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

DaVinci Resolve – Photo

blackmagicdesign.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 307 posts

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#101

Post by atoav »

mastermage wrote: post #77
gyomu wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The short of it is that there’s no money in photography, compared to videography. Movies routinely have 8 or 9 digit budgets, with teams of hundreds of people who have to collaborate to make footage coming from dozens of different cameras look seamless and consistent. Meanwhile, $1M would be an insane budget for a photo shoot. You can see this in the actual skills of people working in the field as well. Anyone workin…

Counterpoint most of the Movies budgets is usualy spent on the actors and on the filming. Not on the editing team. There is also copious amounts of money in photography Alot of advertising is still static images and print.

Yes, but if the budget of the whole thing is high(er) they don't tend to cheap out on details that could mske or break it.

Or phrased differently: If your shoot codts a million a day it doesn't matter if your camera costs 400 bucks a day or 40. In fact they may ask you whether you really wanna go with the 40-buck camera.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#103

Post by divan »

divan wrote: post #70

Cautiosly looking forward to it. I shoot with A9 III (global shutter camera that makes 120fps _RAW photos_), and dealing with thousands of photos per shoot is a challenge. I don't use Adobe products and still looking for a good stack for photos processing, but it's an uphill battle. For culling there is nothing better than Photo Mechanic. Worth every penny. For editing, surprisingly, the best solution (performance/fe…

While we're on topic, I've been using DaVinci with this camera for a slightly unusual hybrid process. With a good light and lens I shoot slow-mo video (240fps FullHD or 120fps 4K) with shutter speed of 1/1000. Then I can take any frame and save it as a photo directly from Davinci.

I wrote 2 scripts for that:

- first is for keyboard shortcut that automates "Switch to color tab, Grab a still, Save a still to folder, Switch back"

- second for more advanced workflow where I put markers on the frames I like, and then it uses Fusion's Saver node to save images as EXR

This flow is even faster than culling with Photo Mechanic. In both cases I get 10bit PNG or EXR images that I can import into the photo editor. Workflow is far from the perfect yet, as it might need some adjustment when working with Log profile or different FPS (for 2nd script).

But aside of giving me an option of "shooting" video+photos at the same time, it blows my mind that it's practically "shoot photos 240 times per second and choose later", and how good the end result is. The bitrate of video is 280Mbps (4:2:2, 10bit) and while video compression quality is not negligible, the resulting "still photos"'s quality is more than enough for social media purpose. Photo example [1]

[1] https://drive.google.com/file/d/13So6ZuVx3dn2jZCw7cm3LkbzydF...

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#105

Post by InfinityByTen »

hulk-konen wrote: post #65
tech234a wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes DaVinci Resolve is supported on Linux. Unfortunately the free version of DaVinci Resolve does not include H.264/H.265/AAC support on Linux due to codec licensing issues though you can transcode it elsewhere first.

I think this will be the year of the Linux then. Native photo editor with decent ux was the missing piece.

I'm so eager to try this out today after work. I heard a lot of things about Darktable, but then it didn't really feel like the alternative to Lightroom I'd hope for.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#106

Post by InstaPage »

Foobar8568 wrote: post #40
georgemcbay wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They also sell a paid version, if you want a few extra features. And the great thing about the paid version is that updates are (so far) free with no subscription bs. I paid for it once like 10 years ago and still get every new version for free.

And from what I remembered, it wasn't a too expensive license, a few hundreds?

[dead]

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#107

Post by northernsausage »

I honestly hope there is a whole suite of middle and upper management at Adobe sweating right now. I'll wait for the reviews but this looks like a total win for me as 90% stills and already using resolve for the other 10% and having had 10 years of Adobe bleeding me dry whilst basically not developing Lightroom (the only tool I need) I am looking to jump, no LEAP from their subscription service.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#108

Post by RobotToaster »

amatecha wrote: post #78

It 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…

> It includes native RAW support for Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, Sony and even iPhone ProRAW.

I guess everyone forgot that Pentax still exists.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#109

Post by omnimus »

esperent wrote: post #50
arecsu wrote: post #31

This 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…

> Only Darktable seemed to push the technical capabilities of photo editing forward (AgX, parametric masks, tone equalizer, etc) As a casual photographer, I wanted to love darktable and I'm sure it's extremely capable. But the UI is just so hard to get to grips with. I've put a few hours into it, tried following some tutorials etc. but I have no idea what I'm doing there. I do have a fairly decent grasp of color scie…

There is even Darktable fork Ansel where they try to roll back lot of these ux mishaps.

Once you care only about editing and not cataloging then RawTherapee ends up being better editor for mr.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#110

Post by tablatom »

discopicante wrote: post #96
orbital-decay wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was always absolutely inexplicable to me. A lot of photographers are just resistant to better color tools (as in, actively arguing against them!) or are in deep denial about their existence. Photography is well behind videography in that regard.

I think this has been imprinted in the photographer world due to long-standing requirements from AP, Reuters, etc. on avoiding post-processing. Video has never had these constraints; post-processing is required to publish the works.

That’s interesting - how do they define that? Surely they don’t publish raw rgb?
Post reply on HN