Originally Posted by progprog
I'm sorry, but I think you're confusing me with someone else. I don't know Jeff, never met him. And I've never had my TV calibrated, so I'm not in a position to have an opinion on the relative merits of any of the calibrators who post here. So I've never offered one.
Please direct your comments to whomever you're actually addressing. Thanks.
He's obviously talking about DNice.
I think we all have to be careful here.
It's been said again and again and again that the written word without the context of tone, inflection, and other cues can be VERY, VERY misleading and lead to misunderstandings.
Having read through this latest batch of posts, I really don't think it is DNice's intent or anyone else to necessarily cast aspersions on any other calibrators' ethics, skills, or motivations. It's just that he and others love the ISFccc look so much and feel that it is such a benefit to the 9G panels that they are a little . . . well exuberant.
I take comments like "perfect" and "it will be the last AV selection you will ever need" and "any calibrator who doesn't activate ISFccc mode is only bringing out half the power of the set" with a grain of salt. To me that just shows natural excitement over results that frankly previously were not attainable on a plasma set.
The whole ISFccc mode is still controversial to me for many reasons. I have no doubt that it gives an incredibly color accurate picture with significantly increased brightness. The question is whether that is truly necessary for what some people want from their panels and whether it is worth the several hundred dollars it will take to get this done.
People were enjoying themselves and having a great time with their panels way before ISFccc became the latest "gotta have it" mode with the 9Gs.
For one thing, I don't like my pictures super bright. The calibrated mode and the Pure mode looks a bit dim for a reason. It does remind me of what I see when I go to a movie theater. The BRIGHTNESS itself is part of an accurate movie experience and anything close to Performance mode would just hurt my eyes at night.
It sounds like a perfect combination of the color accuracy and contrast of a plasma with the brightness of an LCD. But there are issues I wonder about. Will watching constantly with such a high brightness (as high as 51fl) increase the chances of image retention? I wouldn't dream of watching Performance mode exclusively on my flat panel, yet this is what is being talked about. How about longetivity of the panel? If this was so good, why not have it available right out of the gate along with all the other modes like Pure, Sport, Optimum, and Performance. What was Pioneer thinking? Shouldn't they be marketing this mode/picture and even make it a centerpiece of their campaign? Shouldn't this have been talked about in January at the CES show? But unless I miss my guess that wasn't the calibrated picture shown at that time. Nor is this a standard service provided by every calibrator working out there. So far, I count less than a dozen calibrators in the country who can routienly do this well if you go by these boards. ControlCal is the only software that allows this to be done. If this is so good, so necessary, and so indispensable with no downside, why is it so hard to get it done?
Or are we being sold 6500 dollar panels that are only operating at half their potential without this particular brand of calibration.
So Pioneer in addition to the 151 Elite and the 141 Signature now have a special hidden ISFccc mode that is even MORE Elite that can ONLY be unlocked via ControlCal's software to finally, truly bring out the perfect display picture?
I think all of this raises legitimate questions, legitimate issues. There are legitmate doubts in people's minds over this. And "seeing" is not necessarily believing because I got a secret for you. About 90 percent of the population thinks LCDs look better tha plasmas and Performance/Torch mode looks better than Pure because they are Joe Average and have not been educated like we have. Just because ISFccc gives a brighter, sexier picture, does that make it a more movie accurate experience than Pure or a traditionally calibrated picture? I honestly don't know. I think the jury may still be out on that.
That being said, I'm not necessarily against it either. To be perfectly fair, I haven't seen it with my own eyes. Anything that gives me more options is a good thing and I am seriously thinking about having this added to my display.
I'm just saying that it is natural for many people who are used to one set of ideas and doctrines that have been accepted for many years to question what looks to me to be a major paradigm shift in picture quality on our 9G panels.
If Dnice and turbe and luvnhatesony are to be believed, then I have to say every single 9G panel owner in the country needs to have their set ISFccc calibrated. Maybe they're right. I'll have to see for myself, I just need to ask myself if it is worth another couple hundred dollars to do that . . .