I mean no auto exposure. But to me this makes no sense.
This sounds like you got a bad TV that achieves higher nits by scaling the whole panel. You might be able to disable this in the settings but then it will probably never achieve the brightness necessary for something like the sun.
I went in expecting nothing and the HDR implementation of Assassins Creed Origins blew my mind wide open.
The problem is that most TVs that support HDR don't get anywhere near the brightness required to really make a difference. You want a display that can get close to 1000 nits of sustained peak brightness and with either local dimming and/or pixels can turn on/off to produce true blacks (AMOLED / OLED / POLED). Most of the TVs on the market, outside of the ultra high end stuff, have HDR peak brightness of 450-700nits. Obviously you can tell a difference between SDR and HDR more easily once you get past the 600 nit mark but HDR at 800-1000nits is where its at.
I think part of the issue is some just don't know what to look for when it comes to HDR content. That and some having less capable TVs for HDR content. It doesn't help that some TVs even have this faux HDR option that is misleading
Phones with oled displays and the YouTube app are pretty much the best hdr experience (outside of high end televisions) right now. My note 8 has 1200nits peak brightness and blows my hdr TV out the water. My TV can only do 600+ nits of hdr brightness with local dimming (according to rtings.com
It's worse than that, the game is desaturated and dim in HDR versus in SDR. It's actually better and more vibrant with HDR turned off.
That's Wide Color Gamut, which is usually bundled with HDR, yes. But there are games which have HDR but don't have WCG. HDR essentially stores data for lighting and allows the picture to make lights brighter as it is told what parts of a picture is a light and what aren't, and determine the individual brightness of these lights.
It is a huge difference. It's a far, far bigger difference than 1440p to 4k, which whilst I can see, basically does nothing to me. It's sharper, but it's not inherently better, it's beyond what I care about.
I have an X and a b7 (previous year's c7) and I had exactly that experience on AC:O. Holy hell.
Exactly what I think; I'm in the same boat.
Just to note, the B7 isn't the previous year's C7. It's the same year. It's actually basically the same TV. The B7 has a different stand and the trim around the outside is silver, not black like on the C7.
Classic Sony. Not complying with other companies' standards and creating their own.The parameters are no different for real time rendering, but the actual thresholds for what is considered HDR are non enforced.
SDR / Standard Dynamic Range content (or "LDR" Low Dynamic Range content) were typically made to be displayed at around 100nits, if you are at a theatre, this will be the brightest something could be.
As soon as you start producing content that goes above that, you are creating content with a larger dynamic range and you need the display to be able to view it.
HDR movies are available that range anywhere from 500 nits to 4000 nits, with a view that in future this will go as high as 10,000.
TV manufacturers were desperate to launch new TVs and a new format and in doing so they started producing displays that went above the SDR technology, but there was huge variation in capability. Displays were being sold as HDR that were not really much higher than an SDR display.
Consumers got confused, content didn't look much better if better at all and confidence was low. The manufacturers had started selling a new technology that was not standardized, which would have made it difficult to sell an improved set later on down the line.
A few of the manufacturers go together in an attempt to set a threshold and standardise HDR capabilities.
UHD Premium was created. In order to be a Ultra HD Premium display you needed to be able to display 1000nits of brightness and less than 0.05nits on screen simultaneously.
Now because the manufacturers were also trying to sell OLED screens, which were not able to come close to this threshold, they bent the rules and lowered the requirement for peak OLED screens to 540nits, because they could go darker 0.0005nits with ease. This was deceptive, as HDR content is all about the extra brightness and not about dark imagery.
Sony famously refused to participate in the standard as they were concerned that this would not leave enough low/mid range products capable of meeting this criteria, which was where they typically sell the vast majority of their displays.
So they went with their own format
This meant that the TV could accept and 4K and HDR signal, but was no guarentee of anything else.
More recently they have backpeddle and started referring to their TVs as XDR / EDR (Extended Dynamic Range).
Because as the others had previously, they became aware that they were going to sell a load of TVs as "HDR" and then consumers would not understand that the experience would be better with new models later on down the line and would not feel compelled to purchase an actual HDR TV form Sony.
So there has been loads of politics and bullshit from Day Zero of HDR and Displays.
That probably hasn't fully answered your question, but it's hard to keep it briefer than that :P
But movies do the exact same thing. Only difference would be that the exposure is usually shot by shot so it might not be as obvious to you?
Huh? You know they worked with Philips to make CD and DVD, right? Or a bunch of other people for BluRay?
Like I said, maybe there's no other way around it, but there's many instances in these hdr games where you move the camera one inch and everything goes much darker or brighter depending on the situation. The exposure change can't be THAT aggressive, I moved the camera like one inch, it's basically the same scene. Infamous second son is painful to look at for this very reason. How can it be pitch black in broad daylight: because I angled the camera down a little and now everything around me is covered in shadows!
You either have a shitty tv or you don't have it set up correctly
Does that mean that I am not getting the full HDR experience with my Samsung KS9000 because of it's awful local dimming? Doesn't that go against the general consensus of the KS8000 TVs (that and the KS9000 should basically be identical PQ wise) being great HDR gaming sets?
Well, great is subjective I guess.
Halo 3 is HDR on XBO?
