Blackmagic Forum

From time to time, we get questions on how to monitor HDR using the viewer in Resolve, either on the built-in display of a MacBook or via an external monitor connected via HDMI or DisplayPort.

If you'd like to learn how to use the HDR capabilities of an Apple MacBook, iMac or external HDR capable displays such as the Apple Pro Display XDR in order to preview HDR content directly via the Resolve viewer, follow the link:

https://daejeonchronicles.com/2021/09/2 ... ve-viewer/

Sorry, I'm only able to upload 3 attachments, otherwise I'd have included the steps here!

I don't believe it's possible. I think you'd be very wise to ignore the GUI image and concentrate solely on the color-managed image shown on your calibrated color monitor outside the operating system.

Marc Wielage wrote:I don't believe it's possible. I think you'd be very wise to ignore the GUI image and concentrate solely on the color-managed image shown on your calibrated color monitor outside the operating system.

While no one should be using the Resolve viewer for color grading on their Mac, this feature does have a number of advantages.

(1) for making screenshots for tutorials on blogs and websites, (2) for those using QuickTime to record the screen of their Mac when making online instructional videos, (3) it’s a joy to see the colors of the viewer resemble what you're seeing on the monitor - just as those working in SDR do - rather than the flat and lifeless mess they used to be and (4) it makes it possible to show the client/friends/model what you’re working on when on location or when there’s no HDR display around.

The time can't come soon enough when we're able to see an actual HDR image in the viewer on Macs with miniLED displays.

Moved to Resolve forum

You would also match monitor's refresh rate to your project fps (on monitors which support multiple refresh rates). This makes way bigger difference if you use full screen clean preview though.

JonPais wrote:

Marc Wielage wrote:I don't believe it's possible. I think you'd be very wise to ignore the GUI image and concentrate solely on the color-managed image shown on your calibrated color monitor outside the operating system.

While no one should be using the Resolve viewer for color grading on their Mac, this feature does have a number of advantages.

(1) for making screenshots for tutorials on blogs and websites, (2) for those using QuickTime to record the screen of their Mac when making online instructional videos, (3) it’s a joy to see the colors of the viewer resemble what you're seeing on the monitor - just as those working in SDR do - rather than the flat and lifeless mess they used to be and (4) it makes it possible to show the client/friends/model what you’re working on when on location or when there’s no HDR display around.

The time can't come soon enough when we're able to see an actual HDR image in the viewer on Macs with miniLED displays.

But it would still look flat unless the viewer is watching in an HDR environment. Even with the correct Mac, that is unlikely.

4 - I agree (since you are aware and in control).

You can work on HDR, have color space converter node connected to Nobe display preview to show SDR representation on non-HDR screen.

Also QTX now does HDR tone mapping (for properly flagged HDR files) into display profile. It even reads metadata with peak brightness etc. and takes it into calculation.

Another example. Cereal box highlight detail clearly discernible in the picture without “Use Mac Display Color Profiles for Viewers" enabled is blown out on the MacBook Pro's SDR display when enabled but is plainly visible on my LG OLED TV.




In Final Cut Pro, on systems with macOS Catalina 10.15 or later, you can view HDR video in the viewer with tone mapping applied, which compresses bright image content and reduces the apparent dynamic range of the video to fit the viewable range of your display.

The original ProRes RAW clip (below) is tone mapped in the viewer of Final Cut Pro, yielding a less contrasty image with far more information in the highlights (much more than can be seen in this screenshot) and clips in the browser and on the timeline are tone mapped as well. Note the extra information in the curtain to the left.

You do know your screenshot are all being viewed in SDR?
The first screenshot just seems to be shot in log and just needs grading or a LUT. 99% of the production we grade is shot that way. During the offline edits, a simple LUT is used to give it contrast and vibrancy on the color.

mpetech wrote:You do know your screenshot are all being viewed in SDR?
The first screenshot just seems to be shot in log and just needs grading or a LUT. 99% of the production we grade is shot that way. During the offline edits, a simple LUT is used to give it contrast and vibrancy on the color.

This is not about Log footage needing grading. Both the flat image and the colorful one are one and the same - it's already been graded and has heaps of contrast and color. It is about how clips in the viewer of Resolve appear on a Mac when color grading HDR footage using an external display. The second screenshot is with “Use Mac Display Color Profiles for Viewers" enabled in Preferences.

Yes, because now OSX tone maps HDR to SDR (Resolve behaves same as QT X preview).
Not long time ago there was no HDR to SDR tone mapping in OSX.

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Yes, because now OSX tone maps HDR to SDR (Resolve behaves same as QT X preview).
Not long time ago there was no HDR to SDR tone mapping in OSX.

Not quite. Unlike Final Cut Pro, which applies tone mapping, compressing the dynamic range to fit the display, the viewer in Resolve is displaying ST2084 PQ, which explains why the picture is so contrasty and highlights are clipped. In other words, the Resolve viewer really is HDR. Final Cut Pro's solution is preferable for day-to-day playback and editing of HDR projects on a Mac. That is, until the new miniLED Macs are introduced!

JonPais wrote:Final Cut Pro's solution is preferable for day-to-day playback and editing of HDR projects on a Mac.

I think trying to judge HDR images on a Mac screen is very, very iffy at best. I've done a half-dozen HDR & Dolby Vision projects, but I ignored what was on the GUI and just believed the calibrated Sony BVM-X300 screen with a color-managed connection. Everything went fine.

Marc Wielage wrote:

JonPais wrote:Final Cut Pro's solution is preferable for day-to-day playback and editing of HDR projects on a Mac.

I think trying to judge HDR images on a Mac screen is very, very iffy at best. I've done a half-dozen HDR & Dolby Vision projects, but I ignored what was on the GUI and just believed the calibrated Sony BVM-X300 screen with a color-managed connection. Everything went fine.

This isn't about grading HDR footage, it's about being able to see an image with color and contrast for day-to-day playback and editing as well as for taking screenshots for tutorials and making instructional videos.

JonPais wrote:

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Yes, because now OSX tone maps HDR to SDR (Resolve behaves same as QT X preview).
Not long time ago there was no HDR to SDR tone mapping in OSX.

Not quite. Unlike Final Cut Pro, which applies tone mapping, compressing the dynamic range to fit the display, the viewer in Resolve is displaying ST2084 PQ, which explains why the picture is so contrasty and highlights are clipped. In other words, the Resolve viewer really is HDR. Final Cut Pro's solution is preferable for day-to-day playback and editing of HDR projects on a Mac. That is, until the new miniLED Macs are introduced!

Should be the same (unless FCP X has own engine for it which is more advanced).
Is Resolve same as exported file seen in QT X (files has to be seen as HDR which is shown in file info)?

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:

JonPais wrote:

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Yes, because now OSX tone maps HDR to SDR (Resolve behaves same as QT X preview).
Not long time ago there was no HDR to SDR tone mapping in OSX.

Not quite. Unlike Final Cut Pro, which applies tone mapping, compressing the dynamic range to fit the display, the viewer in Resolve is displaying ST2084 PQ, which explains why the picture is so contrasty and highlights are clipped. In other words, the Resolve viewer really is HDR. Final Cut Pro's solution is preferable for day-to-day playback and editing of HDR projects on a Mac. That is, until the new miniLED Macs are introduced!

Should be the same. Is Resolve same as exported file seen in QT X?

What should be the same? An image tone mapped to the gamma curve of the SDR display of a MacBook vs. one with a PQ ST 2084 transfer function for HDR? I'm afraid they're not at all alike: one is contrasty with blown out highlights, the other has normal contrast with information in both highlights and shadows.

If you tick use Mac viewers option on Mac then whatever Resolve generates internally (eg final PQ data) is taken by OSX color manage system and mapped to display profile. Exactly the same as QT X or any other color managed OSX app does. This happens for SDR projects. Maybe HDR is different in Resolve.

I've asked you if Resolve preview is the same as QT X (once you export HDR file).
QT X should be the same as FCP X (and the same as Resolve). But Resolve use to have different preview to OSX apps, so this is not guarantee. There is also possibility that FCP X has internal engine which is different than OSX one for mapping HDR to SDR (but I think it doesn't). Compare QT X, FCP X and Resolve preview and it will be more clear.

On Mac Os 11.6, display P3 iMac 500nits(?), R17 my results are:

– Timeline and Output Rec2020/ST2084 1000 nits
– 'Use mac viewers' checked
– 'Use HDR on viewers if available' checked

Output viewed in QTX, Movist Pro, displays Apple's pseudo HDR mapping (watch the brightness climb in highlights momentarily during playback).

The Resolve viewer (poor-man's monitor) is not tone-mapping correctly (highlights completely blown) and doesn't match the QT player for luma values. I have to use an HDR simulation LUT on the last node to make it visually match the QT export.

Unchecking 'Use mac viewers' produces the 'flat' image in the viewer.

Watching the QT file on my Panny HDR screen matches and exceeds the QTX player.

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:If you tick use Mac viewers option on Mac then whatever Resolve generates internally (eg final PQ data) is taken by OSX color manage system and mapped to display profile. Exactly the same as QT X or any other color managed OSX app does.

I conclude that the Resolve viewer is not mapping the excess luma values in the same way as QTX is doing.

*PS If you don't have access to a declink card, or box to directly monitor HDR, but you do have a decent HDR TV handy, you can get a quick and dirty idea of final HDR output by using the Google Chromecast dongle on the TV, and using this App https://airflow.app/ (I'm not affiliated or paid) to quickly stream an output file to it in HDR. Very useful for a quick check.

Just quickly checked it and yes- Resolve preview is not following OSX color engine, so you don't have "nice" tone mapped SDR preview.

DaVinci Resolve 17.4 adds Native HDR viewers and 120 Hz playback on supported MacBook Pros! Yeah!

Also “Native full screen mode” ?
What does it exactly mean?
Hardware accelerated ProRes is going to be liked a lot. It was smooth already, but I assume this will make it amazingly smooth.

Also this:
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT212851

looks promising. Fine tuning screens.

JonPais wrote:DaVinci Resolve 17.4 adds Native HDR viewers and 120 Hz playback on supported MacBook Pros! Yeah!

Well, it doesn't work at all.
With 17.4 I actually lost the ability to display HDR inside the GUI, on both Mac and MacBook Pro (new one)

Alessandro Caporale wrote:

JonPais wrote:DaVinci Resolve 17.4 adds Native HDR viewers and 120 Hz playback on supported MacBook Pros! Yeah!

Well, it doesn't work at all.
With 17.4 I actually lost the ability to display HDR inside the GUI, on both Mac and MacBook Pro (new one)

DaVinci Resolve 17.4.1 is supposed to address issue with HDR viewers on Mac.

Good morning
I pose a question to which I cannot find a solution.
I have a 27" HDR monitor connected to pc with W11, with HDR screen enable.
When I import an HDR file, or do SDR to HDR grading via Color Management, the prewiev monitor always shows the image "washed out" and off chromatically.
It does not return the BT 2020 color space, maybe I am doing something wrong or need to make some other setting?
Thank you.


Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

MIMMO61 wrote:When I import an HDR file, or do SDR to HDR grading via Color Management, the prewiev monitor always shows the image "washed out" and off chromatically.
It does not return the BT 2020 color space, maybe I am doing something wrong or need to make some other setting?

You will have to either use an HDR simulation LUT on the last node to make it visually tone map the brightness or in the color management settings> video monitoring > Use HDR Simulation LUT
(DR doesn't include that LUT but if you google search you may find it)

DR needs additional hardware such as UltraStudio Mini 4k to output HDR signal to the HDR monitor.

Ranjan wrote:You will have to either use an HDR simulation LUT on the last node to make it visually tone map the brightness or in the color management settings> video monitoring > Use HDR Simulation LUT
(DR doesn't include that LUT but if you google search you may find it)

DR needs additional hardware such as UltraStudio Mini 4k to output HDR signal to the HDR monitor.

I thank you for the information.
From a quick search on the web, it seems to me that the HDR emulation LUTs are all paid.
In fact, I do not know which one is the best and which one to purchase.

Emulation LUTs are for SDR monitoring if you don't have HDR monitor. If you do have such a monitor then they are useless for you.
Those LUTs are for eg. preview or edit only. Never try to judge HDR grade on SDR monitor through LUTs or any tonne mapped conversion. It's not the way.

HDR preview is "in theory" now supported over GUI viewer (without BM card) on PC and Mac, but it needs validation and measurements, to make sure it's correct.
Simple way is use BM card which supports HDR over HDMI.

MIMMO61 wrote:HDR emulation LUTs are all paid.

Resolve comes with several LUTS that may serve here in the HDR ST 2084 folder of the LUT panel.

Bear in mind, that Mac monitors except for the 6k one are incapable of displaying true HDR. They are no where near bright enough generally producing no more than 500 nits or so. The ultimate target display will need to be considered as well. They also have some limits. Most HDR capable monitors, unless very high end, are around 1000 nits, far from the actual 10,000 nit level.

To get really accurate imagery to a real viewer, you need to consider all of this. There is no way around these variations. That is why the $25000 monitors find buyers. They can be dialed into whatever your actual work flow needs.

Sorry to contradict, but even the iPad Pro is HDR capable (up to 1,600 nits locally), as are the screens in recent MacBooks.

MIMMO61 wrote:I thank you for the information.
From a quick search on the web, it seems to me that the HDR emulation LUTs are all paid.
In fact, I do not know which one is the best and which one to purchase.

Here is one of the free/donation LUT which can be used to monitor the video without blowing up those highlights.
Remember its only a way around to viewing HDR tone mapped as SDR & not meant for accurate color grading.
https://bryanadamc.gumroad.com/l/hdrconversionlut


Fannel Ninja also have HDR to SDR conversion LUT free,
https://flannel.ninja/articles/how_to_c ... ci_resolve

Uli Plank wrote:Sorry to contradict, but even the iPad Pro is HDR capable (up to 1,600 nits locally), as are the screens in recent MacBooks.

I'd have to see the calibration data. I'm unconvinced that they can do "honest" HDR. No laptop, no iPad, no cheap display is capable of grading at a high level... yet. If it was, Sony wouldn't be introducing another $30,000 grading display at NAB, the BVM-X3110.

The day the EBU says that an iPad Pro or a MacBook Pro can be certified as a Grade-1 display, I'll be happy... because I own several of them. But I'm not convinced it's going to happen. I'm staring at an 16" MacBook Pro M1 Max right this very second, and I'm not convinced it can do good HDR. It does an "imitation" of HDR, but it's not accurate.

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:HDR preview is "in theory" now supported over GUI viewer (without BM card) on PC and Mac, but it needs validation and measurements, to make sure it's correct. Simple way is use BM card which supports HDR over HDMI.

We're in agreement on that. Dolby will tell you to correct in HDR, then have a second monitor set up to monitor off the second output, completely in SDR. In that way, you can immediately see what the PQ sidecar data is doing for the tone-mapped SDR version.

It all depends on the target market you are working for. I'm pretty sure that most end users will just have a HDR TV. In my experience, the Apple screens are better than most of those, even if far from reference grade. But then, many 'HDR' TVs are as much HDR-capable as some early 'HD' flats were true HD…

Marc Wielage wrote:

Uli Plank wrote:
The day the EBU says that an iPad Pro or a MacBook Pro can be certified as a Grade-1 display, I'll be happy... because I own several of them. But I'm not convinced it's going to happen. I'm staring at an 16" MacBook Pro M1 Max right this very second, and I'm not convinced it can do good HDR. It does an "imitation" of HDR, but it's not accurate.

Imitation?
'Imitation' is tonne mapped/LUT preview on SDR monitor- this is "imitation".

It's 1:1 HDR preview with proper PQ curve and correct max brightness. All what you can argue is accuracy of color/gamma and blooming artefacts (but those are present on 20K$ FSI monitors as well and somehow people think it's ok). Screen itself, once properly calibrated can probably meet Grade-2 HDR requirements.

Uli,

I have measured various screens with a good spectrophotometer, and can tell you that my iMac 5kRetina screen at best tops out at a luminance of around 500 nits. This makes it incapable of displaying the minimum luminosity required for true HDR. The image is very good for viewing, and it is a pleasure to use, but is far from HDR capable. Even the new Studio Display is not HDR capable,as its measured luminosity is around 650 nits. Note that Apple does not say that it is HDR capable. You can use an HDR color space and HDR gamma curve to get an approximation of what it will look like, but that is all that it is.

Depending on how your color workspace is configured, viewing a project graded on a Mac screen looks very different on something capable of at least 1000 nits luminosity.

iMac 5K is an old screen which has not much to do with HDR.

Right, it’s just a pretty good SDR screen. I didn’t mention those.
Would be interesting to measure an iPad Pro.

This is the point- iMac 5K screen is not an option for HDR work.

Subscribing ...

Hi all, I've been just trying to figure this out myself recently, so was happy to stumble on this active thread about the topic. Does anyone know the best way to match QuickTime rendering of HDR content in the viewer in Resolve 18? Disclaimer first that I'm not a professional color grader and do not have a reference monitor; I just want to be able to grade with a preview that looks what I will see on QuickTime (and iPhones, iPads, etc).

What I'm trying to do is see the actual HDR representation, not mapping to SDR. It looks like there was some confusion above, so to clarify, modern Mac screens (without third-party software) are capped to 500 nits for the UI and SDR content and only unlock their full 1,600 nits when you view something in HDR. If you view HDR video in QuickTime, Photos, etc. you will immediately see the difference as the old "white" in the UI is nothing compared to the video brightness.

You can access this HDR mode and full brightness in the Resolve viewer by enabling "Use Mac display color profiles for viewers" and some subset of timeline color spaces and gammas. I've clicked through most of them and it's very obvious when some do or do not trigger the HDR mode on the Mac.

The problem is I don't know specifically which settings will give me the same rendering as QuickTime. Has anyone gotten this to work?