Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DaVinci Resolve 18

blackmagicdesign.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 150 posts

Re: DaVinci Resolve 18

#91

Post by throw_m239339 »

magnio wrote: post #69

During my high school, I had a bunch of (amateur) projects involving video editing. As a broke student in a poor country who didn't want to just torrent Premiere and call it a day, I started exploring several FOSS video editors: - OpenShot: simple interface, but crashes quite a lot - Kdenlive: clunky and crashes way too much - Shotcut: good for quick edit and the most stable out of the three The biggest problem I had…

There is also Blender Video Sequencer, which has a terrible UI but also a good compositor.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 18

#92

Post by frzen »

Youden wrote: post #26
frzen wrote: post #7

At work I regularly transcode a Resolve editor's video to AVC-Intra 100 50i using Avid Media Composer or Adobe Media Encoder because Resolve can't export interlaced video properly. Looks like they still haven't improved interlaced video support which is a shame because the rest of the software is great but it just isn't fit for purpose for me

Is it common to use the editing tool to output a delivery format? I find that their encoders are universally pretty terrible so I always output an intermediate format then transcode it with something more capable. I'm just a hobbyist when it comes to editing though.

I work in news and that's common. I don't mind what anyone uses to edit or transcode but for our equipment to broadcast it, at some stage it has to become 1080i50 and its quicker for someone to submit that directly. It's a small feature that Resolve would benefit by having imo.

If they send in xdcamHD 50 or avc intra 100 it'll be ready for us to check and send to playback as soon as the file transfer is done. If they are transcoding it themselves, or expecting us to do it that can cost another 2-3 minutes minimum. Thsg time makes a big difference sometimes.

We accept basically anything though, the current thorn in my side is HDR video from phones. I have an ffmpeg command to make them rec709 but they still look awful and we are really only using phone footage when time is an issue.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 18

#93

Post by mardifoufs »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #51
capableweb wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, DaVinci is ridiculously cheap, because the software is not how they earn their money, it's via their hardware. If you scroll all the way down to the bottom of the submission page, you'll notice a bunch of hardware for controlling DaVinci and its modules. It ranges from $400 to $50,00 and they have even more expensive hardware as well. This is where they get most of their profits from, and where the larger compan…

> Yes, DaVinci is ridiculously cheap, because the software is not how they earn their money, it's via their hardware. DaVinci is ridiculously cheap because the entire company is owned by three guys, at least one of whom has a personal, burning disgust for the way that the television industry (in particular, the Australian television industry) used to be run back in the day. I distinctly remember getting a bizarre com…

Wait DaVinci is developped in Australia? Bummer. At least it does not require an internet connection to use, but even then...

(I usually don't really care about potential backdoors from a foreign nation state, but the Australian police has shown itself to be really really helpful with foreign law enforcement agencies. The FBI recently used them to set up a massive sting operation that would've been illegal for the FBI to do on their own.)

Re: DaVinci Resolve 18

#94

Post by filmgirlcw »

blagie wrote: post #62
alpaca128 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For every Blender we have countless other projects getting almost zero donations or support. Why take that risk if the current model works for the Resolve team?

From my perspective, if a product is open source, it means I'm not at the whims of a company which might or might not go under or change models. I have huge amounts of content from decades ago locked up under no-longer-existing proprietary formats. The companies long went out of business, activation servers are gone, and in most cases, there's no way to find the .exe files. My LaTeX files still work. Open source does…

OK, but that doesn’t answer the question. That shows why you personally would feel better about it, but it says nothing about why a company should change a model that is working for them to a model that would require more work (it’s likely that Resolve contains components and libraries that would be very difficult to open source and would require rewrites — to say nothing of the general work required to make a project open source and accessible) for frankly very little gain.

Again, given the various codec, driver, encoding, and other patent and license encumbered issues related to video stuff, I would seriously be surprised if this was something BMD could open source even if they wanted to. And for what? The 0.0001% of video professionals who insist on using an open source piece of software to use for their work?

It works on Linux not for the free software crowd but because video professionals who are using specialized Linux servers for high-end editing workflows (using almost entirely proprietary software, I might add) requested it. As a side effect, desktop Linux users also have access to a pretty great editing suite.

I like open source too. I think that it is generally a better development model.

I also understand why specialty tools often aren’t open source and think that history has proven to us time and time again that the financial upside to OSS is not what people wish it would be.

I’m not saying it wouldn’t be nice. But for Black Magic, I honestly see absolutely no compelling reason why it would be better for them to invest a bunch of money and resources into changing a model away from something that works to pacify an extremely small number of users who aren’t even their target audience.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 18

#95

Post by capableweb »

Jackson__ wrote: post #90
capableweb wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What OS and hardware are you using it on? Regularly use it (Resolve 17) on both Windows and Linux with larger projects than that (100s of 4K clips, multiple audio tracks, added effects, color grading and more) and haven't encountered the issues you've mentioned at all. When I try the beta versions (including the beta of 18), I've run into many problems, including seemingly random crashes, but never for the stable ver…

I'd like to believe it is my hardware, but other video editing software, as well as software in general, runs perfectly fine on my GTX1080/i7-4790/32GB Ram system. I've tried it after every single clean re-install of windows 10 over the past few years, with every major stable and beta version they offered at the time, while never managing to not run into issues. In the end I've come to accept that there simply must b…

Yeah, that sucks... If you ever end up coming across it again, try to send over the project file over to support to see if they can figure something out. The times I've written them, they've been very responsive and helpful (but I am a Studio license holder), not sure how support works for the free version.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 18

#96

Post by vindarel »

magnio wrote: post #69

During my high school, I had a bunch of (amateur) projects involving video editing. As a broke student in a poor country who didn't want to just torrent Premiere and call it a day, I started exploring several FOSS video editors: - OpenShot: simple interface, but crashes quite a lot - Kdenlive: clunky and crashes way too much - Shotcut: good for quick edit and the most stable out of the three The biggest problem I had…

Maybe try the latest Kdenlive a shot, it appears very stable. I'm dozens hours in already, no issues so far (Mint, latest Kdenlive with snap), and others also report it improved drastically.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 18

#97

Post by capableweb »

cebert wrote: post #88
capableweb wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you happen to miss the part where it says there is a free version available? It doesn't get much cheaper than that.

I did miss that initially. Being new to DaVinci, it’s still a little unclear to me what all the packages listed at the bottom of the page offer vs the free offering.

Packages at the bottom is hardware for professionals (or at least semi-pros/serious hobbyists) who want a really streamlined hardware interface to the Resolve software. It's in no way needed to use or get good with the software, just helps when you want to move faster.

The free offering is really generous compared to other video editing software, and you only need to upgrade if you want the software to really be able to take advantage of your hardware, or you have more specific needs.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 18

#98

Post by cs702 »

mmaunder wrote: post #77

Our entire production pipeline is Resolve. I’ve been pushing Adobe users to move to Resolve for years, because of the pricing and pace of innovation. We’ve been using a device from SNS for remote collaboration and this release just removed the need for that. Every release is packed with fundamental new value, and doesn’t sacrifice stability or performance - it usually improves both. Great software engineering! Combin…

I'm rather curious: Why and how does a software security business like yours use or need professional nonlinear video editing solutions like Resolve?

Re: DaVinci Resolve 18

#99

Post by Shadonototra »

nsomaru wrote: post #70
Shadonototra wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

being open doesn't mean it becomes free to use, you can still sell your licenses https://www.aseprite.org/ successful product, and is open source: https://github.com/aseprite/aseprite there are many examples like that being open source allows your users to participate in the development, fixing things, and adding new features the company wouldn't have done themselves because: lack of budget, or "too risky" this is wh…

I’m curious why you say Unity will have no choice but to go open source?

it already is happening (kinda), they are modularizing their engine, and all the new parts are made open source

biggest part what their graphics stack https://github.com/Unity-Technologies/Graphics (only the scripting part)

competition is growing, unreal is fully open source, and more and more people have been asking for the source, there was even some drama few years ago when unity DMCA'd (if i remember correctly) a reference source code of unity engine (decompiled) on github, then unity made it officially available on their github: https://github.com/Unity-Technologies/UnityCsReference after users complained about it

wich already proved effective and caused them to fix a huge performance issue shortly after: https://github.com/Unity-Technologies/UnityCsReference/pull/...

Re: DaVinci Resolve 18

#100

Post by eole666 »

35mm wrote: post #89
mmaunder wrote: post #77

Our entire production pipeline is Resolve. I’ve been pushing Adobe users to move to Resolve for years, because of the pricing and pace of innovation. We’ve been using a device from SNS for remote collaboration and this release just removed the need for that. Every release is packed with fundamental new value, and doesn’t sacrifice stability or performance - it usually improves both. Great software engineering! Combin…

What do you use as an After Effects equivalent?

The Fusion part of Davinci Resolve is a sort of node based after effects. I might try it someday, apparently it can even import 3D scenes from blender.
Post reply on HN