DaVinci Resolve – Photo • Hacker News Board

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#51

Post by vasco » Tue, Apr 14, 2026, 5:19 AM UTC

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…

I know you have a whole narrative going but there's gotta be millions of "make my picture look analog" filters, that was the whole premise of Instagram, you can get specific effects for pictures to look like all kinds of specific cameras, so mentioning VHS like esthetics as something that doesn't exist is very strange.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#52

Post by dylan604 » Tue, Apr 14, 2026, 5:21 AM UTC

cuu508 wrote: post #23

dylan604 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's actually faster than working with an editor. what does this mean? it is an editor

Faster than to work with a human person who edits your videos.

that's just a funny claim from multiple angles. a professional editor working with professional shot footage is an entirely different creature than someone that can work with a pile of footage with no guidance to create something. feature film editors are different from documentary film editors which would be closer to content creators.

a professional editor will take longer as they are laughing/crying about the dumpster fire of footage dumped into their bay. a content creator is just going to yolo jump cut their way through it with absolutely no regards for the same criteria a professional editor would be looking for. you know, things like continuity, different angles, cut away shots and other things to make a clean edit. so yeah, something you just taped on your system with no regards to normal production quality will take a professional editor longer just to get their head wrapped around it.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#53

Post by buildbot » Tue, Apr 14, 2026, 5:25 AM UTC

vasco wrote: post #51

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…

I know you have a whole narrative going but there's gotta be millions of "make my picture look analog" filters, that was the whole premise of Instagram, you can get specific effects for pictures to look like all kinds of specific cameras, so mentioning VHS like esthetics as something that doesn't exist is very strange.

An instagram filter is to a 3D lut as a PB&J sandwich is to a Michelin star meal...

Let alone the other things listed.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#54

Post by tech234a » Tue, Apr 14, 2026, 5:25 AM UTC

InfinityByTen wrote: post #22

mturilin wrote: post #6

This honestly made my day. I’ve been looking for a way to manage my photos on Linux for a while. Lightroom has been the only reason I’ve stuck with a Mac. If I can switch to a photo editor that lets me process everything properly, skip the monthly subscription, and not have Adobe tracking all over my system—that’s exactly what I want. This feels like a dream come true. Really amazing.

I'm in a similar camp where I'm stucking to windows for that one software: lightroom classic (or CC as they call it). I'm happy to pay for a legitimate replacement that lets me go Linux native on a laptop. I'm fine even paying for the Adobe Cancellation tax from the money I save not buying Windows. On that note, is this supported on Linux?

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.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#55

Post by mimentum » Tue, Apr 14, 2026, 5:26 AM UTC

AussieWog93 wrote: post #42

bredren wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you there when BM produced the macOS compatible eGPU units in collaboration with Apple?

Yep, I don't remember a whole lot about them though. (Actually, anyone else from BMD here? Was that the product that the Industrial Designers won second place in the design awards for, losing out to the accessible playground?)

I didn't work at BMD but worked for a cine distributor supplying lenses to be tested. But yes, lean clean company that works well.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#56

Post by ksimukka » Tue, Apr 14, 2026, 5:28 AM UTC

AussieWog93 wrote: post #32

raincole wrote: post #10

How do they actual make money? I've been using Resolve for years without paying for it (and without thinking about its business model too much). It seems that they sell quite expensive professional hardware so I assume the software users are just compensated by hardware users?

I used to work at Blackmagic, wrote some of the peripheral code around BRAW and did some work with the Resolve guys up in Singapore. Used to have lunch regularly with one of the owners too. Need to check in with him again! At least back in 2019, BMD made a lot of money selling professional licences for DaVinci Resolve. I don't know exact figures but that part of the business was healthily profitable of its own accord…

I’m an avid user of Fairlight for almost a decade now. The accelerator card has an interesting history (as does Fairlight).

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#57

Post by vasco » Tue, Apr 14, 2026, 5:32 AM UTC

buildbot wrote: post #53

vasco wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know you have a whole narrative going but there's gotta be millions of "make my picture look analog" filters, that was the whole premise of Instagram, you can get specific effects for pictures to look like all kinds of specific cameras, so mentioning VHS like esthetics as something that doesn't exist is very strange.

An instagram filter is to a 3D lut as a PB&J sandwich is to a Michelin star meal... Let alone the other things listed.

I'm saying the things mentioned exist and gave example of one of the most popular consumer applications in the whole world already offering an entry level version of the same feature. Since that's what most people know about.

You have all those features already in professional photo software already as well. DaVinci is cool but it doesn't unlock anything like "make my photo look like VHS" that hasn't existed for decades by now.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#58

Post by porphyra » Tue, Apr 14, 2026, 5:37 AM UTC

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…

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.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#59

Post by Maxion » Tue, Apr 14, 2026, 5:38 AM UTC

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…

Yeah, the UI in darktable is not good enough to go through a large shoot. When I've tried to use it I always end up doing all my selection in PhotoMechanic and then in darktable I just do editing. But even that UI/UX is terrible.

Re: DaVinci Resolve – Photo

#60

Post by Maxion » Tue, Apr 14, 2026, 5:41 AM UTC

Pyrodogg wrote: post #45

robertwt7 wrote: post #34

I always try out new photo editors but I've kept coming back to LR because of familiarity + number of presets / plugin (Dehancer) that I've bought. I think there should be some presets converter somewhere that helps us with moving to other software, not much can be done for plugin though. regardless I'm a happy user of Davinci Resolve and this is amazing!

> The Photo page gives you everything you need to manage your entire image library from import to completion. You can import photos directly, from your Apple Photos library or Lightroom, and organize them with tags, ratings, favorites and keywords for fast, flexible management of even the largest libraries. This is how they're going to win over LR users. It always comes back to it not just being a decent photo editor…

> ...library management is turning into more of what keeps me shelling out.

Library management whas how Lightroom got started. Back in ~2005 or so when the first betas came out that was the big selling point and why I and other photographers jumped on it. Back then, the editing tools in Lightoom were still behind photoshop, but the library management was intuitive and fast.

The other comparable tool (at the time) is PhotoMechanic, but that one is quite different in terms of library management, though far superior to Lightroom in many regards. But it isn't very functional as an overall library tool IMO.