See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/303556353

Modeling of Achievable Contrast and Its Impact on HDR Projection in

Commercial Cinema Environments

Article  in  SMPTE Motion Imaging Journal · May 2016

DOI: 10.5594/JMI.2016.2548338

CITATION READS
1 201

4 authors, including:

Claude Tydtgat Dirk Maes

Ghent University 5 PUBLICATIONS   15 CITATIONS   
4 PUBLICATIONS   40 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Goran Stojmenovik
Barco
24 PUBLICATIONS   129 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

HD²R project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Claude Tydtgat on 03 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SMPTE Meeting Presentation

Modelling of achievable contrast and its impact on

HDR projection in commercial cinema environments

Claude Tydtgat
Barco NV.
Dirk Maes
Barco NV.
Goran Stojmenovik
Barco NV.
Augustin Grillet
Barco NV.

Written for presentation at the

SMPTE 2015 Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition

Abstract.
There is a growing interest in High Dynamic Range Imaging for cinema projection applications. It has
been reported that the observable cinema contrast ratio is not only determined by the native
projector contrast, but even more by various parameters such as the projection lens, port window,
screen, theatre setting and audiences. We have derived a mathematical model to characterize the
influence of these parameters and to assess their relative importance as a function of the projected
image content. Further a fast measurement method was developed to determine the various
parameters across different theatres, providing a good match with our model.

Keywords.

HDR; Projection; Cinema; Contrast; Model; Measurement

The authors are solely responsible for the content of this technical presentation. The technical presentation does not necessarily reflect the
official position of the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE), and its printing and distribution does not constitute an
endorsement of views which may be expressed. This technical presentation is subject to a formal peer-review process by the SMPTE
Board of Editors, upon completion of the conference. Citation of this work should state that it is a SMPTE meeting paper. EXAMPLE:
Author's Last Name, Initials. 2011. Title of Presentation, Meeting name and location.: SMPTE. For information about securing permission
to reprint or reproduce a technical presentation, please contact SMPTE at jwelch@smpte.org or 914-761-1100 (3 Barker Ave., White
Plains, NY 10601).

© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®)

Introduction
Recently there is an increased interest for high dynamic range imaging in cinema applications.
High dynamic range in cinema is loosely defined as increasing the range of projected
luminances to reproduce brighter images (e.g. highlights) while at the same time reproducing
darker tones (‘blacks’).
The simultaneous contrast ratio that the human visual system (HVS) is able to resolve has been
reported to cover a range of at least 3.7 log units [1]. With eye adaptation, user preference
studies have identified a desirable brightness range between 0.005 to 20.000 Cd/m2 for TV
screens and 0.002 to 7000 Cd/m2 for cinema projection screens [2].
As much as the HVS can resolve a wider dynamic range than is currently available in cinemas,
there are practical limits to consider, not only on the maximum achievable brightness level but
also on the minimal achievable black level.
First, whatever the sequential contrast of a projector, there are always limitations in projector
optics that limit the ‘ANSI contrast’ of a projector. External factors such as dust and fingerprints
can cause additional scattering at the projection lens and port window that drastically reduce
this ‘ANSI contrast’. Furthermore, light from bright parts of the image can return to dark parts of
the image via reflections from the ceiling, floor, walls, and even the viewers; called ‘back-
reflected light’.
In addition, the presence of ambient light (e.g. emergency exit signs, stairlights …) has a direct
impact on the sequential contrast.
The dynamic range of the observed image is therefore not only determined by the dynamic
range of the projection device but even more so by the environment.
The importance of projector related parameters (sequential contrast and lens veiling glare) and
projection environment related parameters (ambient lighting, surface reflectivity, seat reflectivity
and seat occupancy) has already been highlighted in other studies [3&4].
Here we want to establish a mathematical model and measurement method to calculate the
achievable contrast ratio as a function of the white image fraction, as well as auditorium
parameters. Measurements in actual theatres have been successfully fit to this mathematical
model and the spread in the parameters has been determined.

Mathematical model
A mathematical model to predict theatre contrast is done in two steps:
1. modeling projector contrast
2. modeling theatre reflectivity
1. The first step involves modeling the ‘projector contrast’ which depends on the imaging device
contrast, imaging optics, dust inside the projector, dust on the projection lens… but we take also
scattering due to the port window into account. The general effect is that starting from an
imager, some light will be scattered all over the projected image reducing the projector contrast.

© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 2

Here we make an assumption that this scattered light fraction, called ‘s’, is uniformly spread
over the whole image field.
As usual, sequential projector contrast CRseq is the ratio of the brightness of a full white image to
a full black image while the ANSI contrast CRANSI is the ratio of the average brightness of white
patches to the average brightness of dark patches of a 50% checkerboard pattern measured in
a ‘perfect’ or ‘black hole’ environment. When white content is not 50%, contrast is no longer
called CRANSI but defined here CRproj and is given by the next equation where ‘’ is defined as
the white image fraction – not in drive level, but actual image brightness (see Appendix for a full
derivation):
(1 − 𝑠 + 𝑠𝛼)𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞 + 𝑠(1 − 𝛼)
𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 =
𝑠𝛼𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞 + (1 − 𝑠𝛼)
eq.1
2. The second step involves modeling the impact of theatre reflectivity on the achievable screen
contrast.
A small portion of the projected light reflected from the cinema screen will be reflected back onto
the screen by any objects in the auditorium (ceiling, floors, walls, seating, people, decorations
etc.). This light is again bounced back to the auditorium and so on … so that finally the total
reflected light back to the screen is proportional to the incident projected light. This
proportionality value is called the theatre ‘reflectivity’ ‘’.
A second assumption introduced here is that this reflected light is uniformly spread over the
projection screen.
For simplicity we take no background light into account as this can in principle easily be
subtracted from measurements, but it is clear that adding a minor back light will negatively
influence the achievable screen contrast to a great extent. However, in this work, we are mostly
interested in the effect of projector and theatre environment.
Starting from the projector contrast CRproj (eq.1) and the second assumption, we can easily
derive the full theatre contrast as function of white content which is our main equation (see
Appendix)
(1 + 𝛼𝜌)𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 + (1 − 𝛼)𝜌
𝐶𝑅𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑟𝑒 =
𝛼𝜌𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 + (1 + 𝜌 − 𝛼𝜌)
eq.2
Combined with equation eq.2 the theatre contrast can be calculated from the sequential
contrast, scattering ‘s’, the theatre reflectivity ‘‘ and the white content fraction .
The calculated theatre contrast CRtheatre can then be fitted to measurements as function of white
content. However, it was found using χ2-maps that the fit is sensitive to measurement
uncertainties with respect to ‘s’ and ‘’. To remove this uncertainty an extra measurement needs
to be done, called an ‘occlusion contrast measurement’ explained below.
When projecting a 50% ANSI pattern the brightness of a black portion is the sum of the direct
projected light and the back reflected light. By blocking the direct projected light a split between

© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 3

these two can be made. It is shown in the appendix that the ratio, of the black to the occluded
black, called the occlusion contrast CRoccl, is given by
2 2
𝐶𝑅𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑙 = 1 + ≈1+
𝜌(𝐶𝑅𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑖 + 1) 𝜌𝐶𝑅𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑖
eq.3
To determine all parameters, the following method is used.
For a set of test patches with different white content values ‘’, the theatre contrast is measured.
Using these measurements a least square fit can be performed using eq.1. and eq.2. An
occlusion contrast measurement is added to reduce the effect of measurement uncertainties on
the retrieved parameters.
In these equations it is assumed that no ambient light is present. In fact ambient light can be
easily subtracted from measurements prior to using these equations.

The combination of Equation eqs.1 and 2 can be approximated to the more familiar typical
‘parallel resistor’ form for values of ‘‘ and ‘s’ <<1 (as shown in the Appendix):
1 1
= + 𝛼(𝑠 + 𝜌)
𝐶𝑅𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑟𝑒 𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞
eq.4
It is important to notice that in this approximate equation (eq.4), the scatter fraction ‘s’ and the
theatre reflectivity ‘’ simply add, this indeed shows why ‘s’ and ‘’ are sensitive to
measurement uncertainties but ‘s + ’ not.
In Table 1 a summary of the parameters introduced in the model:

Parameter Definition
 % of white content of the projected image
(image brightness)
s Projector + port window scattering
coefficient
 Theater reflectivity coefficient
Table 1. Parameters of the mathematical model

Measurement method
In order to verify the mathematical model and obtain data for a variety of theatres worldwide we
have developed a fast measurement method.
In order to simulate the varying white image content , we developed a series of test patterns
inspired by the ANSI test pattern with white squares arranged in a 4x4 grid but with a varying
© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 4
size of the white squares, corresponding to a white content fraction α ranging from 1 to 50%.
The distribution of the white content in a 4x4 grid helps to achieve a uniform illumination of the
auditorium, while the size of the black and white squares is sufficiently large to be able to
perform reliable measurements in the center. In Figure 1, the test pattern for a 15% white
content fraction is illustrated.

Figure 1. The test pattern for a white content fraction of 15%

Measuring the centers of white and black rectangles for every test patch with varying a is very
time consuming and error-prone. We devised a faster method that relies on taking a number of
pictures of each test pattern and processing the data afterwards.
We used a digital camera with 16 bit RAW linear output to capture the images on screen. The
camera offers manual control over the exposure time and f-number. For example we have used
a Canon EOS1100 D. For each test pattern, we captured shots with 2 different exposure times.
The first exposure time was selected to capture the black level with sufficient detail. The
exposure time was selected as long as possible, while avoiding saturation of the black parts.
The second exposure time was selected to capture the white level with sufficient detail. It is
important to avoid at any time saturation of the regions of interest but still have enough data.
See Figure 2.

Figure 2. Left image with 25% white fraction captured with long camera exposure time of 13 s,
right image with 25% white fraction captured with short camera exposure time of 1/15 s.
First, some preprocessing of the images is needed to remove the noise floor added by the
camera. Therefor dark images are taken with the lens covered by the lens cap, one using the
short and another using the long exposure time. These offset darks are then subtracted from all
corresponding images.
© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 5
It goes without saying that the camera optics by itself needs to be as clean as possible to avoid
added veiling glare. Keep the lens and other optics clean and avoid fingerprints. A cross check
of the derived contrast can be quickly performed using an LMT meter. For instance, the contrast
of the 50% ANSI pattern can be measured using an LMT and cross checked with the camera
image derived contrast values.

The images were sampled at the center of the different squares (cfr. measurement locations of
the conventional ANSI pattern) and the average contrast ratio was calculated taking into
account the ratio between the black level exposure time and the white level exposure time.
An occlusion contrast for the 50% ANSI pattern is also measured by obscuring some dark parts
of blacks in the pattern. In this case the light incident on the screen from the projector is
blocked and only light reflected by the auditorium is measured [4]. An example of such a
measurement is shown at the bottom left in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Example occlusion contrast measurement clearly showing that occluded parts are
darker than the non-occluded darks.

Results and discussion

Using the method above, we measured several cinema theatres and did a least square fit to the
model using the Microsoft Excel solver. A typical measured and fitted contrast curve as function
of white content is shown in Figure 4. It shows that theatre contrast quickly decreases as the
fraction of white increases. The dots are measured points while the line is the result of the fit
which show that the model works extremely well.

© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 6

Figure 4. Typical contrast curve as function of white content for a real theatre.

We were able to find the reflectivity and scattering of several theatres, a representative selection
of them is shown in the table below.
Theatre s  s+
1 0.015 0.019 0.034
2 0.033 0.025 0.058
3 0.010 0.025 0.035
4 0.005 0.011 0.016
5 0.018 0.022 0.040
6 0.009 0.018 0.027
7 0.008 0.021 0.029
8 0.010 0.013 0.023

Table 2. Parameters found from theatre measurements worldwide

© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 7

In theatre number 2 we found an exceptionally high value for s. Upon later inspection of the
projector we found an apparent contamination with dust on the projector lens and projector
optics. For further calculations and discussions we omit the values of theatre 2.
The smallest value for ‘s+’ found was 0.016 while the largest value was 0.040. This puts a
realistic range for most of the theatres.
On the other hand the theatre contrast also depends on white content. For several movies,
statistics were calculated showing that typically 80% of the frames have a white content
between 1.5% and 10%, and 10% of the frames have a white content below 1.5%. The median
of the frame brightness distribution is around 5%.
This typical ‘working area’ defined by ‘s+’ between 0.016 and 0.040, and white content image
between 1.5% and 10%, is shown as a dark grey zone in figures 5 and 6.
From this data and equation eq.4, one can calculate what the theatre contrast would be for
several projector sequential contrasts.

Figure 5. Theatre contrast calculations using real world parameters (theatre reflectivity and
scatter) and statistics of several movies for a sequential projector contrast of 2000:1. Blue
curves show the theatre contrast.

© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 8

 Figure 6. Theatre contrast calculations using real world parameters (theatre reflectivity and
scatter) and statistics of several movies for a sequential contrast of 1M:1.

From the graphs one can notice that in most of the area of interest, and especially with a
median brightness about 5%, the achievable theatre contrast ranges between 500:1 and 700:1
even with a very high contrast projector.
Let’s now focus on dark images. As a figure of merit we have chosen the line of 1.5% white
content, below which we estimate only about 10% of the movie content is found. For an average
theatre the s+ factor is 0.028.The achievable effective theatre contrast for a 2000:1 projector
contrast is around 1150:1. For the 1M:1 projector, the achievable theatre contrast for the same
scattering and reflectivity value is around 2400:1, (not shown in the picture, but can easily be
calculated with Eq.4). Thus increasing the projector contrast by a factor of 500:1 effectively
increases the effective theatre contrast only by about of factor 2. Even further, due to the
diminishing returns in this case, the largest improvements in contrast happen with the first steps
of increasing the projector contrast above 2000:1.
So we can draw three conclusions:
1. Auditorium reflectivity and scattering largely influence the effective theatre contrast for all
image content, especially for median image brightnesses for which the projector choice
makes little difference (700:1 for 1M:1 projector vs. 500:1 for a standard DLP projector).
2. For average auditoriums and pretty dark image content (1.5%, defining a 10:90 split of
the frame count), a 1M:1 projector only offers a twofold improvement of image contrast.
Most of the contrast improvements happens with relatively lower projector contrast
improvements due to the hyperbolic nature of the curve.

© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 9

 3. For the very best auditoriums and even darker image content, the difference in contrast
becomes more apparent – however this is for a fast decreasing number of movie frames
as one moves further down from 1.5% frame brightness.

Conclusion

In this paper we derived a mathematical model for the determination of effective theatre contrast
as function of the projector sequential contrast, projector optical and port window scattering
effects as well as variables anteater reflectivity. In approximation for small scattering and
reflectivity values, this model is compatible with earlier models for theatre contrast [3]. We
proved that, using a new fast measurement method, the model fits the measurements perfectly.
By testing our models on a number of real theatres we were able to get a realistic range for the
parameters influencing in-theatre contrast. From these parameters we can predict the
achievable contrast for different white image content values found in most feature film
presentations while also accommodating for different projector contrasts modeled in the same
auditorium.

The results indicate that in an average cinema room, the contrast can still be improved for dark
images, either by improving methods for the reduction of auditorium reflectivity+scattering, or a
higher projector contrast, or both. However this improvement soon enters a law of diminishing
returns as the projector contrast increases beyond a point where the room variables impact the
audiences ability to view any meaningful improvement. Next to projector brightness, projector
contrast has a large impact on system cost, be it for throwing away light, requiring specialized
optics, extensive modifications to the viewing environment, etc. There are limits to how far
projector technology can be pushed to provide a visible improvement in contrast levels, while
still maintaining a good economic value proposition for the end user.

© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 10

Appendix: derivation of the equations
Consider an image with full white area Amax and full black area Amin in an ideal theatre while Atot
is the whole surface of the projected image (Amax+Amin=Atot). The projected dark area is not
necessarily perfectly black, for instance due to higher diffraction orders which leak into the
projection lens. Assume that the full white area has illumination Emax (lm/m2) and the dark area
has illumination Emin (lm/m2), then the total luminous flux is Ltot = Amax Emax + Amin Emin.
A part of this total light will be scattered all over the image; this fraction is called s. So the total
illuminance of the white patch and the dark patch after scattering is:
𝐿𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝐴𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝐸 ′ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = (1 − 𝑠)𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑠 = (1 − 𝑠)𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑠
𝐴𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝐴𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝐿𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝐴𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝐸 ′ 𝑚𝑖𝑛 = (1 − 𝑠)𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝑠 = (1 − 𝑠)𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝑠
𝐴𝑡𝑜𝑡 𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝐴𝑚𝑖𝑛

Or with the factor  defined as the area fraction:

𝐸 ′ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = (1 − 𝑠)𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑠[𝛼𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (1 − 𝛼)𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 ]
𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛 = (1 − 𝑠)𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝑠[𝛼𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (1 − 𝛼)𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 ]

The projector contrast is the contrast measured in a perfect theatre (a ‘black hole’) and is the
ratio of E’max to E’min:
𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥
(1 − 𝑠 + 𝑠𝛼)𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝑠(1 − 𝛼)𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 (1 − 𝑠 + 𝑠𝛼) 𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝑠(1 − 𝛼)
𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 = =
𝑠𝛼𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (1 − 𝑠𝛼)𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝐸
𝑠𝛼 𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (1 − 𝑠𝛼)
𝑚𝑖𝑛

Now, the ratio Emax / Emin is nothing but the sequential contrast:
𝐸 ′ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝛼 = 1) 𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞 = =
𝐸 ′ 𝑚𝑖𝑛 (𝛼 = 0) 𝐸𝑚𝑖𝑛
So we get a first important equation for the projector contrast:
(1 − 𝑠 + 𝑠𝛼)𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞 + 𝑠(1 − 𝛼)
𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 =
𝑠𝛼𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞 + (1 − 𝑠𝛼)
eq.1
When the area fraction  is 0.5 we find the ANSI contrast.
We now place this projector in a real theatre, not a ‘black hole’. Light reflected from the
projection screen will be partially absorbed and partially reflected from the walls, the ceiling,
floor, seats, people … in all directions. The net effect is that a portion of this back-reflected light
will fall back upon the screen. However for this back-reflected light the image information is
completely destroyed and we assume that this back reflected light is uniformly spread upon the
front screen to simplify the problem.
© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 11
In principle this back reflected light will again reflect from the front screen and have a second
step to be back reflected again… In the end this means that the total back reflected light will be
proportional to the total projected light. This proportionality constant is called the theatre
reflectivity .
The total back reflected luminous flux is then:
𝐿𝑏𝑎𝑐𝑘_𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 = 𝜌(𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝐸′𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝐴𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛 )
This luminous flux is uniformly spread over the total area, so an offset should be added to the
perceived illuminance:
𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝐸′𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝐴𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝐸𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑒𝑡 = 𝜌 = 𝜌[𝛼𝐸′𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (1 − 𝛼)𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛 ]
𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥
And finally the theatre contrast will be:
𝐸 ′ 𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝐸𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑒𝑡 (1 + 𝛼𝜌)𝐸′𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (1 − 𝛼)𝜌𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝐶𝑅𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑟𝑒 = =
𝐸 ′ 𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝐸𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑒𝑡 𝛼𝜌𝐸′𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (1 + 𝜌 − 𝛼𝜌)𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛

Dividing denominator and nominator by E’min we finally find the equation for the theatre contrast,
the second important equation:
(1 + 𝛼𝜌)𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 + (1 − 𝛼)𝜌
𝐶𝑅𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑟𝑒 =
𝛼𝜌𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 + (1 + 𝜌 − 𝛼𝜌)
eq.2
Now we work out an approximation of this last equation and prove that this results into the well
known ‘parallel resistor’ formula for contrasts.
We know that the theatre reflectivity  in practical situations will be very small and that  takes
values between 0 and 1. Thus we get with a reasonable projector contrast CRproj:
(1 + 𝛼𝜌)𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 + (1 − 𝛼)𝜌 ≈ 𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗
The denominator of CRtheatre can be approximated by
𝛼𝜌𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 + (1 + 𝜌 − 𝛼𝜌) ≈ 𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 𝛼𝜌 + 1
Using these approximations we find
1 1 1
= +
𝐶𝑅𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑟𝑒 𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 1/𝛼𝜌
The same approximation can be applied to the projector contrast CRproj:

(1 − 𝑠 + 𝑠𝛼)𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞 + 𝑠(1 − 𝛼) 𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞

𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 = ≈
𝑠𝛼𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞 + (1 − 𝑠𝛼) 1 + 𝑠𝛼𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞

© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 12

 1 1
≈ + 𝑠𝛼
𝐶𝑅𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗 𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞
Combining these two approximations we finally get the ‘parallel resistor’ equation for contrast:
1 1
= + 𝛼(𝑠 + 𝜌)
𝐶𝑅𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑟𝑒 𝐶𝑅𝑠𝑒𝑞
eq.3
Next we derive the equation for the occlusion contrast CRoccl which is defined as the ratio of the
brightness of a black part to the occluded black part of a 50% white content image. Using
previous equations we can immediately write down the occlusion contrast for arbitrarily fractions
:
𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝐸𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑒𝑡 𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝜌[𝛼𝐸′𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (1 − 𝛼)𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛 ]
𝐶𝑅𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑙 = =
𝐸𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑒𝑡 𝜌[𝛼𝐸′𝑚𝑎𝑥 + (1 − 𝛼)𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛 ]
For 50% white content we get:
𝜌 𝐸′𝑚𝑎𝑥 1
2 𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 1 + 𝜌 𝜌𝐶𝑅𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑖 + 2 + 𝜌
𝐶𝑅𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑙 = =
𝜌 𝐸′𝑚𝑎𝑥 1 𝜌𝐶𝑅𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑖 + 𝜌
2 𝐸′𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝜌
Or finally:
2 2
𝐶𝑅𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑙 = 1 + ≈1+
𝜌(𝐶𝑅𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑖 + 1) 𝜌𝐶𝑅𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑖
eq.4

References
[1] T. Kunkel and E. Reinhard. “A reassessment of the simultaneous dynamic range of the
human visual system”. Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics
and Visualization. 17–24 (2010).
[2] S.Farrell, T. Kunkel, S. Daly “A Cinema Luminance Range by the People, for the People:
Viewer Preferences on Luminance Limits for a Large Screen Environment”, Proc. SMPTE
Annual Technical Conference October 2014.
[3] P. Ludé. “High dynamic range cinema, How black is black”. NAB technology summit on
cinema , April 2015
[4] M. Schuck, S. Gilman, G. Sharp, "3D Image Quality in the PLF Environment”, Display
Summit, June 2015

© 2015 Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers® (SMPTE®) 13

View publication stats