- From: Chris Blume (ProgramMax) <programmax@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 11:02:45 -0500
- To: "Seeger, Chris (NBCUniversal)" <Chris.Seeger@nbcuni.com>
- Cc: "public-png@w3.org" <public-png@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAG3W2KcnEt1eJcVuiy=BKmvf8yMZ5f4CSqWT6zmOV3dnuUK6fw@mail.gmail.com>
Perhaps correcting myself: Rather than metadata providing average brightness, it could provide an array of tone mapping options based on the OTHER displayed content's average brightness. And thus it would be a 1-time chunk, not a per-frame chunk. Or maybe it is a combination of the two. (A decoder could track average brightness easily enough for still images. Or for images where a full frame update happens. It just tracks it while it decodes. However, since APNG could update just a subregion of the image this is more difficult. Providing per-frame average brightness could be useful.) On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 10:46 AM Chris Blume (ProgramMax) < programmax@gmail.com> wrote: > I believe I partly understand. > I remember working on HDR on Mac and seeing a video play that affected the > brightness of more than just the video. If I remember correctly, the entire > display's brightness changed as the video's brightness changed. > > For example, if a bright flash is displayed and the viewer's pupils close, > the rest of the display will have to become more bright to compensate and > remain approximately the same color to the viewer. > > Is my understanding correct? > (Is this considered part of the viewing environment?) > > > If I am on the right track, I can understand why extra metadata is useful. > The average brightness changes throughout the animation. And so we might > have this metadata before every frame of animation. Or perhaps every other > frame or only when a significant brightness change occurs. > > Would we want to include this average brightness as part of the standard? > If so, we are specifying a standard schema, too. > (Is iTXt + XMP + schema overhead too heavyweight for a simple average > brightness?) > > On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 9:54 AM Seeger, Chris (NBCUniversal) < > Chris.Seeger@nbcuni.com> wrote: > >> There could be additional metadata for specific HDR transfer functions >> that describes specific tone mapping or specific “looks”. >> >> >> >> In the case of animated PNG’s, I’m anticipating this could also include >> dynamic metadata for HDR that is used for tone mapping against overlaid >> video that also includes dynamic metadata (and therefore could change it’s >> average brightness level which would in turn affect the overlaid graphics). >> >> >> >> -Chris >> >> >> >> *From: *Chris Blume (ProgramMax) <programmax@gmail.com> >> *Date: *Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 7:03 AM >> *To: *public-png@w3.org <public-png@w3.org> >> *Subject: *[EXTERNAL] XMP in PNG >> >> *Solicited feedback:* >> Chris Seeger, are you allowed to tell us what extra metadata you foresee >> coming around the corner? It would help us plan. >> Everyone, feel free to weigh in. >> >> >> *Thoughts:* >> In our last meeting, we discussed adding XMP to PNG. >> In this email thread we can talk about how we would like to accomplish >> that. >> >> The motivation is from Chris Seeger, who asked if extra metadata could be >> added to Exif. Apparently, Exif is rigid and will not allow extra metadata. >> Leonard Rosenthol proposed XMP as an extensible metadata solution. >> >> Here is the latest Exif standard (translated to English): >> https://www.cipa.jp/std/documents/e/DC-X008-Translation-2019-E.pdf >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.cipa.jp/std/documents/e/DC-X008-Translation-2019-E.pdf__;!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!5xo5SyyJmhmS2tKvFfoz9JbeaM9jmWOpYdgZ3BweBNosffNd6hMMzRgPSrx6K1JA-w$> >> Here is a link to purchase ISO 16684-1, the XMP standard: >> https://www.iso.org/standard/75163.html >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.iso.org/standard/75163.html__;!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!5xo5SyyJmhmS2tKvFfoz9JbeaM9jmWOpYdgZ3BweBNosffNd6hMMzRgPSry98HW4Ig$> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> During the meeting, Chris Lilley mentioned that XMP in PNG could go >> inside the "iTXt" chunk >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-PNG-20031110/*11iTXt__;Iw!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!5xo5SyyJmhmS2tKvFfoz9JbeaM9jmWOpYdgZ3BweBNosffNd6hMMzRgPSrxZz-qPMg$> [1] >> with an unregistered keyword "XML:com.adobe.xmp". This makes sense to me. >> Other keywords represent other known metadata such as copyright, author, >> title, creation time... >> Perhaps we could add an official keyword for XMP. >> >> However, the datastream placement of "iTXt" and similar chunks has no >> restriction, according to PNG spec part 5.6, Chunk ordering >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-PNG-20031110/*5ChunkOrdering__;Iw!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!5xo5SyyJmhmS2tKvFfoz9JbeaM9jmWOpYdgZ3BweBNosffNd6hMMzRgPSrwUNInpEw$> >> [2]. If the XMP data itself could affect how the image is decoded, we would >> want to enforce that it appears before the "IDAT" chunk in the datastream. >> Similarly, perhaps XMP would require a different (un)safe-to-copy property. >> >> If we need strict chunk ordering or different chunk properties, we might >> want XMP to appear in a new chunk. >> >> >> >> I do not know enough about XMP or the future extra metadata that we might >> be adding. So I cannot make a judgement call about this. I'll spend some >> time reading about XMP. >> >> >> Interestingly, PNG spec part 12.10, Text chunk processing >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-PNG-20031110/*12Text-chunk-processing__;Iw!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!5xo5SyyJmhmS2tKvFfoz9JbeaM9jmWOpYdgZ3BweBNosffNd6hMMzRgPSrxYT81uPw$> >> [3] suggests scenarios where text chunks might want to appear before or >> after the "IDAT" chunk. >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-PNG-20031110/#11iTXt >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-PNG-20031110/*11iTXt__;Iw!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!5xo5SyyJmhmS2tKvFfoz9JbeaM9jmWOpYdgZ3BweBNosffNd6hMMzRgPSrxZz-qPMg$> >> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-PNG-20031110/#5ChunkOrdering >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-PNG-20031110/*5ChunkOrdering__;Iw!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!5xo5SyyJmhmS2tKvFfoz9JbeaM9jmWOpYdgZ3BweBNosffNd6hMMzRgPSrwUNInpEw$> >> [3] https://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-PNG-20031110/#12Text-chunk-processing >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-PNG-20031110/*12Text-chunk-processing__;Iw!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!5xo5SyyJmhmS2tKvFfoz9JbeaM9jmWOpYdgZ3BweBNosffNd6hMMzRgPSrxYT81uPw$> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 30 November 2021 16:03:13 UTC