Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Disney+ Adding Support for HDR10+

mosesenegeade said:
HDR+ minimum bandwidth is 25Mbps but as someone who does stream 4K from their home media server you need a minimum of a 1GB connection from your media server to your AppleTV. They can advertise this feature all they want it will not work with any sort of quality until we all can stream at 1GB speeds from that provider. Their bandwidth requirements would be astronomical. So we are effecively paying for quality a little north of 1080 but not much. Definitely not even Blu-Ray quality. I assure you.
Click to expand...

I don't know about HDR+ but Apple TV has no problem playing Dolby vision at 4k from Netflix or Apple TV plus with ~ 100Mbps
 
Dolby Vision is the best thing that happened to movies since the 70mm 6 track stereo format of the 80s. On an OLED TV in a pitch dark room, it's phenomenal. Dark scenes look just like they would in real life. You can feel the lighting as if you were there.

People seem to think HDR is for oversaturated colors and ridiculously increased brightness. It's not. If i remember correctly, Dolby Vision is calibrated at 100 nits for neutral grey and dark details can go way down to 1 nit only. This is why OLED TVs are the best devices to watch Dolby Vision content. In a pitch black room, you can see, in a dark scene, all the details in the shadows and, at the same time, be blinded by the headlights of a car and feel the energy from other light sources. I know some will not believe me, but, in my opinion, John Wick 4 is one of the most beautiful movies to watch in Dolby Vision on an OLED TV in a dark room. The colors are great and there's always at least one bright colored light source directly into the frame to break the shadows and add to the color palette.

Let's not mistake Dolby Vision for Youtube HDR where you only see boosted colors and brightness for the sake of it. Dolby vision is made to be watched in a dark room like if you were in a movie theatre. Not to blind viewers in an already bright room. That is why some people think Dolby vision is too dark. It's made to be watched in a dark room.
 
  • Like
Reactions: red elma and nathansz
bLackjackj said:
Panasonic? Just get a Samsung,..better, brighter screen, full support for a number of generations & a range far bigger than a paltry Panasonic.
Click to expand...
I prefer oled to me Sony and lg oled looks better than Samsung qled better black level better color. Plus most of my content is Dolby vision and Samsung doesn’t support it.
 
Baseiseough said:
That is why some people think Dolby vision is too dark. It's made to be watched in a dark room.
Click to expand...

And why my lg has a Dolby “home” setting that seems to just boost the brightness a bit compared to “cinema” for watching not in the dark
 
nathansz said:
And why my lg has a Dolby “home” setting that seems to just boost the brightness a bit compared to “cinema” for watching not in the dark
Click to expand...
Yeah, my LG has it too. It raises the black levels according to the tv photosensor. It effectively helps watching Dolby Vision shows in daylight but at the cost of contrast. The contrast is less dramatic and effective this way. You lose most of the lighting effects. So, if you watch a Dolby Vision movie or show during daytime and the curtains are open, Dolby Home makes everything easier to see. If you watch during the evening and you shut the curtains and turn the room lights off, select "Dolby cinema" instead of Dolby Home and enjoy all the benefits of Dolby Vision. Apple TV+ has many show that look quite good with it. Foundation, For all Mankind and The Prize Next Door come to mind.

As for movies Matrix Resurrections looks really fantastic (although the story is not as good), John Wick 2 and 4, Bullet Train and Violent night use Dolby Vision really well too. In my experience, most of all movies in Dolby Vision filmed digitally after 2017 look great. Don't know why 2017 though. That's just my personal observation. 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:
Samsung doesn't support Dolby Vision and LG doesn't support HDR10+. Choose
 
aaronhead14 said:
Why? HDR10+ is just a generic, inferior imitation of Dolby Vision.

Also, Samsung should just start offering Dolby Vision on their TVs. It's insane that they refuse to pay the licensing fee. It's only like $3 per unit, which any reasonable customer would be willing to pay. It's a shame because Samsung's TVs are otherwise quite good. But their lack of Dolby Vision support is a massive dealbreaker. I, and many other potential customers, refuse to buy Samsung TVs due to their lack of Dolby Vision.
Click to expand...
I have two S95 QD-OLEDs and honestly... they're great. I don't feel like I'm missing anything compared to my friend's LG and Sony OLEDs. Agreed it's a weird thing for Samsung to die on a hill for, but honestly fine without it.
 
theanimala said:
I agree 100%. I have been slammed for saying the same thing on the AVSforums, but I just really do NOT like Dolby Vision in comparison.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if it's a Dolby Vision issue. I know Dolby was supposed to certify the color of the panels once upon a time but I think they dropped that? I just think LG skews their panels towards intense color calibration to look surreal.

I've spent a lot of time watching Samsung, Sony, and LG OLEDs and my preference leans towards:
1. Samsung
2. Sony
3. LG

Either way, these are all fantastic sets and I think we're living in a great time that we can all have access to awesome OLED TVs at crazy low prices. It's hard to believe that I paid like $12,000 for a 50" Pioneer Kuro Elite in like 2008, with all the weight, and panel buzz to get similar quality.
 

and unlike Dolby Vision, there are no licensing fees.
Click to expand...

Licencing fees are such a bane to the consumer. No one wants to pay them, so those standard never become the default no matter how good they are. So the developer never makes much money. If a licenced standard becomes accepted, it is invariably due to the power of the company, not the quality of the standard.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bLackjackj said:
Panasonic? Just get a Samsung,..better, brighter screen, full support for a number of generations & a range far bigger than a paltry Panasonic.
Click to expand...
Panasonic doesn’t have that garbage Samsung build quality that breaks in 3 years. It’s also a premium tv manufacturer that is only surpassed by Sony, but usually priced better. They just need to drop that Fire TV interface.
 
Great to hear an additional streaming service support HDR 10+ as I have a Samsung TV. Disney+ was late to the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mganu
So Disney plus HD10+ content should look even better now on the iPP M4 Tandem oled screen right?
 
They need to include a switch to turn that off. I don’t want to strain my eyes for some fake “high definition”. Looks like manufacturers do not even know what else to come up with so that they invent some useless standards like dolby and hdr. What I understand is bitrate and resolution, other than that doesn’t worry me at all
 
At last! Although I remain a little sceptical as to how good the Apple TV app will be with it.
So often HDR content shown via the Disney+ app on the ATV looks horribly dark (at least when watching on a Samsung TV). Disney+ is the only service where its better to use the TVs own app.
 
VHS vs Betamax, Bluray vs HD DVD, Playstation vs XBox, everybody wants their slice of the "either/or" money pie don't they? The only advantage Dolby Vision has over HDR10+ is that it has 12-bit colour depth whereas HDR10+ has 10-bit, but it's really not relevant, there are no 12-bit TVs and even professional reference monitors are 10-bit, and seeing as a lot of people view their content via streaming where data compression causes rampant banding and macro-blocking anyway I think it's the least of everyone's concern.

If your TV is calibrated correctly it shouldn't matter which solution you choose, speaking personally I am happy there is a free dynamic HDR standard in HDR10+, I'm not anti Dolby Vision but I don't want HDR locked behind a paywall however minimal that cost might be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jml12286 and DickieSmith
aaronhead14 said:
Why? HDR10+ is just a generic, inferior imitation of Dolby Vision.
Click to expand...

It depends a little on how you access content.

If you are watching UltraHD Blu Rays (or have ripped them without additional compression to a media server) and have one of the few TVs that supports 12-bit colour depth then Dolby Vision will extend bit depth to 12-bits instead of 10, however if you're streaming content then you're going to receive 10-bit colour depth whether you are watching Dolby Vision or HDR10+.

Otherwise HDR10+ and Dolby Vision content are both mastered between 1,000 to 4,000cd/m2, both have a maximum peak brightness of 10,000cd/m2, and both offer dynamic metadata.

So while HDR10+ is intended to be a royalty free copy of Dolby Vision, when you stream your content its not going to make a difference provided the streaming service supports both formats.
 
Last edited:
mosesenegeade said:
HDR+ minimum bandwidth is 25Mbps but as someone who does stream 4K from their home media server you need a minimum of a 1GB connection from your media server to your AppleTV. They can advertise this feature all they want it will not work with any sort of quality until we all can stream at 1GB speeds from that provider. Their bandwidth requirements would be astronomical. So we are effecively paying for quality a little north of 1080 but not much. Definitely not even Blu-Ray quality. I assure you.
Click to expand...

That might be related to compression.

For example UltraHD Blu Rays with Dolby Vision have 12-bit colour depth and very little compression, but when you stream the same content from Prime / Netflix / Disney then even with Dolby Vision you'll have 10-bit colour depth and higher video compression.
 
john123 said:
In an ideal world, you're not supposed to have to. The TV, device, app, and/or platform should be handling all of it for you quietly in the background. You just need to tweak the settings for different modes when they pop up — and even that isn't strictly required. The good TVs come with decent out-of-the-box default modes that you can use, although if you use "Vivid" we cannot be friends.

In practice, stuff still doesn't work quite as it seems it should all of the time. If you don't want to fight it and deal with the headache though, the best option is to ignore that and just enjoy the content however you get it. Even if you know what you're doing, the oddities can still drive you mad. And there are approximately 18 billion internet threads about whether you should or should not use "Enable Dolby Vision" or enable matching of frame rates or dynamic range on an Apple TV. And contrary to what some say, that is not a completely open-and-shut case in all situations.

"Ignorance is bliss," as they say.
Click to expand...
It’s annoying with apps like the BBC iPlayer where the version on the Apple TV doesn’t support UHD but the LG TV app does.

Especially for nature programmes like David Attenborough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: john123
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back