It's like I'm making all these calls faster than their governing bodies.

There is no "DisplayHDR 2000" tier in the VESA DisplayHDR specification and logo program at this time.

The only thing that really matters! If the (earlier) leak is legit then it's only a matter of time VESA unveils this :pimp:

R0H1TThe only thing that really matters! If the (earlier) leak is legit then it's only a matter of time VESA unveils this :pimp:

It's pretty much a given that there will be updated standards in the future. That doesn't mean claiming compatibility with a currently nonexistent standard is anything but a big fat lie.

Valantarnonexistent standard is anything but a big fat lie.

You mean how (multiple) companies advertised wifi6 or wifi6E compatibility?

So Samsung and Acer thinks that being able to get the display brightness to 2000 nits means they can come up with their own certification Its funny they called out by VESA that created this certification.

Anyway, I am thinking under what circumstances will we need 2000 nits? Its going to be crazy bright considering I usually keep my monitors at 200 nits brightness indoor. Yeah you can run a more realistic HDR, but you need to wear sunglasses to view the content.

R0H1TYou mean how (multiple) companies advertised wifi6 or wifi6E compatibility?

Before the standard was ratified? Shady, yes, but no, not the same. Why? Because the standard was publicized in its unratified form, its development was largely public, the (non-final) specs were known, etc. There was absolutely a risk that changes would happen that would make these products non-compliant with the finalized standard, but ultimately, they were compliant with what was very, very likely to become the standard based on actual evidence. With this, no such standard has ever been talked about, publicized or discussed by the standards body. So either the display makers here are basing this off non-public standards development (in which they're breaking the trust of the standards body, and possibly violating contracts or NDAs), or they're just making shit up on the same level as "90+" PSUs. Either way, your comparison is flawed.

watzupkenSo Samsung and Acer thinks that being able to get the display brightness to 2000 nits means they can come up with their own certification Its funny they called out by VESA that created this certification.

Anyway, I am thinking under what circumstances will we need 2000 nits? Its going to be crazy bright considering I usually keep my monitors at 200 nits brightness indoor. Yeah you can run a more realistic HDR, but you need to wear sunglasses to view the content.

That's pretty much what real world lighting is like though - even in a relatively dim overall scene things can get really bright. Like the headlights of an oncoming car on a dark street, or turning on a lamp in a dark room. Of course that's not always beneficial, but that depends what you're trying to do. And more display capabilities means more creative freedom to create more interesting experiences. Of course they're more likely to be used for flashier-looking mass-produced garbage, but that's another thing entirely. The possibility of really bright highlights or temporary flashes of bright light in a scene can make for some neat creative implementations.

ValantarBefore the standard was ratified? Shady, yes, but no, not the same. Why?

Right & does VESA incite comments from govts around the world before a standard's finalized? Unless of course you think Wifi isn't a much much larger all important (piece of) tech, especially as compared to "HDR 2k" ?

Would be hilarious if official DisplayHDR 2000 will have stricter requirements than what these two monitors can deliver.

R0H1TRight & does VESA incite comments from govts around the world before a standard's finalized? Unless of course you think Wifi isn't a much much larger all important (piece of) tech, especially as compared to "HDR 2k" ?

Uhm, no, but then display technology isn't typically subject to government regulation either, unlike wireless RF transmissions. So there's literally no reason for them to request government input, especially with regards to an image quality standard (i.e. not a hardware standard). The visible light portion of the RF spectrum is largely unregulated, after all, and I don't know of any government body anywhere that regulates the amount of quality of light a display is allowed to emit.. Also, the pre-certification devices came out long after the part of the process where such comments were relevant, and any issues with them could likely have been fixed through firmware updates. Your comparison is completely invalid, as the two things compared here are very different.

Display certifications are somewhat pointless. We know that almost entire monitors on the market offer Display HDR 400 capabilities, but how many of them have correct and proper implementation?

There's a typo in this article: "...and ASUS EI491CRG9 monitors are advertised as..." That should be Acer, not Asus. Anyway...

watzupkenSo Samsung and Acer thinks that being able to get the display brightness to 2000 nits means they can come up with their own certification Its funny they called out by VESA that created this certification.

I would hardly blame Samsung or Acer; it was on that Taobao site and idiotic news sites that post specs from a retailer instead of from the manufacturer.

I'm looking at that Samsung monitor right now (on the US site) and it's peak brightness is rated 1000 nits and clearly says "HDR 1000" and I bet the Acer will be the same (can't find that one on their US site).

ZoneDymo

Why does that look like Kevin Conroy (Batman) as a Romulan??

ValantarYour comparison is completely invalid, as the two things compared here are very different.

Is it though?

ValantarThat doesn't mean claiming compatibility with a currently nonexistent standard is anything but a big fat lie.

Because do you now suddenly believe Samsung claimed compatibility with this vaporware standard, not some WTFtech equivalent from China?

R0H1TIs it though?

Because do you now suddenly believe Samsung claimed compatibility with this vaporware standard, not some WTFtech equivalent from China?

I'm responding to what the article reported. If that's not true, that clearly changes who is to blame for the misleading marketing. It doesn't do anything to change the significant difference between WiFi standards certification being subject to regulatory input and approval vs. display brightness/color volume standards not being so. If your comparison was of a HDR transmission/encoding/decoding standard like HDR10/-+/Dolby Vision it would be a better comparison (as compliance is then required for the display to be able to decode and display images encoded in those formats), but still not a good one as that still wouldn't be subject to regulatory approval like WiFi.

watzupkenSo Samsung and Acer thinks that being able to get the display brightness to 2000 nits means they can come up with their own certification Its funny they called out by VESA that created this certification.

Anyway, I am thinking under what circumstances will we need 2000 nits? Its going to be crazy bright considering I usually keep my monitors at 200 nits brightness indoor. Yeah you can run a more realistic HDR, but you need to wear sunglasses to view the content.

200 nits? ugh the whites are basicly grays.... its like saying well we dont need smartphones we can do all the same stuff... even my 250 nits 2006 monitor vs my old main one of 350.. omg..