3 ms·

Oh. I don't want the ability for 10% of the screen to be so bright it hurts my eyes. That's the exact thing I want to avoid. I don't understand why you think y

by mort96 11mo ago

Oh. I don't want the ability for 10% of the screen to be so bright it hurts my eyes. That's the exact thing I want to avoid. I don't understand why you think your suggestion would help. I want SDR FFFFFF to be the brightest any part of my screen goes to, because that's what I've configured to be at a comfortable value using my OS brightness controls.

Dylan16807 11mo ago
I strongly doubt that the brightness to hurt your eyes is the same for 10% of the screen and 100% of the screen. I am not suggesting eye hurting. The opposite really, I'm suggesting a curve that stays similarly comfortable at all sizes.
- mort96 11mo ago
  I don't want any one part of my screen to be a stupidly bright point light. It's not just the total amount of photons that matters.
  - Dylan16807 11mo ago
    It is not just the total amount. But it's not the brightest spot either. It's in between.
    - mort96 11mo ago
      I just don't want your "in between" "only hurt my eyes a little" solution. I don't see how that's so hard to understand. I set my brightness so that SDR FFFFFF is a comfortable max brightness. I don't understand why web content should be allowed to go brighter than that.
      - Dylan16807 11mo ago
        I'm suggesting something that WON'T hurt your eyes. I don't see how that's so hard to understand. You set a comfortable max brightness for the entire screen. Comfortable max brightness for small parts of the screen is a different brightness. Comfortable. NO eye hurting.
        mort96 11mo ago
        It's still uncomfortable to have 10% of the screen get ridiculously bright.
        Dylan16807 11mo ago
        Yes, it's uncomfortable to have it get "ridiculously" bright. But there's a level that is comfortable that is higher than what you set for FFFFFF. And the comfortable level for 1% of the screen is even higher. HDR could take advantage of that to make more realistic scenes without making you uncomfortable. If it was coded right to respect your limits. Which is probably isn't right now. But it could be.
        mort96 11mo ago
        I severely doubt that I could ever be comfortable with 10% of my screen getting much brighter than the value I set as max brightness. But say you're right. Now you've achieved images looking completely out of place. You've achieved making the surrounding GUI look grey instead of white. And the screen looks broken when it suddenly dims after switching tabs away from one with an HDR video. What's the point? Even ignoring the painful aspects (which is a big thing to ignore, since my laptop currently physically hurts me at night with no setting to make it not hurt me, which I don't appreciate), you're just making the experience of browsing the web worse. Why?
        Dylan16807 11mo ago
        In general, people report that HDR content looks more realistic and pretty. That's the point, if it can be done without hurting you.
        mort96 11mo ago
        Do they? Do people report that an HDR image on a web page that takes up roughly 10% of the screen looks more realistic? Do they report that an HDR YouTube video, which mostly consists of a screen recording with the recorded SDR FFF being mapped to the brightness of the sun, looks pretty? Do people like when their light-mode GUI suddenly turns grey as a part of it becomes 10x the brightness of what used to be white? (see e.g https://floss.social/@mort/115147174361502259 https://floss.social/@mort/115147174361502259) Because that's what HDR web content is. HDR movies playing on a livingroom TV? Sure, nothing against that. I mean it's stupid that it tries to achieve some kind of absolute brightness, but in principle, some form of "brighter than SDR FFF" could make sense there. But for web content, surrounded by an SDR GUI?

by mort96 11mo ago

Dylan16807 11mo ago

I strongly doubt that the brightness to hurt your eyes is the same for 10% of the screen and 100% of the screen. I am not suggesting eye hurting. The opposite really, I'm suggesting a curve that stays similarly comfortable at all sizes.

mort96 11mo ago
I don't want any one part of my screen to be a stupidly bright point light. It's not just the total amount of photons that matters.
- Dylan16807 11mo ago
  It is not just the total amount. But it's not the brightest spot either. It's in between.
  - mort96 11mo ago
    I just don't want your "in between" "only hurt my eyes a little" solution. I don't see how that's so hard to understand. I set my brightness so that SDR FFFFFF is a comfortable max brightness. I don't understand why web content should be allowed to go brighter than that.
    - Dylan16807 11mo ago
      I'm suggesting something that WON'T hurt your eyes. I don't see how that's so hard to understand. You set a comfortable max brightness for the entire screen. Comfortable max brightness for small parts of the screen is a different brightness. Comfortable. NO eye hurting.
      - mort96 11mo ago
        It's still uncomfortable to have 10% of the screen get ridiculously bright.
        Dylan16807 11mo ago
        Yes, it's uncomfortable to have it get "ridiculously" bright. But there's a level that is comfortable that is higher than what you set for FFFFFF. And the comfortable level for 1% of the screen is even higher. HDR could take advantage of that to make more realistic scenes without making you uncomfortable. If it was coded right to respect your limits. Which is probably isn't right now. But it could be.
        mort96 11mo ago
        I severely doubt that I could ever be comfortable with 10% of my screen getting much brighter than the value I set as max brightness. But say you're right. Now you've achieved images looking completely out of place. You've achieved making the surrounding GUI look grey instead of white. And the screen looks broken when it suddenly dims after switching tabs away from one with an HDR video. What's the point? Even ignoring the painful aspects (which is a big thing to ignore, since my laptop currently physically hurts me at night with no setting to make it not hurt me, which I don't appreciate), you're just making the experience of browsing the web worse. Why?
        Dylan16807 11mo ago
        In general, people report that HDR content looks more realistic and pretty. That's the point, if it can be done without hurting you.
        mort96 11mo ago
        Do they? Do people report that an HDR image on a web page that takes up roughly 10% of the screen looks more realistic? Do they report that an HDR YouTube video, which mostly consists of a screen recording with the recorded SDR FFF being mapped to the brightness of the sun, looks pretty? Do people like when their light-mode GUI suddenly turns grey as a part of it becomes 10x the brightness of what used to be white? (see e.g https://floss.social/@mort/115147174361502259 https://floss.social/@mort/115147174361502259) Because that's what HDR web content is. HDR movies playing on a livingroom TV? Sure, nothing against that. I mean it's stupid that it tries to achieve some kind of absolute brightness, but in principle, some form of "brighter than SDR FFF" could make sense there. But for web content, surrounded by an SDR GUI?