[HN Gopher] Display brighter-than-white color on Apple devices
___________________________________________________________________
Display brighter-than-white color on Apple devices
Author : ash
Score : 280 points
Date : 2023-06-19 10:07 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| joshstrange wrote:
| I'm on an iPhone 14 Pro Max in Safari without power saving turned
| on but those 2 QR codes look identical to me. I tried turning off
| dark mode but they still look the same. What am I doing wrong
| here?
| leidenfrost wrote:
| You need to have HDR enabled on your device
| aeyes wrote:
| Enable HDR, disable power saving and don't have screen
| brightness on max.
| dkasper wrote:
| This hurts my eyeballs.
| baxtr wrote:
| Same for me. Can't look at it for long
| shove wrote:
| No one made the Spinal Tap joke? I'm disappointed in all of you.
| (Again)
| fifafu wrote:
| This has been known for quite a while and can be used for
| arbitrary HTML elements with some CSS hacks. I'm suprised no
| "super bright" advertisements have shown up so far.
| https://kidi.ng/wanna-see-a-whiter-white/ (Safari only)
|
| On macOS you can use apps like BetterDisplay, Vivid or
| BetterTouchTool to enable that HDR mode for the whole display,
| which makes it significantly easier to work outside. On iOS there
| is "Vivid Browser" - a browser that enables the HDR mode for the
| whole screen.
| alin23 wrote:
| Lunar developer here, I also use this trick to showcase Lunar's
| XDR Brightness: https://lunar.fyi/#xdr _(which by the way, was
| the first app to get this feature before Vivid took over with
| clever Twitter marketing)_
|
| Some people will worry about battery and display longevity in
| the comments so I'll also leave some notes I wrote on this:
| https://lunar.fyi/faq#xdr-safe
|
| TLDR: yes, battery and LED lifetime will take a hit.
|
| It's a normal consequence of driving the LEDs to a higher
| voltage which uses more battery power and creates more LED
| heat.
|
| macOS has an ABL (automatic brightness limiter) internally that
| will forcefully limit the voltage based on the amount of white
| pixels on the screen, and based on the generated heat. That ABL
| works at a lower level and cannot be bypassed by apps like
| Lunar or Vivid.
|
| Also for the people wondering about BTT, look for the "Toggle
| super brightness" action.
| jamwil wrote:
| I love your app. Thanks for making it.
| jannes wrote:
| I think many people learned this today. "Known to you" might
| not be the same as "known to everybody else" :)
| fifafu wrote:
| Yep! It's just me wondering why the advertising industry
| hasn't picked up on this, given that they are usually fast to
| exploit any possible browser feature/quirk to push their
| advertisements.
| Schnitz wrote:
| Isn't this the sort of thing that would give Apple an
| excuse to detect ads and treat them differently? I'd avoid
| that if I were a big advertiser.
| jannes wrote:
| Probably Safari users aren't their top priority right now
| (after all the anti-tracking features that Apple added).
| fifafu wrote:
| I'd assume iOS is still one the most important markets
| for advertisers
| 411111111111111 wrote:
| That'd heavily depend on the target audience, safari's
| market share is tiny if it's global.
|
| It should be pretty high if the target audience is US
| only and mainly the higher income brackets, however.
| alwillis wrote:
| 2+ billion devices is not nothing.
| 411111111111111 wrote:
| Nobody said it's _numerically_ few devices.
|
| It's just a question of percentages, do you really want
| to implement something that increases the brightness of
| your advertisement on 2-5% of your global impressions?
|
| Entirely different story if your advertisement is a high
| margin product sold on the american market, especially if
| it's appealing to teenagers/young adults. That'd probably
| be over 50% of impressions, though that's just me
| guessing the number.
| dawnerd wrote:
| We pixel push ads around and deal with single browser
| fixes so I'd say yes, advertisers do care and will spend
| the dev time if they think there's any% rev increase.
| fnordpiglet wrote:
| I think your numbers are off by an order of magnitude :
|
| https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-
| rankings/iphone-ma...
|
| Further as an advertiser I'm more interested in
| impressions weighted by free potential spend. A knock off
| device in Nigeria doesn't factor into my calculations vs
| a top of the line iPhone in Norway. The latter just has
| more money to spend.
| llm_nerd wrote:
| In the US (and many other countries) the iPhone dominates
| every demographic except I guess the very poor? The whole
| "teenagers" thing has never been true. Grandma has an
| iPhone.
|
| However _worldwide_ Safari accounts for over 30%+ of
| mobile device impressions. That is an absolutely enormous
| market. It tends to be the market with the most cash in
| almost all markets (I 'm not trying to be a booster or
| start some mobile platform war, and yes Samsung devices
| are super expensive as well, but demographically you can
| go to almost any country -- Japan, Russia, India, Brazil,
| just about everywhere, and the top n% are dominated by
| iPhones).
|
| If advertisers aren't exploiting it it's either
| ignorance, or more likely that the dominant ad networks
| know it will get the ads flagged as abusive and Apple
| will drop the hammer.
| 411111111111111 wrote:
| The discussion was about global ad impressions, which
| include desktop use and exclude devices with working
| adblockers.
|
| Why are you suddenly quoting exaggerated mobile phone
| market share numbers in such a context?
| llm_nerd wrote:
| All apologies for being direct, but you seem to have
| absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Your
| defensiveness about easily verified mobile metrics
| betrays your real intentions here.
|
| Among _all_ browser users, Safari accounts for a 20%+
| marketshare (again, easily verified. I assume your
| metrics were either made up or you 're just trolling?).
| Again almost entirely the people with the most money.
| Your _hysterical_ claim that this is too small to bother
| with is a howler, but please keep on.
| 411111111111111 wrote:
| What are you even on about, I'm able to access the web
| metrics for my current employers consumer facing site
| which has single digit safari user agents, and I'm
| betting _at least_ half of them will have enabled content
| blockers, though I don 't have any metric for that.
|
| It just depends on your target audience. Some
| demographics have miniscule apple presence, others have
| them as a majority. So, depending on your target
| audience, it might not be worth it. Especially because
| we're taking about a feature that will merely _increase
| the brightness_ of the ad.
|
| Don't interpret some idiotic agenda into a simple
| cost/reward speculation.
|
| Fwiw, this comment was written on an iPhone whilst
| procrastinating from work. Which is coding on a MacBook
| pro whilst checking the resulting website on an iPad Air
| today. I'm even using AirPods Pro to listen to music...
| rollcat wrote:
| https://xkcd.com/1053/
| mort96 wrote:
| What I don't get about Apple is, why aren't things like that
| available out of the box? Why do I need a third party tool to
| be able to increase my display brightness?
| wwalexander wrote:
| For the same reason your car has a rev limiter.
| musicale wrote:
| Battery life - a core feature and differentiator for Apple
| devices which is also highlighted in their marketing.
|
| If they unlocked it then the devices wouldn't meet their
| advertised battery life, and Apple could be subject to heavy
| penalties from the FTC. Also one of the purported advantages
| of Apple Silicon would be obscured.
|
| The CPU is also underclocked for absolute power savings,
| lower heat dissipation, and better compute per watt
| efficiency.
|
| Headphone and speaker volume are also limited below what is
| possible in order to prevent hearing damage and speaker
| damage.
| mort96 wrote:
| Honestly, that's pure bullshit. For my machine, Apple
| advertises 12 hours of web browsing. They document (with a
| footnote) that those 12 hours were measured with the
| brightness set to medium (8 steps). With the _current_
| available display options, you can set your display
| brightness to a value which makes it impossible to reach
| the advertised battery life, and the FTC obviously doesn 't
| come after Apple for that. Why the hell would the FTC start
| coming after Apple if you could get even less battery time
| by cranking up the brightness even more?
|
| I don't know what you mean by the CPU being "underclocked",
| these machines don't have Intel CPUs with a base clock you
| can compare against. But the MacBook Pro machines are
| certainly capable of draining their batteries very quickly
| if you try, and they get quite hot in the process. Because
| having a whole lot of CPU and GPU compute is the very point
| of the MacBook Pro line. The battery life while spinning
| all GPU and CPU cores at 100% is certainly not a core
| differentiator which is highlighted in their marketing.
| taknil wrote:
| I found out just a few days ago our company tries to be "super
| bright" in its banner ads with .img_ad:hover { -webkit-filter:
| brightness(120%);}
| mastax wrote:
| Great. Another feature that gets ruined by advertisers before
| it even gets used in earnest.
| artificial wrote:
| [flagged]
| Operyl wrote:
| [flagged]
| 111111IIIIIII wrote:
| [flagged]
| prpl wrote:
| pun intended?
| bee_rider wrote:
| "It's 20% brighter, isn't it?"
| nyreed wrote:
| But why not just make 100% brighter and make 100% be the
| top number and make that a little brighter?
| aendruk wrote:
| Backwards compatibility
| bee_rider wrote:
| Ruining then bit with, honestly, a pretty good point.
| mattkevan wrote:
| ...but this goes to 120%
| n3storm wrote:
| This can become an accesibility nightmare :_/
| e40 wrote:
| _> On macOS you can use apps like BetterDisplay, Vivid or
| BetterTouchTool to enable that HDR mode for the whole display_
|
| I have BTT and can't figure this out. Can you say how? Thanks.
| anamexis wrote:
| It's called "Toggle super brightness for current display,"
| according to the changelog (3.756): https://updates.folivora.
| ai/bettertouchtool_release_notes.ht...
| jaimehrubiks wrote:
| I cannot find it either. I'll wait a bit if he replies, else
| I'll download one of the others but I love BTT because it
| bundles most of the things I know in a single app. I see the
| potential of this for working outside, specially now that
| summer is coming :)
| fifafu wrote:
| Search the actions for ,,super brightness". However I did not
| spend too much time implementing this and this feature
| actually only uses public API in BTT. BetterDisplay (I'm not
| involved in that despite the name) is my favorite app to do
| this (and much more), but Lunar also seems great. I think
| they work on a lower level - BTT basically just creates a HDR
| enabled transparent window which fills the entire display(s),
| thereby activating the super brightness everywhere on the
| screen
| brookst wrote:
| +1 to Vivid. Being able to work outdoors with a perfectly
| readable laptop has been life-changing.
| verse wrote:
| Doesn't that kill your battery though?
| 130e13a wrote:
| wouldn't it, in the long run, also lead to increased
| potential for screen damage?
| epcoa wrote:
| Short answer, probably not damage but it will shorten
| lifetime, possibly not meaningfully. It's still running
| within spec. It will ever so slightly increase the risk
| of premature failure as running anything closer to its
| limits tends to do. White LEDs dim and color shift
| gradually as they age so it will cause it to dim/shift
| faster. On a good display this is still 10s of thousands
| of hours of operation which is many years.
| asvitkine wrote:
| Does it work on a laptop or so you mean iPad?
| dmd wrote:
| Works on my macbook.
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| Mini LED Laptops like the 14 inch Macbook Pro. Peak
| brightness is over 1000 nits but it is locked out by
| default except for HDR content.
| cs02rm0 wrote:
| It displays as normal on my M1 MBP and then gradually ramps up
| over a second or two to the superbright white. Seems better
| suited to a static white area than a few video frames? At least
| on this device, I guess others might be more responsive to it?
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| That's probably your OS gradually adjusting instead of just
| jumping to the desired brightness as encoded in the video.
| oniony wrote:
| Persil are going to have a field day with this.
| Zamicol wrote:
| Browser support for "HDR" features is already in CSS. Using a
| video over idiomatic CSS is a hack.
| https://developer.chrome.com/articles/high-definition-css-co...
| mindbyte wrote:
| A simple website blowing my mind is very rare. And now every
| other white seems so pale & washed out.
| hbn wrote:
| Apple did a clever thing with HDR content where it can appear
| amongst other non-HDR content, and only the part of the screen
| displaying the HDR content is in HDR. But in practice it looks
| really bad and I hate every time I'm scrolling Instagram and an
| HDR video appears in my feed. It blows my eyes out and then the
| rest of my screen looks gray and muted for a few seconds until I
| get the HDR content off my screen.
| Joeri wrote:
| Actually the whole screen is HDR, but the non-HDR parts are
| dimmed to match their normal brightness. They can do this
| because they calibrate their displays and know exactly how
| bright they are.
|
| By the way, if brightness is not maxed this works even on the
| 400 nits macbook air m1, which they call EDR. They ramp up to
| max brightness and dim the non-HDR parts.
| mrtksn wrote:
| It works even if the brightness is maxed out(M1 Air), they
| must be leaving some brightness margin to allow for this to
| work on any brightness level - maybe except for outdoor
| lighting conditions? I had to blast the ambient light sensor
| with my phone's flash to get the screen bright enough so that
| the HDR content disappears. When the auto-brightness is
| turned off, you can still see the HDR content up until the
| top settings, just one bar down is enough to display it.
|
| The switch from SDR to HDR is also interesting, when an HDR
| content is to be displayed it slowly fades into HDR. It must
| be tamping up the backlight of the LCD when tinting the SDR
| content simultaneously to create the gradual brightness
| increase effect in the HDR areas. The fact that the SDR area
| doesn't flicker when this happens, gives me the impression
| that the Apple do amazing screen calibration.
| crazygringo wrote:
| > _It works even if the brightness is maxed out(M1 Air)_
|
| No it doesn't, I'm trying it out right now on my M1 Air. If
| my screen brightness is max, the video isn't extra-bright
| in Chrome or in Safari. If I turn down the screen
| brightness, it does stand out.
|
| I don't know what you're talking about having to "blast the
| ambient light sensor" to get your screen to max brightness,
| that's not how my M1 Air works and it's not how any Mac
| laptop is supposed to work. That's used for "Automatically
| adjust brightness" (which I have on) but that's overridden
| at any moment just by using the brightness buttons on your
| keyboard to turn it up to the max. So I'm not sure how you
| think you've got your brightness "maxed out" but it seems
| you don't. You might have some other setting preventing it,
| like automatic screen dimming in battery mode.
| mrtksn wrote:
| Check this out: https://dropovercl.s3.amazonaws.com/3957b
| c45-20b7-47b5-8910-...
|
| Also, try not to get worked up for such stuff on the
| internet. Yas it appears that when plugged to the wall,
| it does lose the HDR-white on max brightness. Still, even
| on max - 1, HDR is displayed properly.
|
| On iPhone 14 Pro, which has the ability to display full
| HDR content, also can't display the HDR-White when the
| brightness is cranked up to the max.
|
| In my book, M1 Air and iPhone 14 Pro are both capable of
| displaying HDR-white. Just don't go to absolute peak
| brightness, which only happens under direct sunlight
| anyway("blast the ambient light sensor" part, simulating
| extremely bright environment).
| [deleted]
| crazygringo wrote:
| > _Also, try not to get worked up for such stuff on the
| internet. Yas it appears that when plugged to the wall,
| it does lose the HDR-white on max brightness. Still, even
| on max - 1, HDR is displayed properly._
|
| Correcting misinformation isn't "getting worked up",
| please don't insinuate anything like that. HDR is still
| fairly new so it's important that misinformation doesn't
| spread.
|
| And as your comment suggests, it's only because your Mac
| is temporarily reducing its brightness in battery mode
| (also sometimes due to heavy CPU usage, that the battery
| can't fully drive the display and chips).
|
| But your assertion that "absolute peak brightness... only
| happens under direct sunlight" is false. As you yourself
| are seeing, you achieve the same when merely plugged in,
| no ambient light required.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| Hang on, Apple don't calibrate each display individual. They
| profile a characteristic display, and then apply that
| characteristic profile to all of their displays.
|
| If you want a calibrated display you will need to buy some
| calibration hardware! Displays change over time too...so
| frequent calibration is needed.
| mrtksn wrote:
| When done tastefully it's actually amazing. Especially videos
| which have bright sun illuminating some surfaces and other
| surfaces are in the shadows. It really looks like the sun is
| shining, I can feel the endorphin is shooting through my veins.
|
| However, for some reason, the human skin tones can look very
| weird in some conditions. Maybe the iPhone camera settings
| should be by default off when it comes to HDR. It also
| complicates sharing and color editing, so it's a true "pro"
| feature.
| thrashh wrote:
| I have to agree with the iPhone camera in bright settings. It
| doesn't look good.
|
| Admittedly it can look better than my digital camera with
| default settings but I can dial some manual settings on my
| digital camera and the photos will come out really good.
|
| It really comes down to managing dynamic range when you are
| technically limited in capturing it.
|
| A lot of people like film because because highlights roll off
| instead of being linear with clipping like digital, but you
| can get way better results with digital if you know what to
| do. Unfortunately I hate how the iPhone camera does it.
| nomel wrote:
| Have you tried disabling HDR, in the camera settings, so
| regular mapping is used?
| dheera wrote:
| Easily doable on non-Apple displays.
|
| (a) Buy a high brightness monitor. There are some industrial
| ones that go up to 1000, 2500, or even 5000 nits. A Dell
| U2723QE, for comparison, is 400 nits.
|
| (b) Scaling back ALL RGB pixel values linearly from [0,255]
| to [0,127]. Actually, just bit shift them.
|
| (c) Set monitor brightness to 100%, which cancels the effect
| of (b) under most circumstances.
|
| (c) When you want a dose of "Apple HDR" white you just issue
| a [255,255,255] and you get a blast of 1000 nits in your
| face.
|
| In fact I think a lot of newer monitors offer 10 bits per
| pixel of depth, and considering most images on the web are
| still 8 bits per channel, you can do all of the above without
| even losing color resolution from 8 to 7 bits, and instead go
| from 10 to 9 bits, though I don't know how to implement that
| in practice (might have to be done on the graphics driver
| level rather than scaling down pixel values in the OS?)
| saagarjha wrote:
| This sounds to me like it would be a very poor
| approximation of how EDR works on Apple displays.
| rollcat wrote:
| > When done tastefully it's actually amazing.
|
| Same thing happened with color TV, same thing happened with
| 3D movies... every time film technology advances, it gets
| abused at first, until 1. people get fatigued with it, 2.
| someone figures out how to actually use the new medium.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| Android does this as well now, depending on device support
| https://source.android.com/docs/core/display/mixed-sdr-hdr
| munchler wrote:
| So it's basically the Spinal Tap "amp goes to 11" for displays?
| Genius.
| whalesalad wrote:
| Always wondered wtf was going on here and now it makes sense.
| cornstalks wrote:
| Part of the problem is mobile devices often grade their videos
| "too hot." This Demuxed[1] talk has a pretty good overview of
| the problem in the industry and ideas for improving it (and to
| avoid confusion, the talk is given from the perspective of
| someone in the future looking back on HDR in the industry).
|
| [1]: https://youtu.be/bYS-P2bF2TQ
| kccqzy wrote:
| Fortunately turning on Low Power Mode disables that nonsense.
| Might as well save some battery while getting rid of this eye-
| scorching white.
| toxik wrote:
| It in fact still works in low power mode.
| flutas wrote:
| Yup, exactly the same impression for me.
|
| To me it doesn't make HDR content look better, but it makes the
| non HDR content around it just look worse.
| hbn wrote:
| Honestly I think it kind of makes both look bad. Everything
| else looks muted, but also the HDR content itself looks
| cartoonishly over-saturated because your eyes are not in the
| context of seeing colors like that on your screen as it is.
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| My opinion of this way of handling HDR is kinda mixed when it
| comes to phones, but on computers and tablets I prefer it to
| the way that e.g. Windows handles HDR, where non-HDR parts of
| the screen look weirdly dim, which makes you want to only turn
| HDR on when running a game that supports it or something like
| that.
| LelouBil wrote:
| I have this only when turning on HDR in windows, but not in
| my screen.
|
| When both are on, it's good.
| madethemcry wrote:
| That's interesting. Every normal white feels pale and boring
| after seeing that white. I'm not writing this as a joke,
| everything that is supposed to be white looks like a greyish,
| washed out white right now.
| grishka wrote:
| But eventually your vision readjusts to the old levels and
| normal whites feel normal again.
| sweetjuly wrote:
| but some part of you will always be chasing that high again,
| always needing that hit, that rush
| xp84 wrote:
| Same thing happens watching something projected on a screen (in
| a room of non-zero brightness). Imagine a zebra or a
| checkerboard projected on a white screen. When you're looking
| at the projected image, you really see "black and white" but
| only when you consciously reconsider and look at the margins of
| the screen outside the image, you realize the zebra or
| checkerboard's "black" parts are actually full white (possibly
| even a touch brighter due to LCD) and the white parts are just
| ultra bright white. It always amazes me that we're naturally
| able to perceive any (reasonable) relative gradient of dark to
| bright as though it's true black-to-white.
| JLCarveth wrote:
| At first I thought the page was playing a trick by applying a
| tint to the page.
| feintruled wrote:
| Yes! I thought the Safari example above had just dimmed the
| rest of the screen as a trick, but then I closed the window and
| it was all still grey and dull. I have been spoiled now I have
| glimpsed 'true white'.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Most colours are relative to their surroundings anyway; there's
| a few cool optical illusions that illustrate that like
| https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/02/27/12-fa...
| killjoywashere wrote:
| Uh, that just made my screens darker, so kindly never do that
| again. That's worse than a blink tag.
|
| [edit] not sure why the downvotes. I have an XDR screen and it's
| quite distracting when my entire screen goes dark for some local
| video to get bright.
| Snoozus wrote:
| The reason you can only do this with video is to avoid burn in?
| progbits wrote:
| No standardized support in HTML/CSS. Video containers can store
| the color profile information.
| cubefox wrote:
| I assume CSS colors are defined for an sRGB color space and
| the iPhone displays are calibrated, so they show a smaller
| color range than they could. OLED is able to go well beyond
| sRGB.
| adrian_b wrote:
| Not only OLED, but most good LCD monitors support the
| Display P3 color space (derived from DCI P3), with 30 bit
| per pixel, which is much larger than sRGB.
|
| While Safari has been supporting Display P3 for several
| years, all major browsers support since the beginning of
| the year CSS Color Module Level 4, which includes support
| for Display P3 (for all the other even larger supported
| color spaces there are no monitors or TV sets of reasonable
| price that can display them).
|
| Most monitors come from the factory configured to display
| 24-bit sRGB colors, so the user must change the default
| settings to be able to display 30-bit Display P3 colors.
|
| However the color space only affects the maximum saturation
| of the colors, not the maximum brightness of the colors,
| which is determined by the brightness setting of the
| monitor.
|
| For a white brighter than the brightest normal white, it is
| not enough to have a monitor with a wide color gamut, it
| must also be HDR capable and the software must support HDR
| too.
| cubefox wrote:
| I don't quite get the saturation/brightness difference
| here. Isn't $fff "whiter" than $eee? Where whiter means
| brighter? Then why couldn't the whitest color be even
| whiter, and hence brighter, in a larger color space? (I
| assume the answer is that a larger color space contains
| colors that are "redder" or "yellower", but not "whiter",
| for some reason.)
| adrian_b wrote:
| A color is determined by 3 numbers, when those 3 numbers
| are chosen to be hue, saturation and brightness, that
| means that this color cannot be distinguished from a
| mixture of monochromatic light with a standard kind of
| white light (e.g. D65), both lights having certain
| radiant powers (per solid angle and/or per area).
|
| In that case, the hue is the frequency or wavelength of
| the monochromatic light, the saturation is the ratio
| between the (weighted by the eye sensitivity curve)
| radiant powers of the monochromatic light and of the
| total light (so a completely saturated color is
| monochromatic, without any added white), while the
| brightness is the total radiant power (weighted by the
| eye sensitivity curve).
|
| The red, green and blue pixel components of a display do
| not emit monochromatic light, unless the display is a
| laser projector. For any non-laser display the light
| emitted by a pixel component is equivalent with a mixture
| of a completely saturated color of the same hue with
| white light. This is especially obvious in the red of a
| sRGB display, which is much less saturated than a color
| that could be accepted as pure red. When two red colors
| have the same hue, the more saturated color is "redder",
| as it has less white and more red.
|
| "Redder" is ambiguous as it can be also used when
| comparing colors of the same saturation and brightness
| but of different hues, e.g. when comparing two reddish
| oranges, where the redder has more red and less green, or
| when comparing two reddish purples, where the redder has
| more red and less blue. Any color display can show any
| color hue, the difference between the displayed color
| spaces is only in the maximum displayed saturation, which
| cannot exceed the saturation of the individual R, G and B
| pixel components.
|
| When you specify RGB colors, you specify only relative
| values, i.e. by ratios vs. the RGB components of the
| brightest white light that the monitor has been
| configured to emit through its "brightness" setting. For
| instance, on a certain monitor setting the "brightness"
| to "75%" might mean that the brightest white has a
| luminance of 100 cd/m^2, while on another monitor model
| the same "75%" might correspond to a very different
| luminance of white, but in any case changing the setting
| will increase or decrease the brightness of all displayed
| colors, without changing their hues or saturations.
|
| Both "#f0f0f0" and "#e0e0e0" are white and normally one
| would say that the former is brighter than the latter.
|
| If on the axis of black to white one labels as "white"
| the brightest white and as "gray" the white of half
| brightness, then one may say that the former is "whiter"
| than the latter.
|
| However this usage is not recommended, because it is
| ambiguous. It is much more common to say that a color is
| "whiter" with the intention to say that it is less
| saturated, i.e. it is a mixture of more white with less
| of a monochromatic color, than to use "white" as a
| synonym of "bright".
| zokier wrote:
| CSS color() can do Display-P3 and Rec2020
| [deleted]
| elvisds wrote:
| This was explained in demo website [1] that was submitted
| earlier today [2]
|
| > It works by displaying a color whose brightness is way
| outside the standard range of sRGB color space.
|
| > Unfortunately, this color cannot be represented with CSS
| colors (rgb(999,999,999) doesn't work) or any of the widely-
| supported image formats. However, an HDR video can represent
| this color.
|
| [1] https://notes.dt.in.th/HDRQRCode [2]
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36384625
| Jasper_ wrote:
| In theory, you could do this with the rec2020 color space
| included in CSS Color 4. https://www.w3.org/TR/css-
| color-4/#predefined-display-p3
| jojobas wrote:
| Using any monitor in a room with a window on a sunny day
| you'll want to ramp up brightness way above the sRGB-mandated
| 80cd/sqm. True sRGB colours only make sense for print
| designers anyway, anybody else adjusts their white brightness
| as needed. This is a gimmick and Apple's usual pioneering
| stunt.
| vardump wrote:
| Apparently a tab with that hack consumes a ton of energy, even
| when hidden. Weird. Google Chrome, MBP M2 16".
| orangepanda wrote:
| What privileges a superwhite QR code has versus a regular white?
| yootyootr wrote:
| It makes regular white look dim/dull so adverts programmed to
| take advantage of the superwhite will attract more attention.
| da768 wrote:
| Works better in plain sunlight and with barcode scanners I
| assume. Pretty much any apps showing a barcode sets your phone
| on full brightness.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Any QR reader in 2023 that cannot read a black and white QR
| code on a regular brightness phone screen should probably be
| considered faulty...
| chakintosh wrote:
| Exactly. QR code scanning abilities of new smartphones has
| gotten so incredibly quick at scanning the code. I barely
| point my iPhone 14 Pro's camera at the code and it already
| scans and displays the information. Even with the motion
| blur on the camera as I'm pointing the phone at the code.
|
| I think the focus should be more on the ability to
| interpret damaged codes via ML capabilities as most QR
| codes are outdoors.
| jwestbury wrote:
| Scanning an on-screen QR code is usually done with
| barcode scanners, not with phones. Typically, barcode
| scanners are doing the decoding on-device, and passing
| out keyboard data (their drivers usually identify them as
| USB HID). Unfortunately, most scanners don't have loads
| of onboard processing power, though ability to deal with
| damaged linear barcodes has been quite good for a long
| time. Damaged 2D barcodes are harder to deal with, and
| while ML may be able to solve that, it would require a
| paradigm shift in how barcode scanners operate -- and
| essentially bifurcate the market, as some scanners would
| simply no longer be compatible with embedded systems, and
| would require specialised software to function (which
| isn't really ideal; most users of barcode scanners want
| them to be plug-and-play).
|
| (My first post-university job was doing tech support for
| a company which sold point-of-sale equipment. I'd say
| about 50% of my job was helping people with barcode
| scanners.)
| account42 wrote:
| Phones typically have glossy screens which can be a real
| problem if there are light sources in the sourrundings that
| can be reflected - including the scanner's own lights
| which, yes, _should_ be turned off when scanning a phone
| barcode but this is not always the case in practice. Upping
| the brightness of the phone display itself mitigates this.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Phone screens are awfully flat though - which means glare
| from a light is typically a small area. QR codes are
| robust to small areas being missing. In fact, a typical
| QR code is readable with about 20% of the code missing.
| michaelt wrote:
| Not really - a large thing being reflected means a large
| area of glare.
|
| A lot of scanning takes place out of doors - think of
| someone scanning e-tickets at a music festival or sports
| event.
| sdflhasjd wrote:
| I've been doing some work in this space (eticketing) and
| it's not as easy as you think. OK, 95% of the time it
| works, but that's not good enough and when you move into
| the "real world" - cracked screens, smudges, glare, dirty
| sensors it gets worse. The failure cases waste a huge
| amount of time.
| esrauch wrote:
| Haven't flown in a few years but I flew a ton 2017-2020 and
| airlines could never scan the barcode on an eTicket if I
| forgot to turn the brightness up all the way. I'm guessing
| it is more because of glare than contrast though if that
| makes you feel any better.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Airline barcodes aren't QR codes. They are Aztec codes or
| PDF417 codes, and software for reading them is generally
| less robust and less smart because less investment has
| gone into clever ways to align the codes quickly. The
| codes themselves also have less good alignment markers,
| especially for dealing with lens distortion.
| hnbad wrote:
| Every time I'm queuing somewhere that requires scanning QR
| codes or digital barcodes, I see some people going through
| the back-and-forth of scans not working and the person
| fiddling with their brightness settings or fighting auto-
| brightness. I'd say there's a legitimate use case for this
| right there.
| Reason077 wrote:
| A brighter display with higher contrast is more likely to work
| reliably with certain barcode scanners. For example, I
| sometimes struggle to get my Tesco Clubcard QR code (edit:
| actually an Aztec code) to scan on their old (red laser) self-
| checkout machines with my iPhone, but on my Apple Watch it
| displays brighter and seems to work more reliably.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| The number of colors defined by software will not represent
| exactly all the colors a system can display; the software colors
| are arbitrarily defined and at discrete levels.
|
| I expect that any system can physically output colors in addition
| to the software definitions, including in-between colors and
| especially, assuming the engineers left margin for error, colors
| at the extremes of brightness and hue could be generated.
| tda wrote:
| doesn't work with firefox on my M1 MBP, but it does in safari.
| xwdv wrote:
| Is there an opposite to this such as "superblack"?
| kristofferR wrote:
| No, pixels can't be more off than completely off.
|
| That's why OLEDs have "perfect blacks", it's not an
| exaggeration, it's physically impossible to create better
| blacks.
| d_tr wrote:
| Unless we want to be pedantic and take the ambient light
| reflected off the screen into account. Old CRT monitors, for
| example, reflected a lot of ambient light and looked grey
| when turned off in a lit room. And even when operating in a
| dark room there would be some diffusion from the lit areas of
| the screen, which is why they did not actually have "perfect
| blacks" like many believe. If you had a very dark scene you
| would have less internal diffusion too though so it would
| indeed look very good. Something similar could be happening
| in OLEDs, but yeah IMO OLEDs have perfect blacks for all
| intents and purposes.
| londons_explore wrote:
| How many hours can I display super-white brightness before burnin
| starts to happen?
|
| If this is just designed for bright brief 'glints' of light in
| videos, I can imagine the screen itself might be being
| substantially overdriven, and there might well be damage if you
| did this for hours on end (or even maybe minutes, especially on a
| hot day).
|
| OLED isn't known for longevity when displaying bright colors...
| fifafu wrote:
| people have been using Vivid or BetterDisplay for months on
| macOS to ramp up the brightness (they are awesome for working
| outdoors) - so far I don't think any damages have been
| reported. The Apple displays automatically seem to dim when
| they overheat
| eyesee wrote:
| MacBooks don't ship with OLED displays, only micro LED
| ("XDR") displays which shouldn't be susceptible. iPhones
| however do have OLED displays.
| ryder9 wrote:
| [dead]
| londons_explore wrote:
| > The 12.9-inch Liquid Retina XDR display has an IPS LCD
| panel supporting a resolution of 2732x2048 pixels for a
| total of 5.6 million pixels with 264 pixels per inch. [1]
|
| "Liquid Retina XDR" is just a high end LCD. Micro LED isn't
| yet on anything they sell. All apple devices phone-size and
| smaller currently use OLED, and everything larger uses IPS
| LCD.
|
| [1]: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT212527
| girvo wrote:
| I thought Apple also used Mini-LED though, with quite a
| large amount of zones in comparison to most competitors?
| At least in the 14 and 16" pro MacBooks?
|
| Yes I'm aware that Mini and Micro-LED are different
| technology
| londons_explore wrote:
| yes, but the main benefit of more zones is that you can
| make the display thinner (it is hard to design very thin
| light pipes for zonal displays). You also get some power
| saving benefits, and less 'halo-ing' when displaying very
| bright and very dark things next to eachother.
| londons_explore wrote:
| All of Apples laptop range is still LCD right, not OLED?
| ornornor wrote:
| > please don't abuse this
|
| I'm preparing popcorn.
| B1FF_PSUVM wrote:
| (marquee) popcorn (\marquee)
| devit wrote:
| There probably should be a toggle or a separate brightness
| control (i.e. "maximum brightness" and "default brightness") if
| something like that is exposed to the web.
|
| Letting content be arbitrarily much brighter than what the user
| expects seems a terrible design, easily exploitable by
| advertisers and all sorts of attention thieves.
| [deleted]
| sequoia wrote:
| Is the "normal white" toned down to reduce eye-strain?
| Ralfp wrote:
| So this is the trick that Facebook was using to make videos stand
| out more in the feed? I've noticed they are darkening rest of the
| page a little, but didn't know this also bumps backlighting
| brightness.
| knolan wrote:
| This will happen with any video recorded in HDR, on iPhone 12
| and later for example. You see it all the time on Reddit,
| YouTube etc.
|
| It probably isn't anything Facebook is doing.
| ash wrote:
| Duplicate: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36384625
| user_7832 wrote:
| If anyone's curious how this physically (appears to) work - it
| seems it boosts the backlight and applies a dark overlay on the
| rest of the page. If the brightness on my iPad Air 4 is max, the
| white stays the same. If it's lower then it's "super white".
| dylan604 wrote:
| On my MBP in Safari, this adjustment is done in several steps.
| When the page loads, the image is there but takes 6-8 increases
| before stabilizing at the final brightness. It's not a smooth
| ramp at all.
| fifafu wrote:
| It does not apply any dark overlay, at least not on HDR
| screens, it just looks like it does due to the big difference
| in brightness.
|
| I would assume the iPad Air 4 doesn't have a HDR screen, but
| maybe I'm wrong. On HDR capable screens you should still see a
| huge difference even on maximum brightness.
| treecle wrote:
| Apple does some trickery to display HDR on non HDR Apple
| displays. Look up EDR.
| AlanYx wrote:
| On some post-2017 non-HDR Apple displays, the OS actually
| dynamically adjusts the screen's gamma curve to simulate
| this effect. On machines that support this, if you hold
| Option down while opening the Display control panel,
| there's an additional option that appears to enable/disable
| this.
| krona wrote:
| On my 2023 M2 MBP (XDR display) there is still a large
| difference between the white on the page at max brightness and
| the video whiteness. In fact the video gets even brighter at
| max brightness.
| user_7832 wrote:
| Could you try manually increasing the brightness to maximum
| if that's possible? (Though I suspect with local dimming
| zones and the language on the Apple website the whole display
| can't be kept at "max" brightness, as a local zone can still
| be brighter.)
| treecle wrote:
| It's an HDR video and it's the OS that controls how it looks.
| If your display is HDR (OLED and Mini LED Apple displays) it
| will brighten just the video pixels. If your display is not
| HDR, it will do as you describe (across the whole OS, not just
| the webpage). Apple calls this EDR I believe.
| ilyt wrote:
| That's.... terrible way to handle it. Make whole screen look
| worse
| ricardobeat wrote:
| Are you on a MBP? It doesn't actually make anything worse,
| it raises the screen brightness at the same time as it dims
| the content, so it stays at the same absolute brightness
| and the transition is imperceptible.
| user_7832 wrote:
| Yeah I think you're right. I thought that my iPad had an HDR
| display (it's got a wide gamut coverage and can _show_ HDR
| content) but apparently it 's not "Apple HDR".
|
| Though - lots of non-OLED/miniLED displays have HDR... why
| does Apple have a different standard?
| treecle wrote:
| I believe they do it this way because they want to be able
| to display HDR and SDR content on the same display at the
| same time.
| rxyz wrote:
| Because their non-hdr displays don't have enough peak
| brightness for good looking HDR.
| NikkiA wrote:
| About 15 years ago I had a monitor from Philips that had the
| ability to software control the backlight at a reasonably fine
| level (I don't recall if it was actually the same resolution as
| the display, but it pretended you could choose it per pixel).
|
| The primary use case of the included software was to highlight
| the focused window and dim the rest. Other than that, it was
| more of a chore to use.
| neoyagami wrote:
| it makes my second screen to panic and glitch some windows when
| this is present
| unsupp0rted wrote:
| I'm listening to Spotify on a stock M1 MacBook Pro 16", and when
| I opened this Github demo the speakers started crackling, until I
| closed the tab.
| ko27 wrote:
| > Unfortunately, this color cannot be represented with CSS colors
| (rgb(999,999,999) doesn't work)
|
| I think this is wrong. Browsers already support HDR with other
| color space like this one https://oklch.com/
| neoyagami wrote:
| this makes my second screen to panic and glitch some windows when
| this is present
| kurishutofu wrote:
| I tried experimenting with something similar using three.js a
| while ago [0] when I saw the other post [1]. The trick was hiding
| the HDR video in the page, allowing other elements to surpass a
| brightness level of 1. I have a post-processing shader that
| divides all brightness values by 2, along with CSS that applies
| filter: brightness(2). Finally a shader material on one of the
| spheres multiplies its fragment output by a value above one.
|
| [0] https://r3f-hdr.netlify.app
|
| [1] https://kidi.ng/wanna-see-a-whiter-white/
| albertzeyer wrote:
| I was wondering whether such HDR videos are also on YouTube. Yes,
| same super white video:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n__QY3e55Lc
|
| Some other random HDR video:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72_rYwzLhjk
| donatj wrote:
| I've never understood why HDR is implemented in the strange way
| it is, outside the normal color spectrum. Really seems like #fff
| should just be the whitest white the display can physically
| support.
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| RGB isn't an appropriate model for brightness is why.
| donatj wrote:
| Why is that? Isn't brightness just an R G and B value by
| physical definition?
| brookst wrote:
| Our eyes are non-linear across the spectrum. #A0004F is
| much darker than #00FF00.
|
| Thats why we have the CIE colorspace and HSB/HSL/etc. All
| of those use a nonlinear geometry that better maps to the
| way we perceive colors.
| donatj wrote:
| Scaling the colors for our eyes seems like something for
| some sort of psychometrics library and we'd be better
| served having direct access the just the r g and b
| brights control of the individual pixels
| tedunangst wrote:
| Why are we better served by wasting bits?
| Jasper_ wrote:
| That would lead to inconsistent brightness across devices --
| white on a 2000 nits HDR TV is extremely bright, you likely
| don't want that as a paper white background. Standardizing on
| some good enough value of nits (usually between 80 and 200) for
| "SDR" peak white tends to work better.
| CyberDildonics wrote:
| _That would lead to inconsistent brightness across devices_
|
| Phone brightness is going to be adjusted automatically or
| manually when someone goes from somewhere bright to somewhere
| dark, not to mention that different phones already have
| different brightness.
|
| I'm pretty sure there is already "inconsistent brightness
| across devices" so I don't know what this actually means.
| virtualritz wrote:
| That would be terrible for color reproduction which is what
| most use cases are about.
|
| HDR is still a niche application outside of games and VFX.
| d_tr wrote:
| Supposedly every piece of content comes tagged with some color
| space, so the correct thing to do is to display whatever white
| #fff maps to in that color space. Allowing the user to override
| that could be an option.
| altairprime wrote:
| That's the color model Firefox used for the past two decades,
| which is why HN's orange header is always eye-blastingly neon
| on Firefox macOS compared to other browsers.
|
| Thankfully the CSS Color v3 spec mandates a default of sRGB for
| #fff codes, so Firefox will have to get with the times someday
| soon and stop poking my eyes out with HDR-expanded sRGB colors
| (by default).
| orangepurple wrote:
| Nearly all displays are incapable of accurately representing
| colors at high brightness (L=100) levels. You can clearly see
| the sRGB gamut is quite narrow within the CIELAB color space at
| (L=100). The CIELAB color space represents all colors
| perceptible by humans in daylight.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SRGB_gamut_within_CIELAB_...
|
| It is clear that higher brightness levels worsen color volume
| (cubes at the bottom of page 4)
| https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323273667_Color_vol...
| msla wrote:
| Why don't they just make #FFFFFF brighter?
| Tepix wrote:
| Note it will not show superbright colors if you are in low power
| mode on the iPhone.
| layer8 wrote:
| Also not with Smart Invert Colors turned on (where it's still
| white, but remains at normal brightness).
| foolrush wrote:
| "Brighter-than-white"...
|
| Gilchrist enters the chat.
|
| http://wexler.free.fr/library/files/gilchrist%20(1999)%20an%...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-06-19 23:00 UTC)