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

DaVinci Resolve 21.1

blackmagicdesign.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 217 posts

Re: DaVinci Resolve 21.1

#141

Post by __mharrison__ »

maxvij wrote: post #138

I make motorcycle travel videos for YouTube, and the bulk of where my time goes in the preparation of a timeline: chronologically cutting the highlights, synchronising dual camera footage. If Claude + Davinci Resolve will enable me to cut this time slightly, even if it's 10%, it's a welcome change. Ever since I made the jump from Premiere Pro, I've been positively surprised with how good Resolve is. Excited to try th…

I thought DaVinci Resolve could automatically sync camera footage for a few years now. I did it about 4 years ago.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 21.1

#142

Post by jpc0 »

W3cUYxYwmXb5c wrote: post #112
VeryAnonymous wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been using it in Linux for >2 years, including their special cutting keyboard (blanking on the name). Works without a hitch, including multi monitor, gpu acceleration etc I use it on Manjaro, installed via AUR. That said, IIRC it only works with nvidia GPUs and requires X11, and is supposedly finicky to get the environment right for (but the AUR gets it right for me)

I'd be happy to buy if it they add proper linux support. I have an AMD card and I don't feel like fighting with the install process.

I'm not entirely sure I would put that on BMD. AMD support on linux when it comes to actual compute capabilities has always been hit or miss.

Only recently has AMD even become viable for LLM inference on consumer chips and that is the same compute codepaths Resolve would depend on.

So effectively AMD is the issue, AMD on linux is great, AMD on linux for a workstation was kind of hit or miss.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 21.1

#143

Post by __mharrison__ »

darksaints wrote: post #99
jasomill wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only are the upgrades free, the full license is still only $295 and can be freely migrated between macOS, Linux, and Windows (unless something has changed, serial numbers can be activated on two systems at a time and transferred freely so long as you have Internet access). I'm no expert, but I never found Resolve materially more difficult to learn or use than Final Cut Pro or Premiere. And if you're doing anythin…

$295 one time permanent license with free upgrades and can be migrated between different computers? I don't have a single reason to do any form of video editing, let alone professional video editing, but that kind of pricing model makes me want to buy a license just to make sure that companies like this stick around.

Highly recommend the studio version. The ability to edit by transcript is worth the price alone.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 21.1

#144

Post by __mharrison__ »

cnj wrote: post #16

I've had Claude Code drive DaVinci Resolve before in three ways: - Generate .otio files that are imported. Unfortunately, .otio doesn't fully support everything Resolve can do. - Resolve has a scripting engine. Claude can write Lua scripts, then execute the script (through UI Automation) - Computer Use. It's quite token intense, but it works. I didn't try it, but for the paid version, someone also built a MCP server…

I spent a few tokens last year trying to create a Python lib for native (undocumented) Resolve files. I was making progress, but it was slow (I ended up scripting Resolve in different ways). I imagine that current models could reverse-engineer the native file format relatively quickly.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 21.1

#145

Post by thefz »

tonyarkles wrote: post #68
embedding-shape wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd give you $100K no questions asked if you manage to get something even close to Resolve with 2K Astra/Fable prompts, polish included. You vastly underestimate how much work goes into "polish" when software with huge surface area is decades old.

I think there's a really interesting tension between what you're saying and what the parent post is saying, and it's something that's been discussed for a long time but LLMs are throwing a new wrench into it: a given user probably only uses 5-10% of the features of a piece of software, but across the whole body of users you get close to full coverage. I use DaVinci Resolve for editing GoPro, Canon DSLR, iPhone, and D…

> a given user probably only uses 5-10% of the features of a piece of software

Then vibe your own 5% editor, but saying that a software so mature and complete as Resolve can be done with some AI and time is something I expect coming from the mouth of a teenager, not an adult.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 21.1

#146

Post by kolibril13 »

The Claude connector is a nice idea, but there are lots of Python APIs missing in Resolve. Even simple interactions like moving a clip 3 seconds in the timeline will not work with the MCP. I just tried it, and got only the message: "Resolve's scripting API also has no way to reposition an existing timeline item".

Re: DaVinci Resolve 21.1

#148

Post by _jjj »

They must be planning to be bought by one of these companies. Otherwise I dont see why they would not just continue with their strategy of integrating AI tools within their product. They just reduced DR to just another tool. This is like opening a five star restaurant in a food court at the mall.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 21.1

#149

Post by dahart »

mplewis wrote: post #140
dahart wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a lot of older practical VFX artists aren’t able to tell when CGI is terrible. Source? As a CGI VFX artist in a previous life, I disagree vehemently, and I think you’re spinning an untrue narrative. I’ve never met any VFX artists, whether practical or CG (and I’ve met many), who weren’t keenly aware of how bad effects were and how poorly they age. The few practical folks left are way less enamored of CGI than the C…

Ask George Lucas.

Sorry, ask Lucas what exactly? How would that support parent’s claim that practical VFX artists can’t tell when CG is bad? Lucas hasn’t directed anything for over 20 years, and he was a writer, producer, director, and studio exec. He had already been answering questions about practical vs CGI for decades before he retired. Yes he’s overseen some CGI effects that people complained about a long time ago, and plenty more that nobody complained about, and he was perfectly aware of what people think didn’t age well. More relevantly, I know the artists he employed were aware of what would age well before the films were released.

Re: DaVinci Resolve 21.1

#150

Post by settsu »

prollings wrote: post #76
neovive wrote: post #23

I've been using it for many years, and it's grown in power and functionality with every release. BMD has offered free upgrades to Pro users (with no subscription) for many years, which is refreshing given the current state of software licensing. For those upset with the new agent integration, keep in mind that one of the big knocks on DaVinci Resolve is that it's hard for beginners. Powerful tools like color grading…

Taking away some of the more monotonous and "uncreative" tasks in any job can be taking away some of the variety in the work. Variety is nice. Variety affords us downtime. As the job gets stripped down to its core function, while a machine keeps the pipeline full so that the work can continue uninterrupted, the downtime slips away. And great for beginners, now they get to pay some chatbot company to cover the gaps le…

This concept of, say, "productive downtime" was the topic of an article I encountered/skimmed not long ago: "There are no easy calls anymore" https://www.customerexperiencedive.com/news/agents-are-overl...

Editing to add my own salient tl;dr: shifting the "easy" tasks onto AI agents leaves the human ones to shoulder the cognitively demanding loads, resulting in burnout.

There are nuances, of course, but if you imagine that while once a human might have been responsible to move 500lbs a day, broken up into primarily small loads, now a robot is moving anything under, say, 20lbs and the human is left to only carry the heavier loads across the same time period so is now hefting 50 or 100lbs at a time and required to do across the same day, so now they're moving 1,500lbs a day.

Post reply on HN