Skip to main content
P
potsked
Participant
October 23, 2025
Question

HDR 203 vs HDR 300

  • October 23, 2025
  • 2 replies
  • 201 views

I want to make the most of my HDR workflow and want some guidance on choosing the right color space for my projects.  My hdr workflow is Sony ZV-E1 using XAVC HS 4K @ 100M 4:2:2 10bit color -> PP 2025.  editing on a win11 workstation with HDR turned on (in windows and on the monitor).  I'm primarly editing for mobile/youtube. 

 

I am curious because my shots often aim at soft afternoon lighting, like the shot below. Being able to provide as much dynamic range as possible makes this effect better.  Would HDR 300 make those sunlights pop brighter on an hdr-capable mobile device?  Would HDR 300 give me more dynamic range? Is there a downside to selecting HDR 300 in the color settings for a project?

 

 

2 replies

R Neil Haugen
R Neil Haugen
Legend
October 23, 2025

No. And look at the option, what's it called?

 

"Graphics White" ... right?

 

The choice of 203 against 300 has no effect whatsoever on the video ... only on graphics items like text. And the standard for text in nearly all broadcast/streaming HDR work is right at 200-205 nits.

 

Why? Because that is where the upper limit of 'detailed video" sits. Above that, in the expectation of those making the standards, you have mostly speculars ... bright bits that may have color to them, which SDR cannot do at the higher IRE levels ... but do not have details in them.

 

Ergo the oft given thing, think a sheet of white typing paper in sunlight. That's your 'graphics white'.

 

Realistically, even grading in DolbyVision on Resolve or Baselight, nearly all colorists keep that detail limit at or slightly below 200. 

 

What's above? Oh, sun-speckled things reflecting the sun. Car tail and headlights. Reflections off water, glass, or metal. Fire. Candle flames, though some of the flame will probably be under 205 nits. Even skies at times.

 

And note, I work for/with/teach pro colorists. I'm around discussions on grading this by the top teaching colorists on the planet. It's a very misunderstood thing about HDR, and only part of the reason HDR is still pretty much the Wild Wild West of pro video. Most screens still do not do actual HDR, those that supposedly do have limits as to which HDR media they do work with, nearly all of those do really dastardly things to the screen "to enhance the viewing experience" which tick off colorists, and different apps do wildly different things anyway.

 

Which is frustrating because when it does get both created and displayed correctly, it's really, really nice.

Everyone's mileage always varies ...
P
potskedAuthor
Participant
October 23, 2025

forgot to mention, I record in Log, and use 4 different adjustment layers with tuned LUTS that give me fine grained color grading control.  The last of the LUTS is a rec709 conversion.  Typing this out makes me realize that I'm probably not exporting in HDR, so youtube wouldn't get the extra dynamic range that im recording and editing in....

R Neil Haugen
R Neil Haugen
Legend
October 23, 2025

Re-reading your post, yes, with a LUT that does conversion to Rec.709, you are not anymore in HDR space.

 

That is an ... intriguing ... workflow. LUTs are fascinating and at times useful, but very limited tools.

 

When colorists can use algorithmic based conversions they tend to do so, as the algos are actually high-end mathematical computations that do have if-then steps built in. 

 

LUTs are rather simple data look-up tables ... FGH triplicate RGB values get changed to PWR ... those being stand-ins for numerical data in my example ... and in 16, 32, or 64 given steps. With the in-between numbers being typically a straight-line computation of changes.

 

No math whatsoever is involved in implementing LUTs. So ... if the file your are using isn't produced under the same circumstances as the file the LUT was designed to work with, it can and will crush blacks or clip whites or do odd things to sat. Careful application of specific LUTs is needed for specific field produced media.

Everyone's mileage always varies ...
P
potskedAuthor
Participant
October 23, 2025

Thank you for the detailed reply.  I agree that my workflow is unique.  It's a bit of a hack to avoid learning resolve.  I worked with a colorist and my own footage to develop a set of four adjustment layers (3 luts + a Rec709 conversion) so I can try to balance the creative looks and keep footage looking consistent even when I don't have great light.  Each adjustment layer is kind of acting like a node.

 

digging deeper, I am def clipping my whites, but on review, that is consistent with the soft afternoon look I'm going for.  

I am curious, what is the workflow or setting where you would define the brightness in nits of a particular highlight?  Or do you export within a certain color space and let the playback device interpret that for its own display.  For example, I know that many high end TVs might be able to hit 1000 nits of peak brightness which largley goes to waste since most recent movies are mastered for 300 nits max, keeping in line with the "theater experience".  Is premiere able to manage these kinds of color grading dynamics or is it too primitive a tool for that kind of thing?

Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices