Is HDR more relevant than 4K?

Faustus

Faustus

Faustus

Soldato
Joined
20 Mar 2007
Posts
5,413
As the title asks - is HDR more relevant to the consumer than 4K?

My daughter has recently bought a 4K Samsung TV and whilst the PQ is superb, it's only superb if you sit much closer to see the benefit than I would find comfortable for long term viewing.

From the many reviews I have read on various TV models I see reference to HDR having far more relevance to the average consumer than the fact it's 4K. It's HDR that makes the picture 'pop' not 4K.

What do others think?
 
If you bought a 4k TV and don't have amazon prime 4k, netflix 4k, apple TV 4k or a 4k player you are wasting your money
 
When a suitable source signal is available, HDR is more noticeable to the average viewer.
 
It depends on the size of your screen and how far away you sit and what type of content you are watching. HDR would be more noticeable on small screens but on large screens 4k is more noticeable.
 
TALON1973 said:
If you bought a 4k TV and don't have amazon prime 4k, netflix 4k, apple TV 4k or a 4k player you are wasting your money
Click to expand...

My daughter has Amazon Prime 4K and Netflix 4K plus Virgin. TBH sitting so close to the TV made me feel queasy after a while and I had to move much further away, which then cancelled out the benefit.

I think there comes a point beyond 1080p where you end up with a diminishing return. It's either a whacking great OTT panel and sit closer, or a smaller panel and sit at a 'normal' distance. Neither really fits the bill.
 
It depends on the type of TV. I would never, ever buy a 4K TV that does not have HDR. Also, the TV needs to be fed a decent, high bitrate feed. I've got a 55" B6 OLED, the increase in resolution from 1080p to 4K is noticeable but the addition of HDR is far more noticeable. Quite a lot of the content on NetFlix has Dolby Vision and pretty much all movies are 4K with HDR or Dolby Vision so it's unusual to get lots of content that is plain old 4K.
 
TALON1973 said:
If you bought a 4k TV and don't have amazon prime 4k, netflix 4k, apple TV 4k or a 4k player you are wasting your money
Click to expand...

Not at all. Latest technology tends to provide better pq fullstop. My new LG blows away previous plasma and LED screens in 1080p.
 
Yes, definitely.

I 'upgraded' early to 4k - I bought a Panasonic 58" AX802b in 2014.

But it wasn't really much of an upgrade at all, I should have stuck with my 55" VT50 Plasma.

Anyway, last year I sold the AX802b and bought a 65" B6 OLED and the HDR is brilliant.

Best example I can think of is the 'Pacific Rim 4k UHD Blu-ray'

The movie is made from a 2k Digital intermediate, so you are only getting a slightly better detail than a 1080p blu-ray, but the HDR is insane. It was pretty mind blowing watching that.

Edit - It also helps that OLED is just better than LCD/LED in general.
 
Warbie said:
Not at all. Latest technology tends to provide better pq fullstop. My new LG blows away previous plasma and LED screens in 1080p.
Click to expand...

I went from a panny VT 50 to the E7. I would say it's a bit better at 1080p but it wouldn't be huge. The VT range were great tv and still are. Where I notice the biggest improvement is with 4k/hdr.

I suppose it depends on what 4k you actually invest in. The oled gear looks fantastic.
 
snarloas1982 said:
I went from a panny VT 50 to the E7. I would say it's a bit better at 1080p but it wouldn't be huge. The VT range were great tv and still are. Where I notice the biggest improvement is with 4k/hdr.

I suppose it depends on what 4k you actually invest in. The oled gear looks fantastic.
Click to expand...

I don't actually rate 4k and HDR that much. A few of the best thigns i've seen have been old blu-ray. And as nice as plasma and some of the higher end leds were, there were always niggles that annoyed me that aren't there with oled. Dark grey instead of black, phosphor lag, dodgy motion processing at 30fps, light bleed .. goes on and on. Getting my B7 is like a sigh of relief. It's not perfect, but the issues (for me at least) or too minor to be issues and I can just sit back and enjoy the show.
 
It has just got to be the HDR really. I love my GT30 Panny picture. Don't feel the need to upgrade yet because the picture is just so good, even though it is just 1080p, so I feel comfortable waiting on the technology to reduce in price a little before moving.

Equally, my 1080p Sony HW40ES Projector, projecting a 1080p picture with a 120" diagonal. I cannot see individual pictures on that from my seating position roughly 4m or so away. And again, the picture is fabulous. So again, no real want to move to 4K until things get cheaper. In fact, I often rip less beautifully shot pictures in 720p, and still have no issues on either display.

Of course, there are purely based on pixel counts. I cannot see them on either display unless sitting uncomfortably close to them. So of course HDR is the more important factor out of the two, as its the HDR that gives the noticeable improvement.
 
Projectors are different, I find. I also had no issue at all with 1080p at 120" - it would be very different with a panel of that size. It's something to do with them having a more natural, softer, film-like look.
 
Warbie said:
Projectors are different, I find. I also had no issue at all with 1080p at 120" - it would be very different with a panel of that size. It's something to do with them having a more natural, softer, film-like look.
Click to expand...

Really? Surely a pixel is a pixel though? You have a pre-determined amount of pixels with a resolution, so a touch over 2 million for 1080p. So then surely the biggest difference there when talking about different screen sizes then becomes it's pixel size, something that a smoothing of the edges is unlikely to overcome in reality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom