Eventually, HDR content will be ubiquitous... not for many years, but at some point the majority of new content will move to that standard, and SVP will be stuck in the niche of smoothing old 8-bit content on PCs if it doesn't move with everything else.

After seeing the points here, I would agree that 10 bit support isn't urgent, but it has to come sooner or later.

No display that actually supports HDR & 10/12 bit doesn't already do an equal or a better job at interpolation than SVP.

1. This assumes HDR monitors will never exist.

2. Interpolation on certain TV results in bad input lag, and the user may very well not want to have to deal with the hassle of a laggy mouse cursor.

No display that actually supports HDR & 10/12 bit doesn't already do an equal or a better job at interpolation than SVP.

I actually have a Samsung KS9000 TV connected to my PC as my main monitor, I use it for everything including playing films and series, and, well, I can't see any difference in quality from SVP or the internal interpolation feature of the TV, which can now be tweaked to eliminate the soap opera effect while keeping it smooth.

I have subscribed to netflix and since netflix doesn't support 10bit, HDR or 4k on PC, I have to watch via the TV itself and it does a pretty good job...

I still use SVP when watching content on mpc HC, but really it's only because it makes it simpler not having to switch between film/PC/game mode on the TV... (it doesn't interpolate in game mode which is what i use)

Soooo no need for SVP with such a TV, netflix and others are probably not going to support 4k on pcs before long and frankly it's a pain in the ass, SVP I used for a while when i was using a PC monitor as my main screen for movies, but it didn't support HDR so.

Basically, if you want HDR you want a 2000$ TV and those don't need SVP, there you go.

I wasn't thinking about UHD Blu-ray, I was largely thinking about streaming services - for example Netflix and Amazon video already support HDR; even YouTube is going to support HDR:
http://mashable.com/2016/01/07/youtube- … -ces-2016/

Again, it's better to implement support now while it's not critical and work out the bugs and the like rather than wait until it's commonly used everywhere and have to try and do a rush job.

I agree.

That's not a great example though. Netflix and Amazon are examples of services that absolutely cannot work with SVP, unless you know something I don't.

That said... I'm not condoning getting around it in any way, but no DRM is bullet proof, not even AACS 2.0. We WILL see 10/12 bit rips at some point, it's just a matter of time.

Dithering content to 10/12 bits in real time is possible too, but I suppose we can do that after SVP's processing.

Again, it's better to implement support now while it's not critical and work out the bugs and the like rather than wait until it's commonly used everywhere and have to try and do a rush job.

No regular Blu-rays are encoded with HDR.
And Dolby Vision, not even any of the commercial UHD Blu-ray players support that, not even Oppo.
Oppo says no Dolby Vision for their new UHD player.

Maybe give it a year or two.

This is the reason why I haven't purchased SVP yet, no 10-bit support at all, it's the only feature that'd make it worth it for me.

Well you can still use SVP with 10bit videos, it's just that you end up with an 8bit result which isn't that big of deal if you're using it on an 8bit display anyway.

This is why I mentioned HDR - all HDR-capable displays are at least 10bit and HDR video material is also at least 10bit.

Here's a sample 10bit HDR clip in 4k:
http://files.hdrsamples.com/downloads/h … HD_HDR.mp4

EDIT: It must be noted however that Dolby Vision HDR uses 12bit, so perhaps it'd be wiser to have a method of support that's more flexible and independent of whatever the color depth is (maybe even do 16bit internally and then output at whatever the display is running at?).