@troy_s but... That defeats the entire purpose of encoding in the first place. Probably the only reason it doesn't break even further is that the interchange in the middle is like 12 or 14 bits.

The world doesn't make sense.

@genco How many times must I say "HDR does not exist" only to have someone try to deny the claim in some private Discord server or forum?

I state this based on facts:
1. To the best of my knowledge, the *native* response of all displays is plus or minus 2.2 as an EOTF.
2. To the best of my understanding in terms of general mechanisms, the majority of the cellular biological operation is not "scalar measurement" but rather differential.

On *both* fronts, "HDR" does not exist. But we can go a

@genco step further based on the hardware claim.

The evidence supports the claim that the basic "response" is a 2.2, and that all "mappings" are driving the "backlight" or equivalent response.

As such, given the equivalence of the EOTFs ultimately, as they *all* are strictly encoding techniques, and always yield linear radiometric energy, we can ask what the core defining "difference" is between the *ideology* of "HDR" and "SDR", given it is a false dichotomy.

@genco The "ideological" premise, which is nothing more than a falsifiable *theist* belief, is the *belief* that some "appearance related cognition" such as a "highlight" or or "white" or any of the other *cognitive* constructs, can be *mapped* to a given stimuli code level of emission.

We can falsify this without much intellectual rigour.

Literally *one* demonstration that shows that code values cannot predict cognitive constructions dismisses all of "HDR".