DaVinci Resolve 10

[mikeburton]

Jake, care to elaborate how your frequently using Remote grading day to day with clients? Are you shipping them a dongle etc? How are you ensuring proper calibration between your reference monitor and their display? I've been considering doing this with a few clients I know would benefit from it but have held off due to monitoring concerns. Dongles are easy to send but monitors, not so much.

 

[Peace Villow]

Peace, on a side note (knowing that this thread is dedicated to V10), do you have recommended values for "Low Range" and "High Range" for the log grading?

Thanks,

I rarely use the log grading control on my job, even when I use it I never adjust the low & high range parameter, I'm happy with LGG, RGB Mixer and offset. If i need more control over the LGG I just use the Luminance qualifier and set the area range. At least that trick always work for me instead of changing the low & high range in Log Control.

But that's just my personal way to grade. I believe other colorist prefer to use Log control than LGG, it's just a matter of personal preference.

 

[Luis Otero]

Thanks for your input.

 

[M Most]

Obviously I'm keeping my fingers crossed and hope for the new MacPro and, if that happens, there are rumblings, that FL will finally release a real BL on a Mac.

Strong rumblings. Especially considering it might already exist.....

The question is what all this has to do with Resolve V10? I'm just hoping, that someone will stay in the game and fight. Who's left? Speedgrade is still very much behind the curve, even though it's got some new cool toys. Assimilate? I have no idea what's keeping them afloat. Lustre is gone. FilmMaster is on the descending slope. Mistilca and Pablo? Don't know enough, but I know it's pricy. I don't want Resolve be the only solution left standing. Because, if that happens, no amount of complaining will help any longer, when there is no competition.

I dont' really disagree with your sentiment, but it's very difficult for a software product developer to compete against Blackmagic's model of a huge catalog of "glue" hardware that justifies continued development on one major software product that they can literally give away. Such sophisticated software, with its attendent development and support requirements and costs, can really only be supported by either a high per unit price, a lower per unit price plus large sales volume, or a hardware "dongle" approach that allows low software cost but required hardware purchases. Blackmagic has put itself in the unique position of really being the only vendor that can use the last model. Everyone else must have a niche market in order to survive long term, and in many if not most cases, they're kind of slugging it out for the rather small high end market that can afford what they need to charge.

On the one hand, I don't like the idea of a monopoly either, but then again, the monopoly really only exists in the price sensitive end of the industry, not so much in the higher end and facility market. On the other hand, I've really got to hand it to Grant Petty, whose model I really didn't understand until recently. It's really a quite novel and original approach when you think about it.

 

[Peace Villow]

Baselight additions is exactly the same price as Resolve, $995 and it now works on FCP, Avid on Mac and PC, Nuke, with work in progress for FCPX and Flame and even may be for Premiere. And you need to pay only one $995 payment for all those plugins. And yes, the BE uses three trackballs just fine for Log grading and you can customize controls and they are even bidirectional. You select the control and display changes, twist the knob and readouts are actually moving. It's the very same MC Color, that is used on Resolve.

Come on Jake, Baselight Edition plug-in need another software to run. That's another money that you have to spend to use the plug-in. So it's not the same price as Resolve software.

 

[Marc Wielage]

For me the problem with the bmd panels is you never know what that company s going to do price wise. They undercut themselves and others like crazy so it's scary to get into something at that price from them. I think it might be the only product they've ever had that hasn't seen a huge price cut within a year or two (Except the perpetually languishing ultrascope).

I seem to recall that the full Resolve panels were well over $100,000 just a few years ago, right before Blackmagic bought the company. So we already had a 66% price cut as it is. I believe the full color-correction panels for Pablo and Baselight are still over $100,000.

 

[Paul Provost]

Well the bmd panels were a new product, debut at $30k, still $30k. Not saying that's not what they should be at. Just saying not typical for the bmd price drop pattern. Blackboard 2 are $65k ish?

 

[M Most]

Well the bmd panels were a new product, debut at $30k, still $30k. Not saying that's not what they should be at. Just saying not typical for the bmd price drop pattern. Blackboard 2 are $65k ish?

That's about right for Blackboard 2. But the last time I checked, you could still get the original Blackboard for somwhere in the low $40s, which is not that out of line with Blackmagic's price. One needs to keep in mind that such products are most definitely not mass market items. They are purpose designed and work with only one software platform. They are designed for ruggedness, precision, and quick access to all functions, and are manufactured to pretty tight tolerances. In the case of Blackboard 2 and Neo (the Pablo panel), they are fitted with OLED displays on both the readouts and the buttons themselves, which makes them easy to read and very elegant, but increases the cost of both manufacture and programming. The DaVinci panels are not quite that state of the art, but they are nicely done, have very readable LCD screens, and are very rugged. They might not be worth the price to smaller shops and individuals, but they pay for themselves over time in the shops that use them.

 

[MichaelP]

Blackmagic has put itself in the unique position of really being the only vendor that can use the last model. Everyone else must have a niche market in order to survive long term, and in many if not most cases, they're kind of slugging it out for the rather small high end market that can afford what they need to charge.

One could Argue that Apple is in a similar if not stronger position to do the same.

Michael

 

[M Most]

One could Argue that Apple is in a similar if not stronger position to do the same.

True. And that was basically how they got a few million copies of Final Cut Pro out the door. But one can also argue, based on the evidence, that Apple doesn't really have a lot of interest in creating, maintaining, and evolving a standalone color grading product....

 

[MichaelP]

True. And that was basically how they got a few million copies of Final Cut Pro out the door. But one can also argue, based on the evidence, that Apple doesn't really have a lot of interest in creating, maintaining, and evolving a standalone color grading product....

You only need one base product in editorial to get you to buy into the hardware, OS, and App store... Everything else would have to sustain its own P&L to have interest.

Michael

 

[jake blackstone]

Jake, care to elaborate how your frequently using Remote grading day to day with clients? Are you shipping them a dongle etc? How are you ensuring proper calibration between your reference monitor and their display? I've been considering doing this with a few clients I know would benefit from it but have held off due to monitoring concerns. Dongles are easy to send but monitors, not so much.

All of my clients have working installation of Resolve already. They are responsible for the hardware and they just hire me as a colorist, pure and simple. It's like a freelance colorist is hired and he just shows up and does the job. Said that, I do have a bit more of a vested interest with some of my bigger clients. If at the end quality of work is subpar, due to he monitor issues, in the long run it will affect me, regardless, if it's my fault or not. That's why I spend considerable amount of time educating them on proper calibration of monitors. I even flew to my biggest client in Moscow, delivered Hubble probe and Cinespace software, calibrated, profiled it and created proper Resolve viewing LUT for their monitor and taught them how to maintain the calibration in the future. Right now with the second client in Moscow we're in the process of profiling their own film prints with the use of Truelight by FilmLight. We're building a foundation for proper grading environment for filmouts for feature work. Eastern Europe still uses a lot of prints...

 

[Peter Chamberlain]

Jake offers a good example of how through remote grading you can share your creative grading talent far further than your suite. I have been to dozens of facilities now that use remote grading every week, some daily for 50% of their work. Even if you are on the client end, non colorist end, of the connection sometimes this often it brings new clients into your facility who subsequently hire you for the majority of their work. It does take some firewall/setup expertise depending on the facilities but it's worth exploring.
Peter

 

[MichaelP]

Jake offers a good example of how through remote grading you can share your creative grading talent far further than your suite. I have been to dozens of facilities now that use remote grading every week, some daily for 50% of their work. Even if you are on the client end, non colorist end, of the connection sometimes this often it brings new clients into your facility who subsequently hire you for the majority of their work. It does take some firewall/setup expertise depending on the facilities but it's worth exploring.
Peter

Having facilities and services in multiple locations, this is a feature we will be taking advantage of - not only to better balance the workflow where the talent lies, but to offer even more convenience to the customer. I am looking forward to additional functionality in this area.

Michael