Ronster said:
This is a an association body. It will cost a lot of money to be an associate and what that grants you access to clients who work within that association.

It’s another way of shrugging off competition from smaller companies. Just because they have standards does not mean the actual association or even members of that association created those standards. They merely recognise a set standard and to be a member and put an SMPTE stamp on your company will also mean you have to meet that standard no doubt.

They are also part of drug company imaging devices big pharma contracts.

There is not anything wrong with an association body per se but like I said, this is a way of shutting out smaller competitive companys out of contracts because they can not afford the membership fees of being part of the association. And contracts are probably rarely given outside SMPTE membership in certain spheres of influence.

Not all bad but not all good either totally un-competitive though.

$13,500 dollars good client access or $20,000 for better client access per year.

I don’t think much of what you said here is true. Let’s say it is true, though. What does that have to do with what I asked?

If we all found out tomorrow that SMPTE is involved with human trafficking, it wouldn’t change the fact that the entire industry adheres to SMPTE standards and that using those standards achieves a relative consistency of image.

I asked about the science of video standards. If calibration of monitors to SMPTE standards isn’t a good method of attaining image accuracy and consistency, what is? I already said why I think your idea of having media tailored to TV tech wouldn’t work. A rebuttal to that would make more sense than a rumination on SMPTE’s business ethics.