Have you ever tested that contrast ratio? I'm not being snarky here, I'm curious. As I said, I didn't get to measure many CRTs, it wasn't until near the end of their run that I was able to get a calibrator, but when warmed up, I didn't measure their contrast as being that impressive.My statement was in regard to the transition from CRT, with full on/off contrast ratios or dynamic range in excess of 15:000 to 1, to LCD's with a small fraction of that. HDR with its further expanded color and contrast is great, but will not be as impressive to someone transitioning from another great technology.
I guess... If you only care about black point and then not even about really using those near-black levels. With a 2.2 curve, 8-bit DAC, you don't get a ton of resolution in the low levels. So once you have enough contrast ratio that the difference between a symbol of 0 and 1 is noticeable, any more CR than that just makes it more noticeable. It doesn't give you additional detail.When my TV broke last year, my GDM-F520 became my TV for a bit as I was figuring out what to do. Even though on paper it has a fraction of today's display's color and contrast, it could still have a spectacular picture. One that already looked closer to HDR than say an LCD without FALD anyway...
I mean if all you care about, HDR wise, is a lower black point/on paper contrast... ok I guess. But what I find impactful about HDR is the brightness differences. It is a light shining brightly in the darkness, bright glints of reflection off a shiny surface, etc. I never saw that on CRT, wasn't until OLED/FALD LCD that sort of thing.
Though again, you get in to limits of human perception with things like that. You are right that light from a zone affects other zones and that you can't do hard transitions from bright to dark. However, it turns out that our eyes aren't real great at that either. That's why things like bias lighting and so on work in the real world. If I shine a light at you, it ruins your ability to see darker details around the area of that light. It's a trick I've been known to use to hide Halloween scare props. Likewise light in the real-world bleeds, so it ends up being a case where the bleed over between zones often works for how things actually look.Good reply. Have to say that FALD still raises blacks around lit areas in a scene though. It's non-uniform, using a tetris brickwork of shapes, often more than one cell wide like a short gradient in order to avoid more overt blooming (blending it across zones). The larger dark areas vs larger bright areas, like testing contrast ratings using large white and black tiles or full screen, will have the larger contrast numbers but the mixed contrast areas and areas around their edges will drop back to 3000:1 to 5000:1 since the brighter zones are lifting the blacks~darks and/or dimming the brights (and can lose some detail on either end).
Still, individual per-subpixel lighting like OLED has is the ultimate path we want to take forward. Just saying that because MiniLED can push brightness higher than OLED, sometimes the HDR impact actually ends up being more impressive, depending on the content. Vincent Teoh of HDTVTest has said the next gen TCL TVs with 5000 nit brightness are pretty amazing for HDR because they can hit such a high level.