Resolve on PC

[Brad Allen]

Hi Guys,

I did a quick search but couldn't really find any info on whether Black Magic is considering developing Resolve for PC/Windows as well. I know for me personally, I would grab Resolve in a heartbeat if was made available on PC. Based on the amount of people building Hackintosh's specifically for Resolve, I'm guessing I'm not the only one.

I tried to find a section on Black Magic's site to submit feedback but couldn't find any so I figured having a discussion here was the next best thing.

Would you be interested in purchasing Resolve for the PC/Windows platform?

 

[Peter Chamberlain]

Hi, we do have a Linux version that operates on a PC. The benefits of linux are a greater number of GPUs so more nodes of higher resolution in real time.
Peter

 

[Maz Mawlawi]

I asked a rep at NAB and he said they would consider it if enough people asked for it...then he ask me " why isn't running fine on your MAC? " And I told him yes but on a PC I can keep throwing and upgrading to faster GPU cards as opposed to being "locked" by Apple decision to when and what card they decide to support and secondly BMD pride themselves that all their products are cross platform...so why not do the same for resolve?....
Hopefully a win 7 version will be developed soon as it has been a pretty good and stable OS. (just as good as our OsX machines)

 

[Bruce Allen]

Seriously, PC-only guys (I was one of you) - just play with Resolve and you'll see it makes the Mac purchase worth it

Thing is - if Blackmagic took the time to do a PC port... probably by the time they were done, the major Mac problems would be fixed?
EG OpenCL would be working nicely, we'd have fixed the lack of slots with Thunderbolt, etc. Supposedly there are hints of 580 support in OS X Lion?

But for now yes, it'd be great to stick in a few GTX 580s for CUDA. Spending $1000 on a Quadro 4000 that's slower than a GTX 285 is kinda sad. Buying PCI expanders is sad too, but Thunderbolt should help.

Also, it'd be nice to run it on a laptop with fast nVidia chips. Maybe HP's Dreamcolor laptop... or how about a laptop with a 3D stereo screen for quick on-set stuff?

I imagine there are die-hard PC folks with CUDA setups for Adobe Premiere Pro who would like to run Resolve - if so, you guys should speak up now

Personally I am agnostic - Avid, Nuke, Maya, After Effects and Pro Tools are cross platform and so am I. Resolve is one of the main reasons I for me to go Mac at the moment. That's fine.

I am happy just to support Blackmagic - they're giving us a fantastic insane deal, so if they want us to get a Mac, sure thing!

Or what if you think about it as "DaVinci costs $3000 - but you got a free Mac?" Still an awesome deal.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Brad Allen]

Hi, we do have a Linux version that operates on a PC. The benefits of linux are a greater number of GPUs so more nodes of higher resolution in real time.
Peter

Hi Peter,

Maybe I should have clarified this in my original post, but I meant in a Windows environment. As far as I understand it, the linux license is 30k. I would love to be able to purchase the $995 version as it is for Mac but for a Windows platform instead.

For me, I am exclusively running on the Windows Platform using Adobe's Production suite for the bulk of my tasks. If I was able to use my existing PC hardware rather than needing to buy a new Mac to gain access to Resolve, that would be ideal.

This would offer a few advantages:

- Graphics Card Support: High-end consumer level graphics cards almost always come out on PC first. They can also be stacked together (ala, SLI or CrossFire). This would mean better rendering performance at a cheaper price point.

- Cost of Entry: PC Hardware is cheaper to build and upgrade regularly. Getting a system together solely for grading is much cheaper (this is one of the main reasons Hackintosh exists)

- Existing Hardware: For people that are only using PC's (me), this gives them an entry point without the need for a whole new box. It becomes a software only cost.

- File Compatibility: One reason I would prefer not to buy a Mac just for Resolve is that it now means I will need to consider how to move all of my files between these two operating systems. I know this is possible, but it's an extra cost and concern I would prefer not to have to think about.

If Resolve was available at the $995 price point for Windows PC's it would be a no brainer for me

 

[Maz Mawlawi]

+1 for a windows version. We have resolve for the Mac but I'd love to have a few windows licenses as well. Although I love Apple machines and OS, but most of the software we have that is cross platform runs much faster on a windows 7 64 environment because of CUDA support and because we can easily upgrade hardware whenever needed.

 

[Shane Betts]

Alternatively, they could just realign the price of the Linux version to that of the Mac version. Save everyone a lot of work, BMD included...

 

[jake blackstone]

These are all good reasons, but you can't discount the ability to write Prores, which, unfortunately, on Windows a no go...

 

[Brad Allen]

These are all good reasons, but you can't discount the ability to write Prores, which, unfortunately, on Windows a no go...

Hi Jake, could you fill me in on my ignorance here. Which situations require you to export out a ProRes? I'm just thinking out loud in that most deliverables are going to be either for DVD, Blu-Ray, Web or Film?

Or do you mean exporting out to ProRes as an intermediate before final encoding for deliverables?

It bugs me to no end that Apple hasn't opened up ProRes for the Windows side of things, but it's their codec so I guess they can do as they like

 

[Subhadip Sen]

Resolve will be a perfect fit on Windows 7. Thanks to its far superior and constantly updated driver support, not to mention availability of the latest GPUs. As Maz mentions, we have also seen cross-platform software like Adobe CS5 always end up faster on Windows for a similar specced config too - it is the more efficient OS. As for ProRes - why use a lossy codec when there are great lossless codecs (Lagarith, UT, etc) with similar compression to ProRes 4444??? Of course, I understand this problem can occur when a client insists on a ProRes deliverable.

I have tried Resolve on the Mac OS X and it is the closest I have been convinced to moving the Mac platform. It is a truly excellent grading software. But the OS X is just too restrictive compared to Windows 7 for me. The biggest problem, of course, is just how incredibly closed the hardware is. Yes, I know Hackintosh is an option, but I am still certain I would function far more efficiently on Windows 7. I am fan of some Linux distros, especially Kubuntu, but the Linux version is unfortunately too exorbitantly priced for most of us.

 

[jake blackstone]

Hi Jake, could you fill me in on my ignorance here. Which situations require you to export out a ProRes? I'm just thinking out loud in that most deliverables are going to be either for DVD, Blu-Ray, Web or Film?

Or do you mean exporting out to ProRes as an intermediate before final encoding for deliverables?

It bugs me to no end that Apple hasn't opened up ProRes for the Windows side of things, but it's their codec so I guess they can do as they like

Majority of video deliverables these day, at least for me, had been Prores. On windows you can do DNxHD, but it's not as wide spread, as Prores. So, at least for me, it's a deal breaker...

 

[jake blackstone]

Resolve will be a perfect fit on Windows 7. Thanks to its far superior and constantly updated driver support, not to mention availability of the latest GPUs. As Maz mentions, we have also seen cross-platform software like Adobe CS5 always end up faster on Windows for a similar specced config too - it is the more efficient OS. As for ProRes - why use a lossy codec when there are great lossless codecs (Lagarith, UT, etc) with similar compression to ProRes 4444??? Of course, I understand this problem can occur when a client insists on a ProRes deliverable.

I have tried Resolve on the Mac OS X and it is the closest I have been convinced to moving the Mac platform. It is a truly excellent grading software. But the OS X is just too restrictive compared to Windows 7 for me. The biggest problem, of course, is just how incredibly closed the hardware is. Yes, I know Hackintosh is an option, but I am still certain I would function far more efficiently on Windows 7. I am fan of some Linux distros, especially Kubuntu, but the Linux version is unfortunately too exorbitantly priced for most of us.

If you're doing some indy music videos and home movies, sure Windows 7 is fine. But for professional environment you need bulletproof solution. Yes, Mac can be infuriatingly limiting, but the other side of this limitation is simplicity. BM managed to create a workhorse of a grading software. With single GTX 285 my Mac just purrs. I have a top of the line FilmMaster, running on Windows and it crashes at least 3-4 times a day. Those are the tradeoffs and in professional environment, that bulletproof performance is priceless. But Hackintosh can be an excellent solution, if you're looking for a dual boot computer for those times, when Mac just will not do.

 

[Brad Allen]

Majority of video deliverables these day, at least for me, had been Prores. On windows you can do DNxHD, but it's not as wide spread, as Prores. So, at least for me, it's a deal breaker...

Thanks for the info Jake - I appreciate it. The only times I have had ProRes requested of me is when it's going back into an edit in FCP. The particular client was happy to take DNxHD after I explained that ProRes was Mac only, and they had no troubles using it on their end. I guess I'm wondering if you think many of your clients would be happy to substitute DNxHD if you were forced to offer that instead?

 

[Marc Wielage]

The particular client was happy to take DNxHD after I explained that ProRes was Mac only, and they had no troubles using it on their end. I guess I'm wondering if you think many of your clients would be happy to substitute DNxHD if you were forced to offer that instead?

DNxHD is no problem on the Mac, but it's an additional license fee (not that expensive). I've done Resolve projects that were DNxHD 220 in and out, and it looked fine (for network broadcast).

I think the issue for Resolve for Windows support is that they have to optimize the code for specific platforms. The Mac version is a port, and I think they can get it fairly close because of the underlying Unix kernels in Mac OSX. As it is, DaVinci cheats a little bit by not using the Apple toolbox -- a lot of the menus and widgets are custom, not the normal Apple UI control panels.

 

[jake blackstone]

Thanks for the info Jake - I appreciate it. The only times I have had ProRes requested of me is when it's going back into an edit in FCP. The particular client was happy to take DNxHD after I explained that ProRes was Mac only, and they had no troubles using it on their end. I guess I'm wondering if you think many of your clients would be happy to substitute DNxHD if you were forced to offer that instead?

You don't force clients to do anything, if you want to stay in business
Let's face it, Macs is what everyone uses these days- students, ad executives, directors, DPs and like it or not, FCP is still the big Kahuna. And don't forget, Prores is cross platform, when it comes to be able to play it. With Mac you can do both DNx and Prores, with Windows, only DNx.

 

[jake blackstone]

DNxHD is no problem on the Mac, but it's an additional license fee (not that expensive). I've done Resolve projects that were DNxHD 220 in and out, and it looked fine (for network broadcast).

I think the issue for Resolve for Windows support is that they have to optimize the code for specific platforms. The Mac version is a port, and I think they can get it fairly close because of the underlying Unix kernels in Mac OSX. As it is, DaVinci cheats a little bit by not using the Apple toolbox -- a lot of the menus and widgets are custom, not the normal Apple UI control panels.

There is no need for license for QT wrapped DNx, the license only required for MXF version. And it's not insignificant- it's half price of Resolve.

 

[Marc Wielage]

There is no need for license for QT wrapped DNx, the license only required for MXF version. And it's not insignificant- it's half price of Resolve.

$500 ain't a big deal in the grand scheme of things.

I would agree that ProRes is far more entrenched and accepted in terms of delivery. I also think that Avid should just give away the MXF license for free, but that's me. (Note that Avid has had many layoffs and business problems in the last year, so I tend to doubt they want to give anything away these days, sadly.)

 

[Brandon J.F.]

I would buy a PC version of Resolve today if it were available.

 

[Subhadip Sen]

If you're doing some indy music videos and home movies, sure Windows 7 is fine. But for professional environment you need bulletproof solution. Yes, Mac can be infuriatingly limiting, but the other side of this limitation is simplicity. BM managed to create a workhorse of a grading software. With single GTX 285 my Mac just purrs. I have a top of the line FilmMaster, running on Windows and it crashes at least 3-4 times a day. Those are the tradeoffs and in professional environment, that bulletproof performance is priceless. But Hackintosh can be an excellent solution, if you're looking for a dual boot computer for those times, when Mac just will not do.

Both Mac OS X 10.6 and Windows 7 are very stable operating systems. The FilmMaster crashes likely have more to do with FilmMaster itself than anything to do with Windows 7 (though I have never used the software, but just going by my experience in using other software in Windows 7). I just rendered a 4 hour event timeline on Vegas Pro 10 last week and there was not one crash or instability of any kind. Similarly, VLC Media Player crashes on Mac OS X for me like no one's business. Final Cut Pro 7 is extremely crash happy sans ProRes, too. Does that mean Mac OS X is an unstable OS? No, it is the software itself which is at fault. I am sure a software developer of Blackmagic Design's stature can develop a stable software for both operating systems.

Conversely, one could argue that the Mac platform may be fine for indy music videos and home movies, but for a professional environment, I would not want to deal with the limitations of Mac OS X. I want the scalability, flexibility and power the Windows platform offers.

Arguably the most powerful grading solution, Quantel Pablo, is a Windows exclusive. There's really no technical reason why Resolve shouldn't be on the Windows platform.

 

[Brad Allen]

Arguably the most powerful grading solution, Quantel Pablo, is a Windows exclusive. There's really no technical reason why Resolve shouldn't be on the Windows platform.

This makes a great deal of sense to me. If other high end grading solutions are Windows compatible or Windows exclusive then surely Windows itself cannot be a deal breaker.

What do facilities that have a Pablo or FilmMaster installed do when a client requests a ProRes file? Would they transfer it to a Mac in some other format and then convert to ProRes or kindly ask if the client would be happy to accept another format? (DNxHD or Cineform etc). That's not meant to be a jab - it's a legitimate question. It just seems crazy that the whole industry revolves around the ability to write one file type - and this file type is only able to be written on Mac.