DaVinci Resolve – Photo
81–90 of 307 posts
Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo
#82Davinci resolve studio is awesome. I've been editing my videos by transcription for the past two years. Can edit very quickly. Takes about 2 hours to edit a one hour video. It's actually faster than working with an editor.
Some do all the editing for you. Others make you do the editing. Some do "in between". Where they do some edits but then ask you to validate, etc.
That middle group has always been annoying because it has been a huge context shift. By the time I go through their questions, it's typically easier for me to do the full edit myself.
No, I'm not editing a feature length movie.
Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo
#83This is incredible. There are soooo many features that Davinci already handles so damn well when it comes to color editing, that I only wish they existed in photo editors. To the point there were people posting videos on Youtube about hacky workflows to edit RAW photo files on Resolve and export each one as JPG files haha. Only Darktable seemed to push the technical capabilities of photo editing forward (AgX, paramet…
Darktable is great, but notably, it doesn't have any neural network-based denoising, even though that's now standard in Lightroom, Capture One, and other apps. Darktable only has rather outdated wavelet and non-local means denoising. So a photo that would be perfectly fine at ISO 6400 in other apps will still look grainy, or worse, splotchy in Darktable.
- It appears to be an out-of-band pre-processing stage (run the image through denoise to produce an intermediary TIFF), unlike most other parts of the program.
- All AI features are gated behind compile-time flags which default to off.
Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo
#84It took me a damn long time to find this information, so I'm pasting it here: > It includes native RAW support for Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, Sony and even iPhone ProRAW. I looked all over for a more technical page that just lists these kind of specs in bullet-point form, but apparently they refuse to communicate information about their product in this way? The "Tech Specs" page only seems to show information about hard…
Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo
#85Please release me from Adobe Lightroom.
Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo
#86Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo
#87Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo
#88It took me a damn long time to find this information, so I'm pasting it here: > It includes native RAW support for Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, Sony and even iPhone ProRAW. I looked all over for a more technical page that just lists these kind of specs in bullet-point form, but apparently they refuse to communicate information about their product in this way? The "Tech Specs" page only seems to show information about hard…
Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo
#89This is incredible. There are soooo many features that Davinci already handles so damn well when it comes to color editing, that I only wish they existed in photo editors. To the point there were people posting videos on Youtube about hacky workflows to edit RAW photo files on Resolve and export each one as JPG files haha. Only Darktable seemed to push the technical capabilities of photo editing forward (AgX, paramet…
Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo
#90It took me a damn long time to find this information, so I'm pasting it here: > It includes native RAW support for Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, Sony and even iPhone ProRAW. I looked all over for a more technical page that just lists these kind of specs in bullet-point form, but apparently they refuse to communicate information about their product in this way? The "Tech Specs" page only seems to show information about hard…
Have you tried Affinity Photo?