In questions about the different HDR formats that are being proposed, Talstra (Philips) said that standardisation is a bit slow, but everybody is worried about potential ‘format wars’ if there isn’t a clear standard for HDR.
Thorpe (Canon) said that there is a big difference between the “real time” (broadcast) people who have a lot of challenges with HDR, but it’s different for movies or non-real time producers who have time to take advantage of the technology.
There was a question that asked when can consumers get a TV that “works for a long while”. Thorpe said that 4k TVs are available now, and even though there is not much UltraHD content, they are a great way to look at FullHD. Talstra said that HDR TVs will also be a great way to watch SDR as TV set makers will use algorithms to make SD content more impactful.
Content creators are looking at rescanning film content for HDR display. Thorpe said that maybe 400% of peak brightness might be a better target than 1200%.
A comment was that the cost of putting HDR into the cinema is putting off the movie business which means that TV might lead the charge for HDR and HDR cinemas might be used as a way of persuading people to get HDR at home on their TV, rather than the other way around, as has been the case in the past.
There was a question of whether, to improve contrast, you could project off-axis and reject light coming in directly from the auditorium. RealD said that screen design is really tricky even on axis. Off axis would be a lot harder.
Thorpe said there is interest in enhancing FullHD content as well as UltraHD with WCG & HDR. Marketing is easier for 4k, but the visual punch is good for HDR in store.
