The most important control for DTM is a "target nits" control, which I think is handled to some degree with your "screen size" control, but the range of that control is nowhere near large enough to allow user to lighten the overall APL on LARGE screens, only small and medium screens as things stand now.
You effectively have this already with the screen size and gain adjustments. It's hard to imagine how any other tone mapping control would offer something more useful that that. Tone mapping is very good. It's a problem from 5 years ago that has been solved.
I was not aware of those adjustments. Still, that seems like a calibration that can’t be adjusted easily, on the fly, since HDR implementation differs movie to movie. Or is it in fact that easy? Its a sincere question, because I don’t have experience with XGIMI projectors. Regarding your second point, I disagree. If on-board tone-mapping was already solved for years then why do people continue to praise JVC as the best DTM, or even bother with MadVR? One of my theories for why not everybody can be happy is that people have fundamentally different philosophies as to what DTM should do regarding: dimming highlights vs embracing their clipped form; keeping blacks as dark as possible vs raising blacks for the sake of illuminating details; etc.
For an example, Epson projectors feature a static tone-mapping slider featuring 1-16 set levels, which allows you to compromise between deliberately clipping bright highlights for the sake of an overall brighter/vibrant image, OR, darkening the entire image for the sake of retaining details within the bright highlights. Same for dark scenes, some want the darkest blacks even if details are crushed, other people prefer a raised black level for the sake of illuminating all the details. 16 options for tone-mapping is too many. XGIMI should consider 3 presets as a helpful start: “default”, “bright”, and “dark/detail”
Since the time of originally posting this userjot, I’ve learned that the Titan noir’s “screen size” and “gain” settings already accomplish a lot of configurability. However, perhaps Bob Sorel’s comment below should be considered: to provide a greater range of control and configurability.