>>723750732
>There genuinely are stupid people that think the wider gamut of HDR/OLED is good and don't even realize it's just more green pixels
False, and more capacity for color = le bad is a retarded argument
>99% of all content was made for rec709
Misleading in the sense that it makes no sense to master content for anything other than what people can see your content on. At the same time, many films were shot in archival formats well beyond the capabilities of the day, including resolution, and that also extends to the natural dynamic range of the filmstock which can be extracted and used for an HDR master. Doubly true for 3D games and CGI movies where their "raw" versions have no latent resolution, color gamut or dynamic range limit, and thus can be mastered in whatever format.
> Also HDR is literally artificial post processing
No. Or Yes depending on whether or not you consider tonemapping scene-data to display space (be that HDR or SDR) is post-processing, which I don't.
Notable exception is if you're Steve Yedlin and you make a gay 2 hour long video "debunking" HDR by using SDR grades of your movies with artificial boosting of the highlights into HDR range instead of tonemapping scene-data.
