DaVinci for Mac, game changer or game over?

[shashbugu]

I don't know if you all watched the same BM video of resolve for the mac. it was PLAYING BACK 2K RED AND 2K DPX FILES, MULTIPLE EFFECTS NODES IN REAL REAL TIME. seeing is believing, it was even playing back HD files on a mac pro laptop. Paul Buhl, you keep making it out to be weak. the linux version is super powerful for telecine DI playout,where you need realtime playback out to a film recorder complete with continuos printer light calibration. if you work in broadcast on a disk based workflow for, shows, commercials, music vids, what do you need real time 4k playback for? If you really need that get a Pablo or RED Rocket™™, all the tools are out there. Its only a matter of time every NLE will have RED Rocket™ playback. All we need today is 2k. 4k 5k 6k 7k 8k 9k 10k are future proof, we can always go-back and re-conform. I know most people on here are pixel purist, but short 0f $80,000 you cant even monitor a 4k image. Sony's new SR deck records 2k mastering. Shooting 5k gets a deeper richer fidelity rich company.

 

[Paul Buhl]

I don't know why people keep referring to Mac Resolve as an HD or 2k system. Again, from the conversation with BM director of software development, there is no reason, why you couldn't do a grade in HD or 2k and then render it out as 4k finish. It's just, that at this point it's not capable of REAL TIME 4k, but otherwise, 4k and beyond is not a problem. Just like any other high end systems we know... What? Color can't do 4K? Ooops... Said that, there is a caveat, BM hasn't tested the 4k render yet. As was explained to me, they were just barely able to make the deadline of Mac port for the NAB. The real writing and testing of Mac resolve just starting now.

It's right on the Resolve website that the Mac solution is geared toward SD and HD. If you grade in HD or 2K, there would be no reason to out 4K, that's backwards. Color of course can grade 4K, but you need serious hardware to play the 4K in real time. Most Color users don't have the budget to go beyond a typical G5 Quad, which is why they use Color. The grading point really is about the best way to maintain the full latitude of available info in the file when at the grading stage. Some Colorists still feel that a transcoded 2K Log DPX from 4K R3D is just as good as the 4K original in that regard. Some say it's best to grade the 4K itself. But traditionally, the higher end post houses using DaVinci have been living in the 2K DPX world, and their compositing is 2K. Working and finishing in 4K is coming fast, and it's the lower cost solutions that are pushing that, rather than coming from the top down.

 

[jake blackstone]

This is definitely interesting to me. What format and data rate was this being achieved with and what processor level on the Mac? According to the Resolve site, the Mac solution is geared toward SD and HD, the Linux is needed for 4K R3D or 2K DPX.

The code word is "real time". So, just grade with proxies or 1/2 debayer and then render at any desired resolution. They don't limit it in software in any way...

 

[jake blackstone]

It's right on the Resolve website that the Mac solution is geared toward SD and HD. If you grade in HD or 2K, there would be no reason to out 4K, that's backwards. Color of course can grade 4K, but you need serious hardware to play the 4K in real time. Most Color users don't have the budget to go beyond a typical G5 Quad, which is why they use Color. The grading point really is about the best way to maintain the full latitude of available info in the file when at the grading stage. Some Colorists still feel that a transcoded 2K Log DPX from 4K R3D is just as good as the 4K original in that regard. Some say it's best to grade the 4K itself. But traditionally, the higher end post houses using DaVinci have been living in the 2K DPX world, and their compositing is 2K. Working and finishing in 4K is coming fast, and it's the lower cost solutions that are pushing that, rather than coming from the top down.

Seriously, you want to me write the answer on 4k a third time? Using proxies is backwards? interesting statement... And since when is Color can do 4k?

 

[Andrae Palmer]

Seriously, you want to me write the answer on 4k a third time? Using proxies is backwards? interesting statement... And since when is Color can do 4k?

Color 1.5 can output to 4k.

 

[Paul Buhl]

I don't know if you all watched the same BM video of resolve for the mac. it was PLAYING BACK 2K RED AND 2K DPX FILES, MULTIPLE EFFECTS NODES IN REAL REAL TIME. seeing is believing, it was even playing back HD files on a mac pro laptop. Paul Buhl, you keep making it out to be weak. the linux version is super powerful for telecine DI playout,where you need realtime playback out to a film recorder complete with continuos printer light calibration. if you work in broadcast on a disk based workflow for, shows, commercials, music vids, what do you need real time 4k playback for? If you really need that get a Pablo or RED Rocket™™, all the tools are out there. Its only a matter of time every NLE will have RED Rocket™ playback. All we need today is 2k. $k is future proof we can always go-back and re-conform. I know most people on here are pixel purist, but short 0f $8000 you cant even monitor a 4k image. Sony's new SR deck records 2k mastering.

I agree with you on the 2K vs 4K completely. For me, shooting in 4K and finishing in 2K DPX is very impressive. My only question is what kind of power does the Mac Resolve solution offer, and according to the demo you are talking about it's quite substantial. I only know that I can't play either 4K R3D or 2K DPX in real time on my Mac G5 Intel 2.8 Dual Qaud. If the Mac solution can play 2K DPX in real time on my Mac, I'd be absolutely thrilled, but it says right on their own site that the Mac solution is designed for HD, so I'm fascinated with the two different stories here and will check out the demos asap.

 

[jake blackstone]

I don't know if you all watched the same BM video of resolve for the mac. it was PLAYING BACK 2K RED AND 2K DPX FILES, MULTIPLE EFFECTS NODES IN REAL REAL TIME. seeing is believing, it was even playing back HD files on a mac pro laptop. Paul Buhl, you keep making it out to be weak. the linux version is super powerful for telecine DI playout,where you need realtime playback out to a film recorder complete with continuos printer light calibration. if you work in broadcast on a disk based workflow for, shows, commercials, music vids, what do you need real time 4k playback for? If you really need that get a Pablo or RED Rocket™™™, all the tools are out there. Its only a matter of time every NLE will have RED Rocket™™ playback. All we need today is 2k. 4k 5k 6k 7k 8k 9k 10k are future proof, we can always go-back and re-conform. I know most people on here are pixel purist, but short 0f $80,000 you cant even monitor a 4k image. Sony's new SR deck records 2k mastering. Shooting 5k gets a deeper richer fidelity rich company.

A long time ago Grant Petty was talking about being able to use Linux Resolve to do a 28k REAL TIME grading. It has that much power to spare. There is no limiting of resolution in software on either platform. It's just a matter of practicality.

 

[jake blackstone]

I agree with you on the 2K vs 4K completely. For me, shooting in 4K and finishing in 2K DPX is very impressive. My only question is what kind of power does the Mac Resolve solution offer, and according to the demo you are talking about it's quite substantial. I only know that I can't play either 4K R3D or 2K DPX in real time on my Mac G5 Intel 2.8 Dual Qaud. If the Mac solution can play 2K DPX in real time on my Mac, I'd be absolutely thrilled, but it says right on their own site that the Mac solution is designed for HD, so I'm fascinated with the two different stories here and will check out the demos asap.

Mac Resolve at NAB was playing 2k DPX in real time. Actually playback in real time of 1/2 debayered red file with 6 layers of color grade, 2 keys and a defocus is MUCH MORE impressive and difficult feat. And you still could grade it even during the playback. Let's see Color do that. Actually, let's see Scratch do, what Resolve does with an awesome panel and all, at less than half price...

 

[jake blackstone]

Color 1.5 can output to 4k.

Color me surprised. Didn't know that...

 

[shashbugu]

I agree with you on the 2K vs 4K completely. For me, shooting in 4K and finishing in 2K DPX is very impressive. My only question is what kind of power does the Mac Resolve solution offer, and according to the demo you are talking about it's quite substantial. I only know that I can't play either 4K R3D or 2K DPX in real time on my Mac G5 Intel 2.8 Dual Qaud. If the Mac solution can play 2K DPX in real time on my Mac, I'd be absolutely thrilled, but it says right on their own site that the Mac solution is designed for HD, so I'm fascinated with the two different stories here and will check out the demos asap.

you have a mac G5 PPC or intel? without the Intel platform EMM you wont be able to do much

 

[Paul Buhl]

Seriously, you want to me write the answer on 4k a third time? Using proxies is backwards? interesting statement... And since when is Color can do 4k?

Not sure what you mean. You said grade in 2K and output in 4K, which is backwards if you are grading in DPX. If you are grading the actual proxies, then you are not even close to getting all you can get out of your R3D. If you are using the proxies properly, you would be actually grading the R3D, not the proxy. Color 1.0 can grade 4K R3D, but only output ProRes HD. Color 1.5 can grade 4K R3D, and output 4K DPX, 2K DPX, ProRes 12 bit 444. So a proper 2K grade is either 2k R3D, DPX, ProRes or some other 2K transcode from 4K R3D. So why would you go out to 4K from a 2K grade?

 

[shashbugu]

Not sure what you mean. You said grade in 2K and output in 4K, which is backwards if you are grading in DPX. If you are grading the actual proxies, then you are not even close to getting all you can get out of your R3D. If you are using the proxies properly, you would be actually grading the R3D, not the proxy. Color 1.0 can grade 4K R3D, but only output ProRes HD. Color 1.5 can grade 4K R3D, and output 4K DPX, 2K DPX, ProRes 12 bit 444. So a proper 2K grade is either 2k R3D, DPX, ProRes or some other 2K transcode from 4K R3D. So why would you go out to 4K from a 2K grade?

Well the 2K grade will be your super high res proxy

 

[shashbugu]

this is an interesting thread, but as a reduser I am definitely a whole lot more excited about CS5 than about resolve.

 

[Paul Buhl]

Well the 2K grade will be your super high res proxy

The proxies in all resolutions point back to the original R3D data. The proxies are just for cutting with, not intended to finish with, so you need to be sure you are grading either your R3D or properly transcoded DPX, ProRes, etc. Go to your folders with the R3D, copy only the proxies to a new directory and open them in QT and you will see they have no data of their own without the R3D present. So a 2K grade has to be done with a 2k R3D or a format that was derived from and actual transcode from the R3D.

 

[lionel2p]

I don't know why people keep referring to Mac Resolve as an HD or 2k system. Again, from the conversation with BM director of software development, there is no reason, why you couldn't do a grade in HD or 2k and then render it out as 4k finish. It's just, that at this point it's not capable of REAL TIME 4k, but otherwise, 4k and beyond is not a problem. Just like any other high end systems we know... What? Color can't do 4K? Ooops... Said that, there is a caveat, BM hasn't tested the 4k render yet. As was explained to me, they were just barely able to make the deadline of Mac port for the NAB. The real writing and testing of Mac resolve just starting now.

Jeff, I refered to realtime grading. 2K realtime is enough for me !

 

[shashbugu]

Jeff, I refered to realtime grading. 2K realtime is enough for me !

I am with you Jeff.
2k realtime is here and now in every NLE and efx and grading system.

Why worry about sluggish 4k playback when you can do more with 2k and have pristine full debayered 2k output

 

[lionel2p]

2K DPX realtime on mac is a matter of disk speed only. Software is not a limitation. With all different arrays on the market, it's easy to find a cost effective system for Resolve to handle 2K files. Scratch, Luster are working exactly the same way. I have absolutly no doubt of the 2K capability of Resolve. For R3D debayer, let's see, but a half-res realtime is quiet cool, waiting for Red Rocket or simply a Mac power update. Anyway, 2K is largely enough do a great job, and 4K outpout is an exotic demand in my country

 

[Michael Cioni]

Da Vinci IRON

Da Vinci IRON

Since there are a few threads on Da Vinci, I wanted to contribute on the discussion here as well. Another good thread is below, where this post can also be seen.
http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=43697&page=25

Since a large amount of my business at Light Iron is focused on digital intermediate, this particular thread addresses a lot of the excitement about how the ecosystem is changing for digital intermediate. I was pleasantly surprised to see what Black Magic did with their newly acquired Resolve system. To break this down, let's look at the facts.

1. Da Vinci is the most widely known and accepted color grading system on earth. Da Vinci's can be found just about everywhere and they allow for modifications to enable them to work with film, tape, and file based sources. No other DI tool can work with that myriad of formats as smoothly as Da Vinci.
2. The Resolve is an amazing grading tool. The abilities one can learn with this program raise the bar tremendously over similarly priced systems. This means it will allow people who want to learn more about DI the ability to go as deep and as wide as someone who has made a lot bigger of an investment.
3. No one really knows exactly how these systems will perform in the various configurations that Black Magic is building. Until units are in the hands of users, we are going to have to guess.
4. I am confident that even though the Resolve is 500% cheaper than it was 1 year ago, it will not be 500% worse. If you know me, you'll know I am a fan of RED because I am a fan of scalability. My professional career has been all about managing the scaleability of systems integration (be it DI or otherwise) so that investments can change in accordance with experience, demand, and finances. Resolve is a perfect example of a new level of scaleability, to which I am happy to see.
5. Experienced colorists who use Resolve should not be instantly threatened. Talent is paramount, and that takes a lot of time to develop of the years. Unless you stop learning today (which is unlikely to happen) you're current skills will only improve at a similar rate as those who jump on the system and start to learn it.
6. Un-experienced colorists who only have access to systems like Apple Color should be ecstatic! Being able to explore the depth of the Resolve tool and learn more about the width of color correction will not only improve your personal stock, but prepare you for adaptation to other DI systems, which are important to know as well.
7. Don't get too wrapped up in the numbers. Getting a Black Magic Mac Resolve to perform the same way as it did with Da Vinci will not be achieved with a thousand dollars. But it will count as absolutely bona fide experience on the Resolve system.

It was only 5 years ago that my partner Ian Vertovec and our team started color correction on Final Cut Pro and Final Touch. As our skills and clients improved, so did our DI systems. What Resolve on the MAC does better than anything in the past is close the gap between where you START in DI and where you can END UP. That's total empowerment and that type of opportunity would be foolish to ignore. Final Touch did this is the early 2000's, now Resolve has done it again. My advice is to take full advantage of this system and learn it through-and-through so you can graduate from it to other systems or upgrade the Resolve when we learn what more horsepower will offer the machine. But most importantly, I wanted to point out one more element for discussion:

As the demand for systems like Resolve to become more available at affordable prices, so does the demand for harder work. We call systems like FCP, Color, RED Rocket™™™™ cards, and now Resolve LIGHT WORK. These are systems that are inexpensive, readily available, fairly easy to adopt and extremely powerful. But the demand for harder, heavier work we call IRON WORK. This is the demand for 3D, 4K DI, and 4K restoration. Consider that just as the bar is raised in the LIGHT areas of the industry, so does the bar raise in the HEAVY areas of the industry. I surmise that this relationship will likely never cease. -Top end artists always pushing the boundaries of VFX, image capture, fidelity, and resolution, etc. So while Resolve offers an elevated starting point for DI in terms of LIGHT WORK, the industry is no doubt going to continue to organically demand more in terms of IRON WORK. This is why we named our company LIGHT IRON. It's often pointed out that I have 2 Pablo systems at my shop. But what's more important is that I now have Resolve alongside my RED Rocket™s, a dozen Mac computers, iPad dailies, and a slew of LIGHT WORK software solutions. So the name LIGHT IRON was chosen in recognition that there are many jobs that can be perfectly executed without the need of a Pablo. Likewise, as the demand for more "K's" and more "D's" are requested, the need for HEAVY IRON will never completely go away.

I, for one, am as excited about this as anyone else. It will allow each of us to diversify and develop and enable the talent, which is paramount, to do what they do best. And there is nothing wrong with that. ever.
m

 

[Lucas Wilson]

At 50k the Resolve system is way more powerful than a 70k Scratch software. Scratch can't even get the same equivalent 4k Realtime not to mention the grading panel.

Since you own neither a SCRATCH nor a Resolve, what do you base this on - demos at trade shows? Really? Do you also believe every word the car salesman tells you? Not trying to pick on you specifically, but it's comments like this that have made me stay away from this thread.

I work and earn my salary in the real world - with real shipping products and real customers who have clients breathing down their necks. Realistically, it is another 6 months until the $999 version has a real foothold and the market can decide what to do with it. That's a lifetime in the post-production software world.

The Blackmagic announcement is exciting... I love disruptive technology and disruptive announcements. It makes people think hard and work hard, and usually the industry is better for it.

But not *one* person on this thread has seen anything other than a trade show demo of this product. Not one. And if you believe everything you see in a floor demo at NAB, I've got some lake property in the Mojave to sell you...

Lucas


Lucas Wilson
------------
Reality Police
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA

 

[Andrae Palmer]

You are right six months is a very long time... lets hope they release Davinci Resolve for Mac even sooner. Since I'm basing my decisions on demos at trade shows and the capabilities and features that I see online...and I could be very very wrong... what features in Scratch makes it better than the Davinci Resolve grading panel and linux 4k clusters for realtime 4k performance?


BTW... wasn't Davinci Resolve released in 2004 and already has a market presence/reputation?