2 ms·

HDR is mentioned only once. Yet this should be the primary case for any new image standard. I'll repeat a comment I wrote here earlier: Our camera hardware su

HDR is mentioned only once. Yet this should be the primary case for any new image standard. I'll repeat a comment I wrote here earlier: Our camera hardware supports HDR. RAW image formats support HDR. Our display devices support HDR. Videos support HDR. Smartphones can now record in HDR. All the hardware is there ready for the future. Yet due to (30 year old) software limitations we're still cutting off HDR data when saving our precious memories as JPEG. All whites become #ffffff. The white of paper. The color of Word's document background color. The gamut of color has expanded and we need image standards to expand with it.

JyrkiAlakuijala 4y ago
Adobe and Intel seem to share your thinking with HDR driving this generation of image formats. https://helpx.adobe.com/si/camera-raw/using/hdr-output.html https://helpx.adobe.com/si/camera-raw/using/hdr-output.html JPEG XL has HDR always built-in into its modeling, both SDR and HDR images are modeled exactly the same way and give the exactly same visual quality with the same encoding parameters. Compositing SDR and HDR materials does not need conversions between colorspaces -- everything is in absolute color XYB colorspace. Other codecs (AVIF, HEVC) need a different set of encoding parameters for obtaining the same visual quality when used for SDR or HDR. Compositing SDR and HDR materials necessarily needs color conversions, since they will have different normalizations. Knowing which HDR quality setting corresponds which SDR setting will become additional cognitive load for the users.