True HDR image editing finally comes to reality. My tears out of my eyes. Now what we need is a true HDR e-paper for the artists to show their HDR works.
I‘m so glad this is finally happening! I could edit my iPhone photos in the photos app in HDR for years. Always boggled my mind that it was not possible with a professional software like Lightroom.
@@ArtIsRightdo you know if heif on iOS is hdr? from my tests it doesn't seem to be, meaning that the highlights are brighter on proraw then heif on iphone 14 pro. I also found some info that the heif on iOS is crippled to 8bit, so not hdr. Thanks!
Cool preview ! From some experience grading HDR video, I learned that the key is to keep mostly SDR levels of brightness on most of the content, and use the extra headroom in brightness only for what is truly bright or highlights. As of now, the editing approach that you show only brightens the whole image like it would happen by cranking up the brightness on a SDR monitor to 1600 nits. This doesn't provide many benefits besides eye discomfort, especially if there are abrupt transitions between dark and bright content. Instead, the way to do it is editing an image that looks just right and the same general brightness both in SDR and HDR. However the HDR version will allow the highlights to be brighter instead of rolling them off, compressing them so they fit. It needs relearning a bit compared to SDR photo editing, which often consist in a 100% manually transform to a display color space. Therefore filling the histogram is a valid approach for SDR photo editing, but not for HDR. Especially when PQ, the main HDR standard defines maximum brightness as 10.000 nits 🙂
There are various ways of editing the images. And yes preservation is the key. However, with photos it is a bit different, there's also SDR tonal mapping that one can use. It comes down to personal preferences and this being so new there are room for standardization. This said, I am not worried if I pushed my SDR in HDR territory, if I can see it and the device can show it then why not, it looks better. And I would use SDR tonal mapping to bring things back. There are going to be multiple philosophical and methodology approach to this coming up. This is one of them, the method you mentioned would be another and there'll be more. The key is where these HDR will go, because if this tech does not take off like 3D TV or other tech of past decade then this is null.
@@ArtIsRight there are several ways for sure, however your example shows that standards will need to be established for HDR image editing like they have been for video. SMTPE (their RUclips channel) has good resources on that for HDR. Although HDR video is graded "to taste" to some extent, white is generally set to 203 nits. I believe that maxing the histogram should be a HDR viewer output preference: adapting the content to the capabilities of the display and viewing conditions, and editors warning against deviations. For instance if you pushed during editing most of your image above 1000 nits, and it is viewed on an OLED TV with ~700 nits peak and 150 nits full field, what's gonna happen? I really hope HDR photography will be developed under a consortium looking into all that, otherwise you can expect some will love it but many hate it instead, complaining about content just being painful to look at because too bright. This consortium would also have to determine if content is meant to be encoded more like PQ, which defines the brightness of each pixel in nits or HLG which doesn't.
I understand what you are saying, but like I said this is a tech preview, not a teaching standard. Once it develop more then I'll do a teaching video. For now it is preview and I'll leave it at that. About the standard we have to see. I know that ICC has a subcommittee on this. "For instance if you pushed during editing most of your image above 1000 nits, and it is viewed on an OLED TV with ~700 nits peak and 150 nits full field, what's gonna happen?" A few things, editing on XDR preview at the moment the program will not show anything above 1000 nits despite the 1600 nits peak. And when view on lower nits display, this is where tonal mapping would occurred. What is not defined yet for Photo HDR is the standard utilized and used, HDR10, HLG, etc. So at this point it time, it would depend on the device that you are opening that image on and the standard that it uses and provided that JXL is supported and it knows what to do with it. Otherwise, it would just default the SDR tonal mapping in camera RAW as I mentioned. Again, I understand where you are going but we are really early in this. Think of this as the Wild West if you will. When the standard get ratified, then I think it would be a good time to address these points on standards, tonal mapping, methodology and best practice and approach to editing, etc. Because it can and will change before final, as far as how drastic that will be, we'll have to see. So as of now, this is a demo and I'll leave it at that.
@@ArtIsRight thanks for all the details, appreciated 😌 Would you have suggestions on how to follow the progress and standards of such developments, or maybe even get involved in discussions? That sounds super interesting - and I have a special interest related to smartphones on this. Do you know if the limitation at 1000 nits is in this software preview or only enforced by the default "HDR Video (P3-ST 2048)" XDR display profile? I'm personally using a copy of it restoring the 1600 nits peak and with a custom white point set with my "XDR tuner" app
"Would you have suggestions on how to follow the progress and standards of such developments, or maybe even get involved in discussions? That sounds super interesting - and I have a special interest related to smartphones on this." Any update on this would be coming from Adobe or Apple, so I would keep an eye out there. A lot of time this would slip by under the radar so a keen eye is a must. I am hyper aware of this so I'll probably be making video about it. "Do you know if the limitation at 1000 nits is in this software preview or only enforced by the default "HDR Video (P3-ST 2048)" XDR display profile?" To clarify this, the limitation is enforced by the firmware of the display controller and not the profile. The preset or reference communicate this info to the display controller but it is the controller that makes the final determination, through pre programming and development at apple that derive from the OS. And it makes sense not to allow static photo program to show to peak 1600 nits because, on a static image editing program and not motion picture like linear video editing or viewing. This 1600 nits then become a sustained value, which the display cannot support so this makes a lot of sense, why it was done this way. This is via official firmware with no software modifications. "I'm personally using a copy of it restoring the 1600 nits peak and with a custom white point set with my "XDR tuner" app" You can do this but the safe guard and rails are there for a reason. Pushing the display and making 1600 nit peak a sustained value can burn out the LED backlight faster and possibly void the warranty on the build in display.
I had the display on my 14" replaced due to some dead pixels... and its better? As in it seems more colour accurate and brighter? I wonder if there was some sort of change.
Hey, I have a HDR DNG I made of a sunset, but I can't export it in a format that preserves all the HDR information so I can use it as a desktop wallpaper. When I convert it to 16bit, the tone mapping dialog box pops up and destroys the ACR edit I made. Any workaround this issue?
Oh great video! Glad it’s finally beginning to take shape. I hope Canon update Digital Photo Professional to allow HDR PQ on the new MBP with XDR Displays
At last! Thank you Art is Right! Thank you Adobe! Suprisigly, the macOS viewer work pretty fine (colors just little lees saturated), with the "openEXR" and "radiance" formats.
Cool new video! I played with HDR/XDR photos way before ACR, you could do that in Photoline (export 32bit radience HDR) and import into Finalcut Wide Gammut workflow, for instance. Export as Dolby Vision video. It was pretty cumbersome. Fun technology, but I am not of an opinion you cannot go back once you see it. It has limited potential in artistic and commercial photography. SDR is more like a painting and gives a nicer quality to the reality of our world. HDR is brutally honest and almost too real, which makes it more suitable for forensics, landscapes and architectural photography. Beside that, all typical commercial displays struggle to mantain high output on a larger area. The effects is mostly visible in a tiny area of the screen, which is mostly distracting by that time.
that workflow is too involved. One see this tech differently. Sure not for most displays, but for the one that you have with you all the time on your phone. The question is why not, the display is there. For me I want to view my image that way. Printing would go through a different editing workflow. I said it is not the same and that is not the point. I see this working in many scenarios more than what you described. And you may not agree that you want to see it this way but show this type of photo to consumers on their phones that can do HDR, there's not going back many of them, so while I see your point I stand firm on my resolve. This is game changer.
Technically the display can somewhat do HDR with tonal remapping but there are many inherit issues not with BenQ but with state of HDR, OS and implementation in general. Hopefully this will get resolve sooner than later.
Incredible! We've been waiting for this for so long :) ... also, this WORKS on my external HDR monitor-an LG G1. I can enable the "HDR Output" in "Technology Previews," then turn on HDR in Adobe Camera Raw & adjust curves as you've shown. If I want to show a slideshow to people, I guess the only option is to load up all the images in ACR & click between them. But there are jxl viewers out there for macOs. Might try a few ...
I am unable to comment on LG G1 as far as I know it is an API and output limitation. I don't have one to test and can't verify, unless I can see in person and test it out, I am unable to comment on this. As far as JXL viewers yes there are but they don't understand how to show HDR yet, again an API is needed from Apple to get this going and properly.
This is not necessary HDR tonal mapping as much as it is HDR Preview and output on a capable display. As far as I know Affinity can't do this yet and only Adobe is doing this tech so far. This is not just HDR merge it is HDR preview which is a totally different concept all together but one that is the extension of HDR Merge in a way but without the need of HDR Merge as a requisite.
Affinity Photo doesnt tonemap. You can output true hdr in Affinity photo on 32-bit images on macbook pro. You might have to set up OCIO, I have it set up with ACES but can’t remember if it works without it
I did a test with a few files it is not that long. And some apps can open them but does not recognized them as HDR. Remember, we are at the start, this is what to expect.
Holy Moley! You can enable jxl viewing in Chrome ... then you can make a website with jxl files!!! ... & to be clear, right now I'm looking at multiple JXL images I edited in ACR (like you showed) in Chrome in a simple HTML table I created that references the JXL files. & they look amazing-a little different to what they look like in ACR, but that's probably due to a color space conversation.
Great news and bad news in the same comment thread. We'll see what format prevail. If this get push through, this may be a successful outcome that they have to look at again.
True HDR image editing finally comes to reality. My tears out of my eyes. Now what we need is a true HDR e-paper for the artists to show their HDR works.
I know! I am with you! Hopefully this will be a matter of time, rather than a tech that is a niche.
I‘m so glad this is finally happening! I could edit my iPhone photos in the photos app in HDR for years. Always boggled my mind that it was not possible with a professional software like Lightroom.
Tell me about it! :D
are you referring to the 12bit proraw photos being hdr in camera app?
@@ArtIsRightdo you know if heif on iOS is hdr? from my tests it doesn't seem to be, meaning that the highlights are brighter on proraw then heif on iphone 14 pro. I also found some info that the heif on iOS is crippled to 8bit, so not hdr. Thanks!
@@mariussocaci9554 no, it is not. Though it does support it just lien AVIF. Yes, heic is indeed 8 bit. Though it is wide gamut.
Cool preview !
From some experience grading HDR video, I learned that the key is to keep mostly SDR levels of brightness on most of the content, and use the extra headroom in brightness only for what is truly bright or highlights.
As of now, the editing approach that you show only brightens the whole image like it would happen by cranking up the brightness on a SDR monitor to 1600 nits. This doesn't provide many benefits besides eye discomfort, especially if there are abrupt transitions between dark and bright content.
Instead, the way to do it is editing an image that looks just right and the same general brightness both in SDR and HDR. However the HDR version will allow the highlights to be brighter instead of rolling them off, compressing them so they fit.
It needs relearning a bit compared to SDR photo editing, which often consist in a 100% manually transform to a display color space.
Therefore filling the histogram is a valid approach for SDR photo editing, but not for HDR. Especially when PQ, the main HDR standard defines maximum brightness as 10.000 nits 🙂
There are various ways of editing the images. And yes preservation is the key. However, with photos it is a bit different, there's also SDR tonal mapping that one can use. It comes down to personal preferences and this being so new there are room for standardization. This said, I am not worried if I pushed my SDR in HDR territory, if I can see it and the device can show it then why not, it looks better. And I would use SDR tonal mapping to bring things back. There are going to be multiple philosophical and methodology approach to this coming up. This is one of them, the method you mentioned would be another and there'll be more. The key is where these HDR will go, because if this tech does not take off like 3D TV or other tech of past decade then this is null.
@@ArtIsRight there are several ways for sure, however your example shows that standards will need to be established for HDR image editing like they have been for video.
SMTPE (their RUclips channel) has good resources on that for HDR.
Although HDR video is graded "to taste" to some extent, white is generally set to 203 nits.
I believe that maxing the histogram should be a HDR viewer output preference: adapting the content to the capabilities of the display and viewing conditions, and editors warning against deviations.
For instance if you pushed during editing most of your image above 1000 nits, and it is viewed on an OLED TV with ~700 nits peak and 150 nits full field, what's gonna happen?
I really hope HDR photography will be developed under a consortium looking into all that, otherwise you can expect some will love it but many hate it instead, complaining about content just being painful to look at because too bright.
This consortium would also have to determine if content is meant to be encoded more like PQ, which defines the brightness of each pixel in nits or HLG which doesn't.
I understand what you are saying, but like I said this is a tech preview, not a teaching standard. Once it develop more then I'll do a teaching video. For now it is preview and I'll leave it at that. About the standard we have to see. I know that ICC has a subcommittee on this.
"For instance if you pushed during editing most of your image above 1000 nits, and it is viewed on an OLED TV with ~700 nits peak and 150 nits full field, what's gonna happen?" A few things, editing on XDR preview at the moment the program will not show anything above 1000 nits despite the 1600 nits peak. And when view on lower nits display, this is where tonal mapping would occurred. What is not defined yet for Photo HDR is the standard utilized and used, HDR10, HLG, etc. So at this point it time, it would depend on the device that you are opening that image on and the standard that it uses and provided that JXL is supported and it knows what to do with it. Otherwise, it would just default the SDR tonal mapping in camera RAW as I mentioned. Again, I understand where you are going but we are really early in this. Think of this as the Wild West if you will. When the standard get ratified, then I think it would be a good time to address these points on standards, tonal mapping, methodology and best practice and approach to editing, etc. Because it can and will change before final, as far as how drastic that will be, we'll have to see. So as of now, this is a demo and I'll leave it at that.
@@ArtIsRight thanks for all the details, appreciated 😌
Would you have suggestions on how to follow the progress and standards of such developments, or maybe even get involved in discussions? That sounds super interesting - and I have a special interest related to smartphones on this.
Do you know if the limitation at 1000 nits is in this software preview or only enforced by the default "HDR Video (P3-ST 2048)" XDR display profile?
I'm personally using a copy of it restoring the 1600 nits peak and with a custom white point set with my "XDR tuner" app
"Would you have suggestions on how to follow the progress and standards of such developments, or maybe even get involved in discussions? That sounds super interesting - and I have a special interest related to smartphones on this."
Any update on this would be coming from Adobe or Apple, so I would keep an eye out there. A lot of time this would slip by under the radar so a keen eye is a must. I am hyper aware of this so I'll probably be making video about it.
"Do you know if the limitation at 1000 nits is in this software preview or only enforced by the default "HDR Video (P3-ST 2048)" XDR display profile?"
To clarify this, the limitation is enforced by the firmware of the display controller and not the profile. The preset or reference communicate this info to the display controller but it is the controller that makes the final determination, through pre programming and development at apple that derive from the OS. And it makes sense not to allow static photo program to show to peak 1600 nits because, on a static image editing program and not motion picture like linear video editing or viewing. This 1600 nits then become a sustained value, which the display cannot support so this makes a lot of sense, why it was done this way. This is via official firmware with no software modifications.
"I'm personally using a copy of it restoring the 1600 nits peak and with a custom white point set with my "XDR tuner" app"
You can do this but the safe guard and rails are there for a reason. Pushing the display and making 1600 nit peak a sustained value can burn out the LED backlight faster and possibly void the warranty on the build in display.
I had the display on my 14" replaced due to some dead pixels... and its better? As in it seems more colour accurate and brighter? I wonder if there was some sort of change.
Could be a dying panel.
Hey, I have a HDR DNG I made of a sunset, but I can't export it in a format that preserves all the HDR information so I can use it as a desktop wallpaper. When I convert it to 16bit, the tone mapping dialog box pops up and destroys the ACR edit I made. Any workaround this issue?
The issue is that JPEG XL Is not widely supported by the OS yet. At this point in time there's really no work around, just a matter of tech maturing.
Thank you for bringing this content to the community, Art. Do you know if the colorimetry behind the scenes is iccMAX?
I don't
This is definitely something to look forward to! 👍
Definitely!
Very Experimental ，yet Soooooo EXCITING！
Super EXCITING!!! Wait until most people have this!!!
Oh great video! Glad it’s finally beginning to take shape. I hope Canon update Digital Photo Professional to allow HDR PQ on the new MBP with XDR Displays
we'll see what happens with other software. Let's hope 2023 is a great year to usher in this.
At last! Thank you Art is Right! Thank you Adobe! Suprisigly, the macOS viewer work pretty fine (colors just little lees saturated), with the "openEXR" and "radiance" formats.
Good to know, thank you for sharing!
Cool new video!
I played with HDR/XDR photos way before ACR, you could do that in Photoline (export 32bit radience HDR) and import into Finalcut Wide Gammut workflow, for instance. Export as Dolby Vision video. It was pretty cumbersome. Fun technology, but I am not of an opinion you cannot go back once you see it. It has limited potential in artistic and commercial photography. SDR is more like a painting and gives a nicer quality to the reality of our world.
HDR is brutally honest and almost too real, which makes it more suitable for forensics, landscapes and architectural photography. Beside that, all typical commercial displays struggle to mantain high output on a larger area. The effects is mostly visible in a tiny area of the screen, which is mostly distracting by that time.
that workflow is too involved. One see this tech differently. Sure not for most displays, but for the one that you have with you all the time on your phone. The question is why not, the display is there. For me I want to view my image that way. Printing would go through a different editing workflow. I said it is not the same and that is not the point. I see this working in many scenarios more than what you described. And you may not agree that you want to see it this way but show this type of photo to consumers on their phones that can do HDR, there's not going back many of them, so while I see your point I stand firm on my resolve. This is game changer.
Thanks for the video Art. Now, get BenQ to come out with an updated Photography monitor with the necessary specs to support this functionality.
Technically the display can somewhat do HDR with tonal remapping but there are many inherit issues not with BenQ but with state of HDR, OS and implementation in general. Hopefully this will get resolve sooner than later.
This is super exciting news! Thanks for sharing and I think I’ll save up for Apple’s next display launch in 2023 to accompany the upcoming Mac Pro 😅
:D
Incredible! We've been waiting for this for so long :) ... also, this WORKS on my external HDR monitor-an LG G1. I can enable the "HDR Output" in "Technology Previews," then turn on HDR in Adobe Camera Raw & adjust curves as you've shown. If I want to show a slideshow to people, I guess the only option is to load up all the images in ACR & click between them. But there are jxl viewers out there for macOs. Might try a few ...
I am unable to comment on LG G1 as far as I know it is an API and output limitation. I don't have one to test and can't verify, unless I can see in person and test it out, I am unable to comment on this. As far as JXL viewers yes there are but they don't understand how to show HDR yet, again an API is needed from Apple to get this going and properly.
@@ArtIsRight It's possible it works with any HDR-enabled monitor. Have you tried it w/one of the BenQ monitors in HDR mode?
yes and it is not. An explanation video as to why will come next week.
sad that we have the xdr screens and the tool to edit in hdr but no viewer 😔
Would love to see this compared to Affinity Photo's HDR tone mapping tools. Excellent work!
This is not necessary HDR tonal mapping as much as it is HDR Preview and output on a capable display. As far as I know Affinity can't do this yet and only Adobe is doing this tech so far. This is not just HDR merge it is HDR preview which is a totally different concept all together but one that is the extension of HDR Merge in a way but without the need of HDR Merge as a requisite.
Affinity Photo doesnt tonemap. You can output true hdr in Affinity photo on 32-bit images on macbook pro. You might have to set up OCIO, I have it set up with ACES but can’t remember if it works without it
I'll have to give that a look
It’s awesome. I agree there is no going back 😊
Export a JXL image takes a long time and it can not be opened.
I did a test with a few files it is not that long. And some apps can open them but does not recognized them as HDR. Remember, we are at the start, this is what to expect.
Holy Moley! You can enable jxl viewing in Chrome ... then you can make a website with jxl files!!! ... & to be clear, right now I'm looking at multiple JXL images I edited in ACR (like you showed) in Chrome in a simple HTML table I created that references the JXL files. & they look amazing-a little different to what they look like in ACR, but that's probably due to a color space conversation.
Google already notified the media that it will be dropping JPEG XL support due to a lack of interest in the ecosystem.
@@vrijegeest512 Wow, that's really sad. Would have been a great way to share HDR images w/friends & family who can cast to their fancy oled TVs.
Great news and bad news in the same comment thread. We'll see what format prevail. If this get push through, this may be a successful outcome that they have to look at again.
Your eyes convinced me so much
Waiting for Microsoft , Google to respond
And more min led and OLED monitors
:)
iPhone did it first…😅
I know, for years now!