# ISF Seminar Report



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Many of you who know me realize that I have been doing much more calibration work for some time. I have also been quite skeptical of the value of ISF training (I was doing calibration before ISF was a dream). I have always respected the contribution that ISF has made to the industry by promoting the importance of maintaining standards. However, having done just about everything that I could to keep up with color science, standards, and video in general, I have stayed ahead of the curve compared to most and never felt that their seminars would have much to offer me. My experience with ISF trained calibrators has been very mixed, having seen the work of some and not been very impressed, and with some having a rather condescending attitude for people with a two day course as their primary credential. Regardless, I finally decided to hold my nose, cut a check, and spend a couple of days in class. I tried to go with the attitude that I would gain as much as I could. With a heavy dose of humility and my ego as much in check as possible (not a trivial task in itself, as you may know), I proceeded. Well, here is my report.

Was it worthwhile? Easily so. One could say that I just want to justify the cost, but I have also been around the block enough to know how to find true value, as well as to dig for what I need in any information source. What I got might not be the same as other attendees, and the degree of learning may have been quite different, but I got my money's worth. No, I did not need to take a class to learn the difference between colorimetry and dynamic range, but there is much more there. I have to say that I grilled both Joel and Jerry Paleschi (of Sencore) pretty hard about what they might have to offer me. I think that they both could do a better job of selling the seminars to hard nuts like me, but they did get me to go, after all.

The instructor was Joel Silver, along with help from Bob Fucci. Both know the video (and audio) business as well as anyone anywhere, and both understand calibration and the standards, probably better than almost anyone. Joel is very engaging, very charismatic, and fun as an instructor. He has a great deal of experience with high end installations and their related problems, as well as with a range of equipment that would humble anyone in the industry, myself included. Just the energy and motivation that one gets from someone like Joel is worth the time and cost. He is passionate about what we do, communicates it well, and not only keeps you engaged but infects you with his enthusiasm. From my teaching days, I learned that there is a big difference between just knowing and presenting information and the art of teaching and motivating. You have to have both to be a great teacher. Joel has it all. No doubt. Dressed in a black collarless shirt with a dark jacket, with his curly dark hair, he looks like a better looking Gene Simmons, with similar energy and focus but a nicer disposition. I can see how he has seduced much of the industry to accept his vision. He is a leader. He has my respect, as he has had for years. I don't give that lightly. I would say that he is as significant to the industry as are his heros (people like Henry Kloss and Yves Faroudja).

The meeting room was a collection of LCD and Plasma panels, as well as three projectors. One was a 3-chip DLP Runco, one was a single chip Runco, and one was a more modest unit from Epson. The Runco sets had long throw lenses and the screens were a mix of materials from Stewart. Each of the panels had its own Sencore probe and generator so there would be opportunity for some hands on activity. They were also a mix of brands and generations of product. The panel vendors were NEC, Pioneer, LG, and Vidikron. At first I thought the mix was odd, with some of the sets being a bit dated, but that turned out to be one of the highlights for the class. Being able to see the progression of the technology was an important context and an experience that you never get. We normally see demos of the new stuff, and rarely see them in relation to previous product. Maybe that was more important to me than most because of my repair perspective. I see new and old all the time, but not necessarily side by side. The opportunity to see the performance of higher end lenses in relation to lower end gear, and the juxtaposition of the projection and panel displays was quite an experience as well. I would have liked to have seen a bit more of the projectors with better light control, but the setting was, after all, a convention center meeting room with 9 active displays in a classroom setup. Not a realistic notion.

The class contained a mix of people, but mostly dealers and installers, and a few with engineering backgrounds, obvious from the questions and discussion. Most did not ask a lot of questions and were obviously trying to keep up. I had been over the outline ahead of time and lots of the facts and standards are known to me, so that part was easier for me than some others, but at times Joel flies through material. He has the seminar well tuned and injects a large amount of his personal experience which is very, very valuable, but it squeezes the content sometimes, not allowing a lot of time to discuss basics. That was fine with me, but I would suggest that someone with less experience and education on the material do some homework beforehand based on the outline. In fact, I would suggest that they could improve the class by providing a more detailed outline with some of the fundamentals as something of a pre-study guide. I think I got more of the motivational part of the seminar because I was not trying to figure out much of the material that was presented.

There was a lot of content, of course. Joel says that he would love to be able to teach the class as a five day seminar instead of two. Having been a teacher, and knowing the stuff pretty well already, I can say that he is completely correct in that opinion. It would, obviously, be impossible to take that much time. That is one of my criticisms of ISF. They only have one level of training. There should be the opportunity to follow this up with a more advanced seminar. That would take the pressure off with respect to much of the material. A program of study outside of the course and multiple levels of training in the seminars would give ISF more credibility and allow for more effective training. It would also open the door to layers of certification to distinguish the serious professionals from those who are just looking for a logo to use on their promotional materials or those who are peripheral to calibration as a business. Joel told me in subsequent correspondence that they are piloting variations on the course that may give them more time.

Other critiques are minor, but just to be clear that I am not fully assimilated into the collective and thinking independently, I'll share them. Joel needs to be mindful the difference between the terms exasperate and exaggerate. He used the former a couple of times where the latter was what he meant. As smart and funny as he seems to be it could have been a purposeful use, almost making a pun in one of the instances, but doing it twice made him look a bit silly. Also, I had wondered previously about the use of what I call video slang, the term "D6500." I often see it in discussions online and even in some white papers, used where D65 is more correct. I was a little surprised to see it in a couple of places in the seminar booklet. Picking nits? Yes, but my exasperation (yeah, I do know how to use the word) comes from spending some time second-guessing my own understanding of the difference between a specific spec for the coordinates of white as opposed to the use of color temperatures. As it turned out, my understanding of the standards and the use of the terms is correct and my frustration with myself for not being able to figure out where "D6500" came from was a waste of time. It just does not exist in the standards. Joel did explain the use of color temps in the press for simplicity, but I think mixing the notion of CCT and the D65 spec is a mistake that leads to more confusion than it solves. When you talk about color temperature say 6500K or whatever you mean. When referring to specific standard use the correct term, e.g. D65 or the coordianates. There are a couple of other points I noticed in the book that I will discuss with him at some point.

It would be useful to have discussed more of the specific meters and software that are currently available, but it was obvious that they were being very neutral about all products, including both test equipment and displays. Obviously, Sencore is a major sponsor of the course, and we used their equipment, but we did not discuss their stuff much at all. Even some of the guys there helping out were not completely familiar with the Sencore software in the newer package. I understand being fair and politic, but there were a lot of unanswered questions among the attendees with respect to the tools. There is only so much time and obviously some things need to be left out, but the equipment is a big deal.

Overall, an inspiring and valuable weekend. ISF is Joel Silver, no doubt, and the guy has vision. Anyone else would likely have been a disappointment. My energy for video and doing it right has been renewed. The facts you can get on your own if you dig and study. The context, experience, and motivation is what I paid for. I got what I had hoped. Actually, I got more. I highly recommend that anyone even considering an ISF Seminar do it.


----------



## j2sgam (Feb 21, 2008)

Did you take the seminar at EHX in Orlando? I was in that class, the one sitting in back pulling his hair out after day1 ended. There were alot of unanswered questions, but Im workin on gettin that resolved. While I do not have your knowledge, or your level of expertise for this, I do have a new found passion for HD video. 
The class was highly informative, as far as Im concerned, but Im still trying to finish my exam, Im tryin to verify any answers Im unsure of, and the class content is a bit different from real world application. The class was also very streamlined for Sencore, but that is to be expected as they were a sponsor, as you said. I cant seem to find what we're supposed to ask customers to help them decide what display to buy. I will get through it...
Savant Living, the company I work for, had already purchased the DataColor Spyder Pro2 a year or so before I attended class. This is not the best tool for doing the best job possible. I would have liked to have been there for your conversaton with Jerry from Sencore. Their products seem, from what I saw at the show, to be alot better suited to do this job. Jerry said they will work out a trade for our Spyder if we wanted to 'upgrade' to theirs. Thats pretty cool.
Antway, I just saw this thread, an' thought I'd touch base, thats all, P-sout...


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Yes, I was there. My conversations with Sencore have not gone very well, at least for them. They just do not have a very competitive product nor do they know much about them. There are much better values available. Don't hesitate to contact me personally if you have some questions.


----------



## Bent (May 24, 2006)

excellent
when you mentioned "My energy for video and doing it right has been renewed.", it spoke volumes of the validity of the seminar. I'm not a calibrationist, but I am quite passionate about the industry I'm involved in. Time and time again, I've felt like I'm beating my head against the wall when it comes to trying to instill this passion into my trainee's, whether it be their attitudes, or what my line management will allow me to pursue. 
Then I attend a seminar dealing with new products, refined test procedures, or just simply "a better way", and if the presenter shares the same passion for his subject as I do for my occupation I also feel rejuvinated and energized.

Excellent post. Your view differs somewhat from that of Mr. Chen w.r.t the ISF certification industry though, I must say.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Who is Mr. Chen? What is his view? It would not be the first time that my view was different.:boxer:


----------



## Bent (May 24, 2006)

Mr. Chen - aka Micheal TLV.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

So how would you say that we disagree? I just do not understand the comment. I wonder what you think his view might be and how you have interpreted mine. What is your view, BTW.


----------



## Bent (May 24, 2006)

I can't speak for Micheal, as I may have originally mis-interpreted his position on these matters in the first place. 
That being said, I wouldn't say you "disagree" with Mr. Chen - only that you paint a much more positive picture of the ISF than he did quite some time back.

My view is that if someone wants to do their best job at anything (be it calibrating a display device, or spreading a load of traffic gravel on a rural road with a dump truck), being "certified" doesn't necessarilly make them better than someone without certification. 
Please believe me when I say that I don't mean this as a slight on anyone's part - I'm not trying to insult someone for participating in the training required to get certified as an ISF calibrator, I realize that the industry holds certification as a necessary step to give the industry validity and credibility. I am concerned that I may further put my foot in my mouth if I carry on participating in this thread, so I'll politely withdraw myself.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I actually think we all pretty much agree on these matters. I have been pretty cynical about the value of ISF "certification" in the past as well. In fact, I have been strongly rebuked by some ISF trained people for my opinions. I still have some critcisms of ISF for opportunities that they have missed. You have to keep things in perspective from both views, however, and find the value where there is some. Giving your opinion does not equate to putting your foot in your mouth, as long as you are willing to engage in civil and intelligent discussions. I welcome your input and hope to discuss the matter further. As I have said, I am continuing to learn what value ISF can have for me as I give it a chance. I can say this. Joel has been very open to my views and interested in my perpective. Much more so than some the more vocal defenders of ISF as it stands now. He obviously understands that they can be doing much more than they are at this time.


----------



## Bob Walters (May 29, 2008)

And here's the guy who's anti-ISF but joins their "private library"!!!!!! I think we ALL say "welcome" and I KNOW I agree WHOLOHEARTEDLY with your philosphy. Bob Walters/A/V Insights


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

I am not sure what you are talking about, Bob. Can you explain your remarks.


----------



## Bob Walters (May 29, 2008)

Sorry,
I guess I just wasn't clear!! I just happened on this website, read your thread about the ISF seminar and its ups & downs and then realized that I had seen you name somewhere else.....you, as myself, belong to a forum "just for" ISF calibrators so I was LOL and sent you a "welcome". Sorry, I was just having some fun; didn't mean anything by it.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

Well, to be clear, I am still somewhat cynical about ISF and its value. The ISF calibrators forum has been useful, and as my review stated, the class was valuable. The ISF could still do much more in my view than it does, and has missed a lot of opportunities to enhance the profession. That said, I contribute what I can and participate as much as I can.


----------

