FORUMS: list search recent posts

Re: FSI - trustworthy or not? Maybe plasma better? (Updated with Flanders measured CIE chart)

COW Forums : DaVinci Resolve

Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread

Bram Desmet
Re: FSI - trustworthy or not? Maybe plasma better? (Updated with Flanders measured CIE chart)
on Nov 17, 2012 at 4:13:00 am

Folks, take a deep breath. FSI always has been and will be open to feedback, criticism, and an unyielding drive to further refine and improve upon our products. This is no exception.

I think perhaps some of you imagine a conflict and animosity between Light Illusion and FSI that simply does not exist. I have personally begun a very friendly and informative dialogue with Steve Shaw and we've even purchased a Light Space license to learn more and have a better common ground for understanding and future discussion with Light Illusion and customers using their software. However, it would be extremely premature for me to start discussing specifics because we are not sure yet where this is taking us. The one thing I learned long ago from a variety of software and hardware developers even well before I helped start FSI is not to utter the phrase "well this should be easy." Truth is if it was easy everyone would do it and the simplest looking things can often be the most difficult to tackle. Best example of this was our recent addition of 12 bit signal support, it was previously only 10 bit, via a simple and free firmware upgrade. This seemingly simple update actually required a 9 month ground up rewrite of our firmware, but we saw a growing customer demand for it and wanted to address that demand.

What I think FSI has managed to do over the years is provide an affordable range of monitors (remember, they start at $2K with the most expensive currently being $5K) that for the vast majority of our clients get the job done at a fair price day in and day out. We've never aimed to be the company that makes the $30K pushing-the-limits-of-what-is-possible monitors and with that come limits as to what the displays can do. That being said there is ALWAYS room for improvement and we've never suggested otherwise. Our first wide gamut monitors had internal LUTs that were 128 times smaller than what we use now. We then stepped it up with the LM-2460W with a much larger internal LUT. Then we stepped it up with the LM-2461W by investing in truly high-grade probes ($15,000 to $35,000 a piece) that by all indications available to us provided much more precise results. And you know what? At every step of the way we offered inexpensive or free upgrade paths so you could get the latest and greatest technology on these older units.

So again, let me stress that we are always keen on improving what we can where we can and again without discussing specifics, which I just won't do here, this is no exception. That being said we can't ignore the fact that day after day thousands of FSI customers around the world feel they have a tool that already gets the job done. Many of these customers have evaluated our solutions closely compared to other competitively priced options and come to the conclusion that for the money we offered the best tool for the job at hand.

Lastly, please be kind to our employees. If you are frustrated at a lack of public posts here please blame me directly, not them. I have asked that they refrain from further commenting here because I think we have said our peace and I really don't want us to come off as sounding like a company that refuses to believe there is any room for improvement in our products or calibration. In my mind there is always room for improvement and refinement in these respects and we will, as we always have, continue to pursue these avenues of improvement.

Bram Desmet
FSI (Flanders Scientific, Inc.)

Posts IndexRead Thread 

Current Message Thread:

© 2019 All Rights Reserved