. I also see lots of artifacts with any dark scene on my 2013 Nexus 7. It doesn't matter if I am playing a higher resolution (HD) scene or lower resolution one. I wish there was a way to fix that.
Dimethyl said:
I recently purchased an X-Rite i1Display Pro display calibrator. I used it to make really accurate luminance measurements* of the Nexus 7 (2013) and iPad Mini while displaying shades of gray from 0 to 255 in steps of 5. I then calculated the effective gamma** at each step to create the attached chart. It also includes the effective gamma of the reverse sRGB transformation.
My conclusion is that the Nexus is fine if sRGB is the ideal target. I'm not sure what the ideal target is though; in fact, I don't really think there is one. A display gamma calibration of 2.2 to 2.4 seems like the most common recommendation. But almost everyone ignores the fact that sRGB's effective gamma is a lot lower in darker areas. I get the feeling that most people calibrate to a fixed target. sRGB is probably more technically correct. But if fixed 2.2 to 2.4 is more common, does that make it a de facto standard? E.g. if professional movie studios edit their movies on monitors calibrated to fixed gamma, but I watch it with sRGB gamma, doesn't that mean I'm not viewing it as intended by the creator? I'm not saying this is necessarily the case. I'm really, really confused .
So anyway, I just wanted to share my results. You will have to draw your own conclusions.
* I used spotread.exe from Argyll with the -x swtich. The first number from the "Yxy" result is luminance in cd/m^2.
** Effective gamma meaning: the gamma value you'd have to use to get the same luminance value from the input value. Formula is log(luminance) / log(input), where luminance and input are percentages from 0 to 1. I adjusted the luminances to account for non-perfect black levels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow....I just look at my screen. It looks nice.
Not sure WTF all that shizz you posted is about. 250 device = 250 device. /shrug
Mine's right about fine xD .
Just picked up this phone the other day and I'm trying to find out what the best settings would be to convert video files like movies and shows that would take advantage of the FHD screen. I tried to convert a movie and compared it to the same file that I had converted for my old phone which was the HTC Evo Lte but it seemed darker on the S5 for some reason.
casual167 said:
I'm trying to find out what the best settings would be to convert video files like movies and shows that would take advantage of the FHD screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are short on details, so we can only guess at your preferences, whether you are a demanding videophile or just want a decent rip, with minimal effort. Whether you convert on a PC or on the S5 and numerous other questions..
Since it's not at all clear what you goals are, I'll just describe what works well for me, with very good, high quality results.
Using Handbrake:
Use the Android preset, which is quite good. This defaults picture size to 720p. I have done a lot of side by side testing and while I would default to 1080p for Blueray rips intended for viewing on a projector, TV or notebook, there is no visible advantage on a 5.1" screen. As well, ripping to high standards at 1080p often exceeds 4 GB, which is problematic on the Android filesystem. Whereas 720p results in a viable 1.5 - 2.5 GB file.
Confirm that large files size is disabled. i.e. choose 32-bit chunks.
On the Video tab, choose frame rate = same as source
Preserve ad hoc subtitles, the ones that the original English movie occasionally puts on screen when someone speaks a few lines of foreign dialog. On the Subtitles tab, choose Forced only.
.
Thanks for your response. Yeah sorry, I should've been more specific in what I was trying to do. Since all my videos are currently formatted for 1280x720 on my Evo, I wanted to see if there is a conversion for the 1920x1080 that would look better on this phone. I'll give what you said a try and check it out. When comparing the two side by side, the S5 seemed to be a little darker so I wasn't sure if it was because of the lower resolution of 720. Just wanted to get it to look as crisp on the S5 as the Evo
I wouldn't recommend that kind of conversion. First, what you are thinking of doing is called upconverting.. and it never works well when you start with a lower resolution source. If you started with a highbit rate blueray.. that is one thing. And event then it's arguable if there is any visible advantage to 1080 on a 5.1" screen.
But I'll bet good money that upconverting from your lower resolution rip will noticeably degrade your picture. Yes, it will have more pixels in the end but since they are interpolated pixels from a lower resolution source, you can expect all kinds of undesirable video artifacts to accompany that.
Crisp could refer to several things. I suspect that your S5 is simply revealing inherent quality limitations of your current movie rips that may not have been obvious on your previous phone. The way to get that kind of crispness back on the S5 is to make better quality e.g. higher bit rate, mutipass (HQ) encoding and so forth. Simply upconverting will do the opposite of what you are aiming for because the extra pixels will tend to be blury + add random artifacts from an upconverted source.
Second, the dark picture you refer to is no doubt a minor gamma difference between manufacturers. You could in theory lighten all your movies to make them subjectively brighter on the S5. But again, it will degrade the picture a bit at the same time since the frames need to be modified and transcoded. Trust me that you will soon adjust to a gamma difference between devices after a short amount of time unless the difference is huge.
Most videophiles don't play movies at full brightness anyway as picture quality is better at an intermediate screen brightness. So unless you are viewing in a brightly lit room, you could just increase the S5 screne brightness a little bit to more than compensate for the lower gamma.
.
3740
Ok that makes sense. I'm kind of a noob when it comes to this stuff so I appreciate you taking the time to explain it. I kept looking side by side and couldn't figure out why there was such a difference. Colors seemed to pop more on the Evo which I thought was weird but I sort of understand why now. Skin tones and everything just looked like it had less contrast. I spend a lot of time traveling for work so watching things is like 80% of what I do on the phone and getting the right format is important. I was looking at getting the LG G3 so would that mean that it could look worse because of the bigger size and resolution or would it be the about the same?
casual167 said:
I was looking at getting the LG G3 so would that mean that it could look worse because of the bigger size and resolution or would it be the about the same?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The S5 screen is better than the G3 IMO. But you can decide for yourself.
If you want crisp images or images on the S5.. just encode your movies from high resolution sources e.g. bluerays --> 720, with high quality settings e.g. high bit rate. Converting existing movie rips from 720 --> 1080 though won't give great results.
The apparent lack of crispness or contrast is just the effect of having a more capable screen on the S5. A better screen will be both impressive when you have a high quality movie. And disappointing when playing something lower quality because it is also more revealing of flaws that would be less obvious on a lower resolution screen.
.
I wonder if the shield can, through a custom kernel, adjust rgb, gamma, or color calibration. similar to a nexus 6p with a custom kernel like franco or elementalx i can adjust to a much cooler screen similar to the galaxy series.
Also I saw in the shields display settings there is a dynamic range setting which i changed to full and the screen seemed to have dramatically changed. the darks seemed much darker. i dont have an hdr tv but a sony bravia about 2 yo so i didnt think it was actually hdr but only the output from the shield.
dontbeweakvato said:
I wonder if the shield can, through a custom kernel, adjust rgb, gamma, or color calibration. similar to a nexus 6p with a custom kernel like franco or elementalx i can adjust to a much cooler screen similar to the galaxy series.
Also I saw in the shields display settings there is a dynamic range setting which i changed to full and the screen seemed to have dramatically changed. the darks seemed much darker. i dont have an hdr tv but a sony bravia about 2 yo so i didnt think it was actually hdr but only the output from the shield.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
full vs limited is in the range that the device will output colors to the screen. with limited the normal range of 0-255 values per color is limited to 16-235. (256 values per color ^3 equals 16,7million colors (3 colors: RGB)
most particularly (older) tv's won't process the full amount of 16,7m colors, in comparison to monitors which almost always do. Reason why is probably cost, to make them cheap, and to save bandwidth. So they compressed the output, losing some of the detail in between (more like MP3 in comparison to using 160kbps vs 320kbps mp3's, most people won;t notice the difference, but it is there unconsciously)
Anyway. by compressing the range, the tv then stretches these out so that those values become the new white and black. Else everything would look greyish and faded. But now you have less detail because you miss some information, because some of the gradient is missing.
Your TV is set up to the limited range, so that it stretches those to be the new black and white. But when you switch the incoming signal to the full 256 range, the tv will still stretch these as if they were the limited range, and it basically cuts off black and white information, making everything higher contrast but losing a lot of information because it's cut off. And then you'll have to set your TV to full as well, but that's not always possible. Because most tv's can't process more color information.
That's why HDR is such a big improvement, more color information, more visible dark and bright gradients and the overall brightness contrast is wider.
But I think in your case by setting it to full you will get the feeling of more contrast, but essentially you are cutting off a bunch of information. You'll probably notice in dark scenes that you can't see much, because it's clipped out.
If this makes sense to you. (I may have made some mistakes explaining this)
Regarding calibration, you should calibrate your tv in stead. There's no use in calibrating your shield. That's only necessary if you can't control your screen, which TV's can, but phones can't. So mess around with your tv color settings.
In case you haven't read it today, Netflix is now supporting HDR for our XZP's - see Android Police and or Android Authority's articles.
Does anyone know if 4k is also now activated on netflix for the XZP or is it just hdr?
Shnig said:
Does anyone know if 4k is also now activated on netflix for the XZP or is it just hdr?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
4K has been available on the Netflix app for a long time. HDR was the only thing that was missing (which has now been added)
leijonasisu said:
4K has been available on the Netflix app for a long time. HDR was the only thing that was missing (which has now been added)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not believe this is correct. Do you have a source?
Shnig said:
I do not believe this is correct. Do you have a source?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you think is incorrect? I just finished watching an episode of Daredevil on Netflix in HDR. I didn't see anything in 4K though, but it might be that my preferred series do no come in 4K.
Shnig said:
I do not believe this is correct. Do you have a source?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Geezus... do a google search :good::good:
https://9to5google.com/2017/08/04/sony-xperia-xz-premium-supports-hdr-streaming-on-netflix/
ishemes said:
What do you think is incorrect? I just finished watching an episode of Daredevil on Netflix in HDR. I didn't see anything in 4K though, but it might be that my preferred series do no come in 4K.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was trying to be polite by saying I did not believe that's correct. Netflix's android app does not currently support 4k Playback on any phone. This is a demonstrable fact, it's nothing to do with your preferred series unfortunately.
---------- Post added at 02:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:00 PM ----------
ishemes said:
What do you think is incorrect? I just finished watching an episode of Daredevil on Netflix in HDR. I didn't see anything in 4K though, but it might be that my preferred series do no come in 4K.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cheetah2k said:
Geezus... do a google search :good::good:
https://9to5google.com/2017/08/04/sony-xperia-xz-premium-supports-hdr-streaming-on-netflix/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My ability to use Google is just fine thank you, as is my ability to read/comprehend: The article you linked only mentions HDR support not 4k support for Netflix because unfortunately Netflix does not support 4k Playback for android phones.
Shnig said:
I was trying to be polite by saying I did not believe that's correct. Netflix's android app does not currently support 4k Playback on any phone. This is a demonstrable fact, it's nothing to do with your preferred series unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No 4K is a shame. I was afraid that this is what you meant. I was hoping though that you meant that there was no HDR content. In any case, there is hope. Especially since the stopped allowing their android app to be installed on a rooted phone. So they might get ready to bring some really high quality content to the phones.
It really doesn't matter anyway. Unless you put the phone within 3 inches of your eyeballs you won't see the improvement in detail over 1080p.
Physically impossible,
HDR on the other hand and high bit rate low compression will and does deliver significant improvments
dazza9075 said:
It really doesn't matter anyway. Unless you put the phone within 3 inches of your eyeballs you won't see the improvement in detail over 1080p.
Physically impossible,
HDR on the other hand and high bit rate low compression will and does deliver significant improvments
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It actually is possible.
I downloaded the Peru 8k video in both 1080p and 2160p. While both of them look really nice, I can see more detail in the 2160p one.
It's not like I can see individual pixels, but more like having a brand new prescription compared to my old one. Both let me see pretty clearly, but one is perceptibly clearer.
Xifar said:
It actually is possible.
I downloaded the Peru 8k video in both 1080p and 2160p. While both of them look really nice, I can see more detail in the 2160p one.
It's not like I can see individual pixels, but more like having a brand new prescription compared to my old one. Both let me see pretty clearly, but one is perceptibly clearer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My reply didn't last for some reason an I can't be bothered to type it all out again just now but to summarise.
Physics doesn't lie, with normal eye sight on a screen 5.5 in with, 2160 resolution, the range in which you can detect those details, is 3in, beyond that, a typical person can't see those details on such a high PPI screen.
Monitors have a significantly lower PPI so will have a wider range.
To see 4k Improvements on a large TV you need to be within 3 foot. Far beyond what most people have in their living room. But is exactly the maximum distance you will find in any TV shop
What does make a difference is bitrate, HDR, compression artifacts, Contrast ratio, saturation and brightness.
And typically its that that will improve a pictures appearance.
4k alone, physically can't be detected.
It's the new 3D, Designed to fill a marketing departments wet dreams.
dazza9075 said:
My reply didn't last for some reason an I can't be bothered to type it all out again just now but to summarise.
Physics doesn't lie, with normal eye sight on a screen 5.5 in with, 2160 resolution, the range in which you can detect those details, is 3in, beyond that, a typical person can't see those details on such a high PPI screen.
Monitors have a significantly lower PPI so will have a wider range.
To see 4k Improvements on a large TV you need to be within 3 foot. Far beyond what most people have in their living room. But is exactly the maximum distance you will find in any TV shop
What does make a difference is bitrate, HDR, compression artifacts, Contrast ratio, saturation and brightness.
And typically its that that will improve a pictures appearance.
4k alone, physically can't be detected.
It's the new 3D, Designed to fill a marketing departments wet dreams.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First mistake is using the term "normal", it should be average. The difference is normal implies what everybody sees, where as average indicates that there is a sliding scale and some see better than others. And just that, not all visual acuity is the same, some are slightly better, some are dramatically better. This applies to a wide variety of factors as well, not just detail.
Second mistake is in assuming the ability to pick out "detail" is the end all be all. The ability to pick out specific details in a static image (say the corner of a building) may in fact be driven by physics (again, using "average" eyesight) however that does not directly correlate into video with moving edges, edge sharpening and pixel bleeding. Just as the ability to pick out detail can be averaged, indicating higher and lower levels of eyesight, sensitivity to motion detection and color balance are also can be judged on a scale. What this says is that the edge of a bright colored building as it moves against the background may have much more than just "detail" to those with heightened visual acuity.
firstly Normal is the perfect description for eye sight that is considered to be optimum, any deviation from that is sub optimal so when one talks about Normal, IE, what is considered perfect, eye sight, that may or may not be the average, but I couldn't give a monkeys about average eyesight, we are talking about the physical limitations of the human eye in a perfect environment.
Secondly, a moving image is even less likely to have higher visible detail. If you are sitting 6 inches away from our tiny 4k screens, the physical limitation of you eye prohibits you from being able to see the individual pixels, you cant see it, in the same way you can see the flag on the moon, even with the most powerful telescopes on earth or even in space, Hubble for instance cant see anything much smaller than a football pitch and yet it can see whole galaxies in what appears to be highly detailed images. your eye can also only see detail in a relatively small portion of your field of view anyway, our eyes are comparatively crap compared to other animals but they are very good multi functional eyes, more of a jack of all trades, master of none.
anyhow, thirdly, you will notice that I did say that the higher bitrate associated with 4K HDR videos along with much better compression algorithms do make a noticeable difference in image quality, which is what you are talking about when talking about colours, contrasts and motion. Its not the 4K that's doing that, its all the goodness that comes with it.
I have this phone, I have several 4K screens of multiple sizes and I can tell you that 4K isn't the be all and end all especially if you sit beyond the optimal distance, if it wasn't for HDR being packaged with 4K it wouldn't be anywhere near as successful as it is. HDR on a OLED is breath taking, hell, even on a decent LCD/LED screen it blows FHD screens out of the water. of course you need a decent HDR TV for that, one that can pump out 1000+ nits.