Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Resolve for Fred  (Read 5183 times)
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« on: December 09, 2011, 08:28:21 AM »
ReplyReply

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?68426-DaVinci-Resolve-8.2-for-Windows-Public-Beta-now-available-...
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2011, 12:13:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Chris,

You always bring good news !

Thanks very much for the link.

I download it tonight with no delay!


Cheers.
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2011, 12:59:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Chris,

You always bring good news !

Thanks very much for the link.

I download it tonight with no delay!


Cheers.


Fred,

If you don't have it yet, get a board like the tangent wave.

It works with cine-x, apple color, Di Vinci, most systems.

It will speed grading 200%.

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: December 09, 2011, 01:01:11 PM by bcooter » Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2011, 02:13:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Downloaded and installed !

No, I didn't have it yet. After the Scratch experience-evaluation that didn't end to fully convince me , I was waiting for Blackmagic to release their Windows versions (because the only platform I have that has enough power for it is a window one).

Now...the black cherry on the porring cake is: another learning curve on the hunting board...grrr

I hope it's at least minimally intuitive. 
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2011, 03:21:43 AM »
ReplyReply

The Lite version has been enhanced and it's also now integrated with Avid.

------a note out of topic: There seems to be a move in the industry from Prores 444 to DNxHD. It's commented all over the internet in specialized websites.

The Alexa is now recording DNxHD as MXF file and there is a new version on the way (copy-paste): DNxHD 444, will record at 440Mbit/s at 10 bit depth and will be provided as a free upgrade during the first quarter of 2012.

now the current 10 bit records at 220MBit/s.

http://www.fdtimes.com/news/arri/arri-alexa-dnxhd-on-avid/

This is important because it seems that finaly there will be other options than the Prores dictature one wich is an unacceptable locked solution: you don't run FCP you can't write it, just read. (and the QT wrapper is frankly a bit crap and it's not crossed platforms wich is super important for costs issues)

Maybe the upgrade to Media Composer 6 makes more sense than I thought first, just the new 444 codec is a good thing. (in other words, it seems that Avid is going to settled in the middle-end market, where FCP is, as the major player). This could have consequences on wich system to invest in and-or priorize for smaller structure-independant filmakers
.--------end note------

I've seen an interesting Resolve evaluation on a pro colorist's website, the guy has worked with both the very expensive Nucoda (highly integrated with the Avid platform: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is4t5v2yQZI) and the Da-Vinci and even the free version (lite) can compeat with no shame with the ImageSystem product, wich is impressive. Each system has it strenghs and wicknesses but no "winner" according to the colorist.

Now that Da-Vinci runs DNxHD, it's going to be a straightforward process with Avid.

Things are going in the right direction step by step.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 11:18:24 AM by fredjeang » Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #5 on: December 10, 2011, 02:43:56 PM »
ReplyReply

In regards to the Tangent.

It takes about 1 hour to figure out the tangent wave control surface, about 1/2 a day to get it down where it is intuitive.

It works with apple color, red cine-x, nuke, scratch and di vinci (probably more).

Now when it comes to coloring, I think the easiest is Apple's color app.  It's not perfect, it's not as full featured as most, but it is a system that you can learn in a day, vs. something like scratch that is totatlly unintuative.

When and if we get a break, we're probably going to bring in some on site instruction in Nuke.  I figure if you going to learn any third party software, you might as well learn one that does a lot vs. one that just colors a clip.

I predict the next wave of digital content will require retouching and effecting on motion clips, at the same level we now do with still imagery.

Every call I receive for new work is about motion, though we still shoot a large volume of still imagery, motion accounts for the majority of our profit, all of our growth.

The one question every client asks, is can you make the motion imagery look like your still imagery and the only answer to this has to be yes.
   
In regards to Quicktime, I personally don't care if it's 444 or 442 as I see very little difference, unless your heavily compositing, but quicktime is a nightmare when it comes to how it reacts to different apple operating systems and different NLE's.    It has a gamma issue that will make you pull your hair out.

I also believe that in a short time, we'll get a more simplified workflow, Where one or two systems does 90% of what you need.

Maybe one system for dailies, one for editing which also include color, effects, compositing and ouput.

Right now were still hobbled by the specialized systems that are non intuitive and require going from graphics suite to graphics suite and back.  Those are fine if your working on a two year movie, or a $700,000 Televison spot, but with convergence, time allowed, budget restrictions, the only thing that holds the process back is not the talent of the artists, or the cameras, it's the post production system.   The process is still locked in 1997 and traditionalists are going to scream to high heaven when someone finally comes up with a powerful software that makes it more effecient and takes it to a more concise process, but it will happen.

The market is going that way and the market (i.e. the people that write the checks), always prevails.

IMO

BC





Logged
stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2011, 03:32:18 PM »
ReplyReply

BC wrote:,...the only thing that holds the process back is not the talent of the artists, or the cameras, it's the post production system.   The process is still locked in 1997 and traditionalists are going to scream to high heaven when someone finally comes up with a powerful software that makes it more effecient and takes it to a more concise process, but it will happen.

The market is going that way and the market (i.e. the people that write the checks), always prevails."


Totally agree. And - holds breath, waits for the howls to start - I'm brave enough to guess that with the next (rumoured to be massive) update of FCP X we might be pretty close.

I see similarities with the DSLR vs MFDB routine that many of us have been through. Eventually we get it: the client doesn't give a flying f#%k what gear we use as long as we touch their emotions. Give them what they want (and are paying for) and they'll love us. Fail to do that and...nuff said. FCP X does a good job, lacks a few bits but is fast and easy. Fast, that's the clincher. I often meet people who teach the next generation of film makers and they don't come to the game with our baggage. They master FCP X five times faster than my old trained brain does and they love it. Like it or not, things are changing. Accept it, go with the flow, or bury your head in the sand. It's pretty simple really. IMHO.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2011, 04:13:38 PM »
ReplyReply

In regards to the Tangent.

It takes about 1 hour to figure out the tangent wave control surface, about 1/2 a day to get it down where it is intuitive.

It works with apple color, red cine-x, nuke, scratch and di vinci (probably more).

Now when it comes to coloring, I think the easiest is Apple's color app.  It's not perfect, it's not as full featured as most, but it is a system that you can learn in a day, vs. something like scratch that is totatlly unintuative.

When and if we get a break, we're probably going to bring in some on site instruction in Nuke.  I figure if you going to learn any third party software, you might as well learn one that does a lot vs. one that just colors a clip.

I predict the next wave of digital content will require retouching and effecting on motion clips, at the same level we now do with still imagery.

Every call I receive for new work is about motion, though we still shoot a large volume of still imagery, motion accounts for the majority of our profit, all of our growth.

The one question every client asks, is can you make the motion imagery look like your still imagery and the only answer to this has to be yes.
    
In regards to Quicktime, I personally don't care if it's 444 or 442 as I see very little difference, unless your heavily compositing, but quicktime is a nightmare when it comes to how it reacts to different apple operating systems and different NLE's.    It has a gamma issue that will make you pull your hair out.

I also believe that in a short time, we'll get a more simplified workflow, Where one or two systems does 90% of what you need.

Maybe one system for dailies, one for editing which also include color, effects, compositing and ouput.

Right now were still hobbled by the specialized systems that are non intuitive and require going from graphics suite to graphics suite and back.  Those are fine if your working on a two year movie, or a $700,000 Televison spot, but with convergence, time allowed, budget restrictions, the only thing that holds the process back is not the talent of the artists, or the cameras, it's the post production system.   The process is still locked in 1997 and traditionalists are going to scream to high heaven when someone finally comes up with a powerful software that makes it more effecient and takes it to a more concise process, but it will happen.

The market is going that way and the market (i.e. the people that write the checks), always prevails.

IMO

BC


I think you resumed very well.

I found also Scratch unintuitive and too much fancy designed (the automatic pop-up when you touched the screen sides ended to put me on nerves for ex) but in the end rather messy.

Nuke is really powerfull, but very complicated. I have it and this is without doubt the most powerfull software I ever had. It is not unintuitive, but it is so complex. Best to get a Nuke guru in your team or hire.
I don't see myself entering in a deap learning curve in it, but it's in the studio and I can always hire a specialist if needed or do basic things like keying etc...
It's totally configurable and resolution free. It's also powerfull for stills but the thing is that it "misses" a proper timeline so we are fully into the 2 milion bucks production style.
The viewer show the Lut result but in fact all is done on backstage in 32 bits in linear.
The integration of stills in motion and in 3D is impressive. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vW7K-AwFAuM&feature=related


I also can't see the differences between the 444 and the 422 unless really really big artillery is applied to the file. You said it well, the gama shift is the main prob. But ( irony...I had a link somewhere I can't remember where some Avid gurus had solve the issue, and it worked when follow the steps they suggest, no more shift. I need to find this link again and I'll post it because iot was very informative).

I do too beleive that we are walking to a one or 2 max all-in-one powerfull solution. Apple shooted the first with FCPX (I'd really like the marketing departments to forget a little bit those fashionable "X" or "PRO" everywhere), but it's just the beginning and every major software maker will join the party.

I totally agree that the wickest part nowdays is the post-prod tools we have. They are made for a time that is disapearing and replaced by other way to make it work, faster and more cost effective with great resuts.

copy-paste: traditionalists are going to scream to high heaven . Yes, they will ! we're going to hear them up to the asteorid belt and it will be a great day (in fact it is already slowly but surely happening).  I've already read some guys screaming in Creative Cow when resolve putted Da-Vinci Lite for free, others are saying that the traditional workflow is in flame and it's unfair and bla bla bla and we are all pirats...

« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 06:50:35 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1921



« Reply #8 on: December 10, 2011, 04:15:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Totally agree. And - holds breath, waits for the howls to start - I'm brave enough to guess that with the next (rumoured to be massive) update of FCP X we might be pretty close.

+1

We can only hope that the howlers were heard - certainly the drum of marching feet to Avid & Premiere was heard  Smiley
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #9 on: December 10, 2011, 04:18:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Oh come on guys! You sound like little virgin colege girls.

Avid don't bite, she wears high heels and she's experienced. But if you prefer a teenager blonde who's not ready to cover your most obscur desires...

(I know, some men like teaching).
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 04:23:56 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1921



« Reply #10 on: December 10, 2011, 04:50:01 PM »
ReplyReply

...just waiting for a couple more XXs, Fred!
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2011, 04:59:18 PM »
ReplyReply

It's gona be a hot winter!
Logged
stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #12 on: December 11, 2011, 01:52:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Fred, Avid is a high-maintenance woman. Monica from Friends? "She" makes unreasonable demands of me. FCP X loves me for what I am - just a guy trying to make stuff that connects. If I spent my days editing feature films, then I might need a glamorous partner to impress the studio bosses. But I don't.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2011, 02:06:05 AM by stewarthemley » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #13 on: December 11, 2011, 03:04:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Fred, Avid is a high-maintenance woman. Monica from Friends? "She" makes unreasonable demands of me. FCP X loves me for what I am - just a guy trying to make stuff that connects. If I spent my days editing feature films, then I might need a glamorous partner to impress the studio bosses. But I don't.



I think that what you are all seeking is a high-maintenace chick that will keep you in the style to which you want to become accustomed. Seems a fair desire.

Rob C
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #14 on: December 11, 2011, 05:30:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Fred, Avid is a high-maintenance woman. Monica from Friends? "She" makes unreasonable demands of me. FCP X loves me for what I am - just a guy trying to make stuff that connects. If I spent my days editing feature films, then I might need a glamorous partner to impress the studio bosses. But I don't.

Stewart,

I understand the reasons of choosing a FCPX. They are perfectly valid and honest.
That said, I'd also like to stress some nuances about the high-maintenance post-prod partner.

IMO, it's not just about one software, the picture is probably wider than that and not just for High-end productions. FCPX is a Mac platform product only. And if I'm looking at all numbers involved, it's not a money saver nor a timesaver.
If I need power, I mean a serious working tool and not those fancy glossy screens Macs that are inexpensive but useless for me, it costs way more to build a powerfull Mac workstation than a PC one.

The real kids that are doing motion and are not gifted by their parents fancy Macs, use PC because it's cheaper and they tend to use Premiere and After Effect and Vegas as their primary tools and are faster at it that any of us with a FCPX. I don't know any kid here than can have the luxury to be on a Mac workstation. So FCPX the tool for the new kids? Well, I do think it is probably more the tool for the current photographers that love their macs and are moving motion the easy way to be honest.
I know it sounds a little direct but I do think it is truth.

Then, I won't buy anymore a software that is not cross-platform. Avid is, Premiere is too. FCP, Edius and Vegas aren't.
For less cost of a Mac + the inexpensive FCP, I got a powerfull PC and an Avid or PP5 suite that meets the requierements of the current generations (see for ex the Resolve requierements)
I got speed and reliability guaranted, wich is also not the case with this FC because it's not really ready yet.
The time I'd spend to make it works, adding plug-ins and third-party softwares etc...I'd edit right now anything with any media in Avid with the peace of mind that those can also be sent to others.

It's not just about the software and it's not a matter to impress the boss, specially when one is it's own boss and has to make the numbers work. It's a matter of taking all the paremeters into consideration.

Then, the QT wrapper is problematic, the Prores codec is not cross-platform either, and to conclude I'd like to say that many seem to think that Avid is slow and oscur, it is not. It used to be, true, but since the version 5, it is a really much more user-friendly and a dead fast editor. It just needs more training-experience. Do you really imagine that for the active pros working on those NLE time and efficiency is not a concern? Well, it is even more than most FCPX users because they earn money with it and therefore a slow-unreliable solution would be out of question, and they also need to make things that connect emotionally. But they take to time to learn and master their techniques enough so they are really fast. Not a software that would miraculously solve the problem.
This is not aimed to you nor to any particular poster, but I think that a lot of things should be putten in place because there is a lot of mystic circulating everywhere.

In my Avid training, I didn't had so far to join any MC forum because all the issues I've found in the path where easily answered-solved and never had to buy just one third-party stuff because everything you need is already inside and tested-ready. That is also part of the equation in terms of usability wich I personaly call (sorry for the image but it's the easiest I found) a "peace of mind factor".

Honestly, I think that there is too much Apple opium in this industry that sort of blind and rejects whatever is not Apple. Apple is great, is good, but it's not specially the grail. In fact it's far from being ideal in many aspects.
And the addiction is such that many FCP7 users are waiting the guru to send them, nobody knows when-how, the FCPX #2 or 3 that will finally work...
while in the meantime, other brands are also seriously working and also moving things forward with maybe less publicity but certainly more reliability today.



 
« Last Edit: December 11, 2011, 12:33:06 PM by fredjeang » Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1697


« Reply #15 on: December 12, 2011, 03:59:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Avid MC <-> Resolve roundtrip works... sort of.
Avid refers to reel (i.e. tape) names.
Exported AAF's from Avid MC don't carry the reel names correctly to Resolve (I assume this an issue within Resolve as the software refers to the clip name as reel name).
Therefore when you render the color corrected files from Resolve and import them back into Avid they first won't relink to the original sequence created in Avid MC.
You have to modify the reel names first (i.e. modify the reel names of the rendered files from Resolve so that they match the original reel names imported into Avid) before you can relink them to the original sequence. It's a bit cumbersome... but it works. Actually it works quite well.
Which shows where Avid comes from ... old school tape and reel management. Which is not not bad at all (prioritising the original reel names over the clip names is in fact a good thing! Except that for instance MTS files do not contain actual reel names).
I expect things will get sorted out on behalf of DaVinci and on behalf of Avid in future updates. So there is some hope on the horizon for a fluent workflow with Avid and Resolve.
Resolve Lite is a GREAT tool ... especially if you consider it's freeware.
Kind of funny that we still have to create workarounds with those basic things. But so be it...
It's only getting better ... Avid in conjunction with Resolve is (or better: will be soon, hopfully) a very strong workflow... the 2-Software solution mentioned above.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2011, 04:01:56 PM by tho_mas » Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #16 on: December 13, 2011, 03:19:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Tho_mas.

You saved me for more headaches.


At the moment I'm not going to enter into it because I have indeed an overdosis of learning curves of all kinds and want to focus in what I already started-have for awhile and put priorities.
It's even possible that I end grading into Nuke (as I saw that some advance Nuke users are doing with great results  http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/255/382#382).

I'm not sure if I want now to move into MC 6 when I still need to see things on the 5 I have. It's now an update every 6 months!

Cheers.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2011, 03:28:59 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad