[Solved] DaVinci Resolve Lite for Linux request

Yup, that's a shame and seems completely short-sighted, but unfortunately Blackmagic seems to fall into the category of those "traditional" software companies that don't see the potential in expanding Linux usage because they can't see beyond the numbers in their marketing spreadsheets. Oh well, maybe someone else will step up to fill the gap.

[Joshua Helling]

Well, it's kind of a cart before the horse kinda thing if i'm honest. We only support the Linux version of DaVinci resolve on a very specific set of hardware that we certify. And even though the OS is free the hardware that we support in the software is not.

So it's a financial commitment. Also there is no installer right now as on Mac or Windows. It's essentially a disk image that gets installed on the HDD of that machine.

So at the point that you've committed to the hardware, the software is a very small thing.

I could suggest that if all you'd like to do is see that resolve is right for you, that you could install the free version on a Windows PC, or Hackintosh and see if you like it. If that works and you feel comfortable with the software aspect, then you can buy the full version and the supported hardware.

well it is just upsetting that Davinci Resolve for Mac and Windows can run on any hardware, and Linux version support only special hardware, when if BMD was able to make Resolve run on Windows machines there should be completely no issues to make Linux version be as the one for Windows and run on any computers. Linux support most hardware available for computers like Windows does. And it feels really upsetting that Windows and MAc users can take the advantages of BMD amazing software on any decent computer when Linux users can only get it with special hardware which is not accessible in many countries.

I fully realize what advantages the specially designed hardware gives, but if Windows and Mac users were presented with generic hardware support, why can't Linux users be treated the same?

unfortunately the suggestion to try it on Windows or hackintosh is not the best, because Windows to my personal experience is a terrible investment. I have it and regret it. But that is a personal opinion, which is more likely to be the same for most Linux users, that is why they use Linux, they are not satisfied with Windows or policies that MS came up with while Hackintosh is illegal and against the law, at least this was like so a year ago when I read articles about it.

We can not make arguments with BMD because it is your developed software and BMD takes the road map they see best fit their needs.

But as a possible client I have a feature request to recognize Linux users same way as you did Mac and Windows users. Maybe the Linux market looks small because people can;t afford the dedicated hardware, but if Linux users could buy Resolve and use it as Windows users on their regular decent computers you would see a different portrait of the market and its possibilities. After all, you managed to make it work on Windows and Mac OS X.

Another reason to think about it is that MS with Windows 8 made some really not attractive decisions and most video production professionals are not likely to upgrade and it is a question how long will they keep us with win7, while no one knows how long will Apple support their pro line, after the last surprise of theirs, many people who use pro gear from Apple are no longer trusting Apple.

Just my two cents.

Anyway, thank you to BMD for developing Resolve and making it be accessible for MAC and Windows users. It is a very impressive software for color grading.

Well, it's kind of a cart before the horse kinda thing if i'm honest. We only support the Linux version of DaVinci resolve on a very specific set of hardware that we certify. And even though the OS is free the hardware that we support in the software is not.

- Joshua Helling

This is exactly right. It's really easy as a software consumer to forget about the complexities involved in making the OS work together with your software. The problem with linux support isn't on the part of the software creators but on the part of drivers support. The hardware manufactures need to see the power of the OS and the market potential.

Linux audio software is just now starting to be taken seriously by companies like Harrison Consoles. (Highend audio console manufacturer - harrisonconsoles.com) However, it has been a slow process because of the driver problems encountered with Firewire and USB Audio. It took a decade for the Jack Audio Connection Kit (jackaudio.org) to become recognized as mainstream by software developers.

Video is worse off than audio. OpenGL is still a nightmare for developers to work with reliably. Davnci Resolve uses OpenCL which is supported by newer cards. But Linux support is in its infancy. Because of the low price tag of the OS hardware vendors don't feel pressure to support Linux.

Companies like RedHat (Centos and Fedora) and Canonical (Ubuntu and children) do a lot to advance the viability of the Linux market. But it is slow to get graphics cards companies to release drivers to the group of people most likely to reverse engineer their proprietary work.

Like Joshua is saying, this is a cart and horse problem. It's not a matter of desire its a mater of ability. BMD has shown how deeply they desire to embrace and enhance the Linux software ecosystem. They are in bed with Linux. But because Nvidia and ATI have less confidence in Linux companies like BMD are left waiting on them to catch up and smell the 21st century.

I don't think Joshua is in anyway saying that they don't WANT to move forward with a wider Linux support. Just that they don't have the ability to do that just yet. My guess is that in 3-5 years BMD may have the hardware support they need on the average consumer Linux system (Ubuntu et al.) with the growing support of OpenCL. This should add the missing piece needed to let BMD continue pioneering the Linux front for video software. We can hope anyway...

While specialty hardware may have support these type of things get intricate. For the audio systems I build I have to modify the Linux Kernel with Ingo Molnar's (from RedHat) patches. This type of invasive modification doesn't fit well into the paradigm of traditional installers.

Until we have good graphics card drivers DaVinci Resolve on Linux makes no sense. This is why I firmly believe the next big wave of software trends in Linux will be application specific OSes based on Linux. We can already see BMD moving in this direction. That is probably the best thing that could happen for any of us.

This will all take time. But it's not something to get discouraged or impatient about...

I know this has been a while since the last post.. but I am interested in finding out now if the upcoming July release of Davinci 12 Lite is going to run on Linux now, or if it's still only Windows/Mac based. If that is the case, assuming I buy a camera that comes with it, will the full version run on Ubuntu/Debian/etc Linux? Or is it still a special version of hardware that must be purchased for 30K?

[Peter Chamberlain]

The Linux dongle is included with the Mac/Windows dongle when you purchase the BMD DaVinci Resolve panels. The Linux version of Resolve only operates on a specific version of CentOS, or its binary equivalent RedHat, as provided in our installer that comes with the dongle. That installer formats the system disk and creates partitions with the appropriate install config and drivers etc. There are no plans to offer support for other versions of Linux or a Lite version.

Hi,

I am not sure what BMD panels are.. does that come with say the Ursa Mini when I buy that with the full version of Resolve? Or are the panels the 30K+ hardware setup?

I was hoping to avoid having to use Lightworks.. seems Resolve would be so much better with BMD gear.

I am not sure what BMD panels are.. does that come with say the Ursa Mini when I buy that with the full version of Resolve? Or are the panels the 30K+ hardware setup?(

These are the BMD panels: https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve/control

Yes, retail is about $29K and includes Mac / Windows / Linux dongle. It's the only way to get into Linux.

My guess: They figure if you can spend $30K on a control surface you've got a staff engineer (or hired a consultant) who can tune Linux.

I'd love to see a set of cheaper, smaller first-party panels (say, around $5K-$6K) that come with a Linux dongle. We'd likely move at least one, possibly both of our Windows Resolve systems. It's fine for BMD to say they won't provide tech support to Linux installs except on hardware from their qualified list, so this doesn't necessarily have to create much overhead for them.

I'm supporting author's initiative.

I'm using Lightworks NLE from EditShare and also I'd like to see obtainable professional color grading solution like DaVinci Resolve for Linux platform (I'm using Gentoo Linux amd64).
Of course in the future if I'll grow in this movement, speciality I'll be able to buy full pro version but for now it's not possible for me so Lite version for Linux is very appreciated.
Thanks for attention.

Here's a vote AGAINST Resolve lite for Linux. Why would a paying customer of a professional system want development and technical support resources taken away from them only to go to low budget entry level users? You can't just "release" software to the wild, it must be supported by a team of people - that team of people is currently already stretched to their limit without getting 300 emails a day on how to install from RPM that they would be getting if they released resolve lite for linux.

No - keep the support and development team on the enterprise solution please.

kthx!

Here's a vote AGAINST Resolve lite for Linux.

that's an interesting idea!
but to stop the professional linux branch would look much more consequent to me.

many linux developers would be happy, if their their efforts and voluntary work will not be abused by entrepreneurs, that only try to make the big money based on free software achievements, while giving a away the much less powerful toy variants to the poor masses in a kind of PR-campaign, strengthen only a few big monopolists and the usual stupid business against the free software eco system and the reciprocation of giving.

but don't care so much about the support needs of this negligible few linux addicts. they are used to act and think independent.
I dare say an absolute rudimentary package of resolve lite would be enough for them. everything else could be managed within their community and by distribution maintainers.

well -- perhaps they would write too much critical bug reports. an old habit in this milieu, that is hard to silence.

Here's a vote AGAINST Resolve lite for Linux. Why would a paying customer of a professional system want development and technical support resources taken away from them only to go to low budget entry level users?

I'm sure that's a very realistic reason to keep the price where it is. And anybody who follows history should be aware that the original version of Resolve for Linux was $700K (for the most fully-featured 2009 version), which was not that long ago. Even spending $70K for that kind of functionality to day is a bargain.

Just wanted to double it.
I'll not continue this kind of political discussion: this is BMD's deciision: to make the Lite version avaliable for GNU/Linux platform users as for other polular OSes' users or to not make it.
I just want to say that for me Davinci Resolve Lite for Linux is something I'm now missing. The LWKS for editing + Resolve for colour grading/correction is just impressive and unability to use it at home is really disappointing. I don't have thousands of bucks to spend it for panels, I don't even have the enough space to install them at my 40 sq. meters apartment where I have only 6 square meters of my own personal space where I also need to live not only work on cut/correction And I think there are a lot of people living in the same conditions who do want to use GNU/Linux in their full production chain and do want to use DaVinci Resolve Lite on Linux. I think if Leonardo was alive he'd have wanted to do this
So please. If it's possible, please make this. EditShare already made: maybe this is the turn for entire platform and the future for filmmaking? Many Linux users are familiar with debugging tools and can understand if there will be need in some deep testing, bug reporting and other stuff to get software to work.
Anyway, thanks for developing such a great software. Even if it's not avaliable to me now. Just thank you.

Same as Maksim I'm using Lightworks for edit and Resolve Lite for color correction. My goal is to create Linux-based workstations, not for costs but for stability. I have bad experience with Windows, and not good with OSX. Because I'm a prosumer I'm not aware about all of available hardware, so I don't expect that everything will work OOTB. I need to simplify my workflow and optimize time&costs of production.

Currently I'm trying to install Resolve Studio on Manjaro/Arch Linux based system. I'm working on dedicated installer, getting all dependencies together and putting all into separate environment for Resolve. The goal is to create package for automated installation of Resolve Studio for Arch/Manjaro distro. I'm also a software developer, so I can solve many issues myself and create automated installation.

But there are some limitiations on the Blackmagic Design side:

• Possibility to download Resolve archive from direct URL (currently the website is generating a time-limited download token)
• The "Lite" version of Resolve for Linux
• Agreement (or just no objection) for making custom installers for oficially unsupported Linux distributions

There is almost 2016. BMD, please reconsider a linux market.

* * *

Why Arch/Manjaro Linux? They are a rolling-release distributions, so packages are up to date and mostly bug-free. Manjaro should be more stable than Arch, because maintainers do additional testing before submitting new packages. Also provides awesome hardware detection tool and is simpler to use for end user (easy installation, easy upgrade, easy kernel switching). Manjaro is very stable, reliable and fastly fixed if something goes wrong. Both uses AUR (Archlinux User Repository), a big database of packages created by community.
On the other side Centos 6, the system required for Resolve, is very old. I've tried Centos 7 but it is very buggy. Many of applications crashes on the same hardware, and distro includes buggy-and-old versions of many packages. This is not a solid-rock base for production system. That's why I went back to Arch-based system, but a little enhanced - the Manjaro. And it works great!

On the Arch/Manjaro OS we have automated installation for Lightworks, which is not oficially supported by EditShare. But installation is simple as clicking on package name and "Install" button. This cannot be simpler. And finally I bought a license in a few minutes! It just works!

I'm also working on a toolkit for pre-production steps, as importing&converting footage from AVCHD, slowmotion (60i->24p), denoise, stabilization, mostly based on ffmpeg. It should be available in AUR soon.

I belive we can create a great system for prosumer postproduction based on Linux workstations.

I read all the posts above and realised they are written a while ago.
However, I am still wondering: Will there ever be a payable DaVinci Resolve version for Linux ?

I'm on the way completely switching my creative workflow from OSX to Linux (90% reached so far).
The main reason is because Apple stopped producing this beautifully nice power horse workstations, Adobe is doing this stupid monthly cloud abo and returning to Windows is not an option for me.

However, with Blackmagic Fusion (which is an amazing tool) I got a pretty cool After Effects replacement and I'm planning to buy the full version to get use of OFX plugins.
After searching, downloading and trying every available video editing software running on Linux, I ended here in this forum. There are many tools available, but not one is nearly as good as DaVinci (or FinalCut, or Premiere).

Releasing a Linux version is not as complicated as it was a few years ago.
Nowadays you can pack the whole application into an appimage (appimage org) which then can be run on any Linux distro. I guess most of us are willing to pay up to $995 for a license.

Is there any hope or do we have to donate and wait until Kdenlive, Openshot and all this guys build production usable video editing tools... ?

i think that the short answer is no.

no for a lite version, and no for a 999+tangent panels. as a client of me once said to: "we too have to pay rent".

Hi, Marc.

It looks like there will be no Linux version of Resolve, so I'd recommend focusing on Lightworks as the only one professional NLE for Linux. Upcoming V14 will have new simplified layout for beginners and users who does not require maximum flexibility (the classic layout will be still available).

I've "forced" myself to learn Lightworks months ago, and now I can say that there is no fastest editor from the list of NLE's mentioned above (fastest mostly in terms of editing speed). There are two dedicated hardware controllers and special keyboard which improves the editing speed, and both works with Linux.

Lightworks have a decent tools for color correction. The FX subsystem is based on nodes (but a little different than the Resolve's one). There are no specialized tools like motion stabilizer nor tracking, but primary CC and limited secondary CC are possible. Windows and OSX versions have BorisFX and BorisGraffiti available - both improves Lightworks on the FXs ground. Unfortunatelly they does not work with Linux.

It's worth mentioning that some FXs are programmed in shaders language, so anyone can write custom effects. There is a quite big community FXs pack available.

The pricing is OK. At the beginning you may work with free version and then buy 30-day license for finish / delivery. For a long term using it is better to buy 1 or 2yrs subscription (major updates included) or the outright one (one pay for unlimited time, but without major updates - a traditional pricing model).

For everyone else - this is not a marketing nor sponsored post. I'm a just regular user. An user who was driven out here by talks and rants about requiring pro soft for FREE. But same as Marc I'm just preferring Linux ecosystem over Windows and OSX, and this has nothing to do with their prices. When I've dropped dreamings about Resolve on Linux, and go with only one pro route available - a Lightworks, I can do my work (mostly editing) using preferred platform. Professional colourist will have to use Win/OSX + Resolve, of course, but I'm not a colourist and don't need this tool anymore.

Kind Regards,
Marcin

...as a client of me once said to: "we too have to pay rent".

yes, i also think, BMD should pay the rent for squeezing profit from utilizing linux in their high end solutions!

sharing more equal access to davinci resolve with other fellow inhabitants of the open source ecosystem would look like a fair compensation to me...

...as a client of me once said to: "we too have to pay rent".

yes, i also think, BMD should pay the rent for squeezing profit from utilizing linux in their high end solutions!

sharing more equal access to davinci resolve with other fellow inhabitants of the open source ecosystem would look like a fair compensation to me...

really you're trying to make that argument?

let's go back in time 6 years, where no resolve lite exist and the linux version was 100k+: was it better then?

if BM strategy is soo against the consumer, try to buy a baselight. then you will tell me.

most of what i hear is:

"you did not do anything for ME: I want it, (near) free. I WANT IT NOW.!"

m2c

...as a client of me once said to: "we too have to pay rent".

yes, i also think, BMD should pay the rent for squeezing profit from utilizing linux in their high end solutions!

sharing more equal access to davinci resolve with other fellow inhabitants of the open source ecosystem would look like a fair compensation to me...

really you're trying to make that argument?

"you did not do anything for ME: I want it, (near) free. I WANT IT NOW.!"

m2c

Yep, some weird expectation which is growing and growing.

Having been and still in the industry when color correction systems regularly were accepted to cost half a million to a million dollars as a starting point I am more than happy with the ability to field a system that can run a 4K professional DI for 60 Thousand dollars and allow companies to keep artists and engineers employed.


Everyone is entitled to their opinion but if 60K is the top end buy-in for a professional DI machine with software and a color panel I would be thanking Black magic for making the industry more available to the general artists rather than asking for more things for free at this point.

let's go back in time 6 years, where no resolve lite exist and the linux version was 100k+: was it better then?
if BM strategy is soo against the consumer, try to buy a baselight. then you will tell me.

i think, you know my position (and it's quite simple!):
i'm not asking asking for any utterly unrealistic fantasies, but just for equal access conditions on all platforms!

and btw. i'm not one of this youngsters grown up with an iphone in his hands!
is used linux even in pre-kernel-1.0 days -- long before davinci!
and i did serious artistic work utilizing this operating system quite early (e.g. 'horizontal radio').

that's, why i do not sympathize with companies, which didn't abolish this lines of artificial demarcation and apartheid until now. ;(

The frame of reference for someone coming from big-iron color grading days is very different from the frame of reference of open-source enthusiasts/evangelists.

To old-school color timers and graders (I include myself here) Blackmagic has revolutionized our business and made it possible for individuals to set up shop for a tiny fraction of the costs it used to take. And that includes the $29995 Linux seat.

I also have been using Linux for many years for my own education and interest and was pleased that I could run Linux on hardware that was not able to run the various then-current bloated versions of Windows. But I do not confuse the pleasures of open source and its efficiencies with the history of the professional color business and the engineering costs involved there.

Blackmagic has no obligation to play by the externally imposed rules of the open source movement. And as has been stated repeatedly, those long term customers who do pay for enterprise Resolve would not be well-served to have their engineering needs siphoned off and given away. Blackmagic is a business, not a hobby.

I personally would love to be able to run a Linux workstation off my Resolve license, it would save me considerable money, I could forget the heartbreak of Apple's abandonment of pro workstations and I wouldn't have to go back to Windows, but I can't put myself ahead of the ecosystem that has served me well, by and large. Blackmagic has done much more to help me, than to harm me.

The frame of reference for someone coming from big-iron color grading days is very different from the frame of reference of open-source enthusiasts/evangelists.

well -- real open-source enthusiasts/evangelists would ask for not less than opening the source of resolve!

that's something, i would consider as utterly unrealistic.
therefore i'm only asking for equal access on all platforms. this looks like a much more rational arguable claim to me.

...Blackmagic has revolutionized our business and made it possible for individuals to set up shop for a tiny fraction of the costs it used to take...

was it only blackmagic?
don't you forget all those people, which did build the operating system and a lot of useful libraries and tools, utilized by BMD just like a little dwarf on the shoulder of giants?

But I do not confuse the pleasures of open source and its efficiencies with the history of the professional color business and the engineering costs involved there.

this argumentation only makes sense, if resolve for linux would use a distinct code base and would show significant benefits over the releases for other platforms -- but that's not the case!

it's in fact just the same software and the differences in performance and features on the various platforms are marginal.

the only plausible reason to ask for equal access to the linux binaries should be seen in the simple fact, that it is very uncomfortable to switch the operating system or utilize complex virtualization solutions just to run this particular software, if you prefer to do all your other daily work on linux. but otherwise i would simply suggest, that everybody enjoys the operating system of his choice!

it really doesn't make any sense, to mystify resolve for linux as something exceptional -- a kind of the holly grail.
no -- it's just the same software running on a different operating system and the same hardware!

sure, you could argue, that many people are not aware of this simple facts, and BMD should take advantage of this stupidity and squeeze as much profit as possible out of it. yes -- somehow i have to agree -- that's how businesses often works outside of the open source paradise.

but from a more enlightened point of view, you could perhaps also agree, that no soft- and hardware manufacturer will regret any chance to widen the customer base of his products by relative simple concessions.

sure, not all linux users will immediately order a physical panel from BMD, if they could use resolve under just the same conditions as on the other operating systems. but those few, which really have some use for it, could get the professional control devices for just the same price as before. so -- what's the problem ...even from an economic point of view?

are you rally scared, that a bigger linux user base could find more bugs? nasty little show stoppers, which could be fixed before they appear in really cost intensive production critical high end studio circumstances?

Blackmagic has no obligation to play by the externally imposed rules of the open source movement.

sure -- it's only an ethical obligation -- nothing, we can enforce...

but, i still think, equal treatment of linux would have only positive consequences for all involved sides.

...
was it only blackmagic?
don't you forget all those people, which did build the operating system and a lot of useful libraries and tools, utilized by BMD just like a little dwarf on the shoulder of giants?

In case you're not aware, DaVinci ran on turnkey Linux systems, at a much higher cost, many years before Blackmagic bought DaVinci.

It's only since BMD started providing software-only versions that people started demanding that the historically enterprise version be made "equal".

I get your point, I just think you're not looking at both sides of the equation.

The consequences to the paid engineers and high end facilities might not be positive at all.

Do you get paid for your work? Or do you do everything for free? And if the latter, how do you live? Rhetorical questions, you don't have to justify anything.

I get your point, I just think you're not looking at both sides of the equation.
The consequences to the paid engineers and high end facilities might not be positive at all.

that's indeed a very interesting hint!

there where lots of requests for resolve on linux here in the forum since it became easier accessible on the other platforms, but we never got plausible answers from BMD, why they do not want to treat this operating like the others. it looked totally absurd to most of us linux users, because it was quite obvious, that all needed code is still there. nostalgic references about historic price tags, as often argued by old fellow colorists, and the general mystification of the linux setup made it even harder, to apprehend the real situation in a more rational way. therefore i really welcome you pointer to the mighty lobby of davinci maintenance engineers. that's at least a plausible argumentation.

well -- i even feel a little bit of solidarity. it's not easy to neglect this very practical threats of a grown community of experts. but you also have the see the importance and reasonable interest of many linux users in access to this this particular software on the other hand.

a more equal access to resolve for linux would fill a significant gap in the range of available software for this operating system. it's in fact the only application, which i use frequently in virtualized windows environments, because there is no adequate native replacement available. for all other daily work i prefer linux based solutions. that's a very important aspect, and this objective fact hasn't changed over all this years fighting with BMD for concessions.

Do you get paid for your work? Or do you do everything for free?

sure! -- i even earn my living mostly by using free available open source tools and expertise in this filed of software and development of fresh open source solutions for art projects -- that's no contradiction per se!
and it's not only possible for myself -- profound trained davinci maintenance experts would survive as well, if this software would be available to linux users just like on the other operating systems.

We shouldn't mix opensource with Linux port. These are two different things. I think that most of Linux users needs working port rather than opensourced one. Nobody cares about opened sources, excluding opensource developers and few fanatics.

There is also a common myth that Linux users won't pay for a software. This comes probably from opensource community (Linux != opensource, but relies mostly on it). Regular and business users, who works with Linux, does not care about opensource.

There are only two reasons against porting software to ANY other operating system - technical issues and the market size. Technical issues (in the Linux context) are related to the multiple OS distributions (many different environments), which can be solved by opened sources (no company won't do this) or tools like AppImage or Docker. For many years there were no tools like AppImage, that's why open sourcing was a preferred way of distributing software for the Linux platform. But this was changed last years.

The second argument, a market size, is probably most important. Nobody wants to spent time & money without ROI. This is pretty reasonable. Resolve works with many external libs and hardware, which may provide many incompatibilities on a new platform, so without selling hw there may be no serious business here.

I have to pitch in here also. Nowadays every time I dual boot into Windows just to run Resolve Studio I check the BMD website praying there would be a new Resolve for Linux announcement.

Now that Apple have stopped producing real computers we really have no other option but to move over to Linux for any serious work. It does not matter if we have super good software if we don't have any decent hardware and OS:es to run them on. Windows really is a dead end for me (and I believe many others as well).

The current Fusion release for Linux is awesome! I really hope Resolve will follow one day...

We shouldn't mix opensource with Linux port.

well -- but you should also differentiate between typical windows or mac applications, which are not very well suited for cross platform use, an the special case of davinci, which was written and centered around linux for a long time.
that's why it doesn't make much sense IMHO to ask adobe for porting its tools, but resolve would only need some slight modifications of its licensing management modules to enable exactly the same features on linux as on the other platforms. it doesn't need huge additional investments, it's just a political and marketing decision.

I think that most of Linux users needs working port rather than opensourced one. Nobody cares about opened sources, excluding opensource developers and few fanatics.

even through i agree, that we shouldn't ever expect an open source release of a commercial application like resolve, and a closed source binary release under similar conditions as on other platforms would be already a significant improvement, i do not share your general ignorance about the importance of open source.

that's not just an dogmatic question. i just have to look back, how much troubles i have seen concerning those few closed source applications often used on linux hosts (skype, adobe reader, flash...). closed source binaries simply do not fit very well into an open source environment. simply accepting all the the attendant symptoms, you often risk to loose most of the important benefits that make linux systems attractive to some of us. if you really like the flawless way of maintaining and updating a debian based system and dependency management, it's highly optimized and efficient debugable interplay within the context of all other installed libraries and drivers, etc, you will hardly see windows typical installation procedures and application individual update requirements as a desirable paradigm change. it only makes your system much more insecure, unstable and harder to maintain.

but that's an issue, which isn't only characteristic for closed source offers. a lot of more complex contemporary open source multiplatform projects use quite complex continuous integration solutions, external build services and windows like distribution paradigms in the meanwhile. some of them even mimic the stupid barriers of subscription for access and similar questionable achievements of the closed source world. we simply have become accustomed to app stores, PR spam and privacy violations to such an extend, that some people take it as an inevitable requirement of professional attitude, to copy all those nasty practices. a lot of characteristics of open source approaches, which formerly have drawn a clear distinction and the real attraction of this kind of ecosystem, are slowly vanishing this way. i personally would state, that open source culture passed its peak.

but beside all this more general considerations and observations, we simply have to ask, why opening the source code doesn't fit very well for commercial products like resolve?

protecting intellectual property and advantage over competing products, is only one reason for this restriction. an other one, which doesn't look less important, has to be seen in the simple fact, that graduated commercial offers of different feature sets (e.g. resolve studio), are nearly impossible to enforce, if the souce code is available to everybody.

if you really do not care about open source and acceptable licensing conditions at all, you will easily find cracked versions of resolve for linux in the darker corners of the net right now. but this isn't of much interest to usual linux users. in this respect, they are usually much more consequent and exemplary then windows and mac os users, which often do not feel much disinclination to install dubious cracks of wide spread commercial software (and trojans) on their machines for private use. most of the serious linux users i met, are much more sensible to security concerns and strict ethical decisions. they are more like people, which quite consciously choose organic food, if the have the chance to choose, not just the cheapest and most fashioned offer. i think, that comes closer to the real difference between both worlds.

There is also a common myth that Linux users won't pay for a software. This comes probably from opensource community (Linux != opensource, but relies mostly on it). Regular and business users, who works with Linux, does not care about opensource.

that's easier asserted than proved!

i don't think, we should whitewash and idealize the economic conditions of linux software development and marketing to much. outside of the public sponsored academic sphere and some other rather small niches, it's hardly possible to make a living as an open source developer.

take the natron project as an example. they really did an incredible job over the last few years. they wrote an professional grade free multiplatform video compositing software from scratch, which is IMHO in many respects more powerful and handy than BMDs fusion. it's an extremely capable team of developers. i'm sure, if you would give them the necessary funds, they would be able to build a more modern open source alternative to resolve as well. but don't ask about their actual economic troubles and worries!

but somehow i also have to agree with you:
davinci resolve could be an extraordinary exception in this respect!
a professional editing and mastering solutions for linux would fill an evident space, which could turn out as very successful even from an commercial and advertising effectiveness point of view. that's a very uncommon initial situation, which can not be asserted for many other applications.

Martin,

To be clear - I wrote this from business / consumer perspective. As a software developer I appreciate opensource solutions, collaboration and communities. But we/they shouldn't force anyone to do it that way. And yes, there are some businesses built top of open source product(s), but not every software manufacturer should/can do it that way.

From the technical perspective it is better to provide opened sources, because whole "dependency hell" is solved by distro maintainers (also hired in companies like Canonical or RedHat). But, as you stated here, there are some intelectual properties to be secured, and compilation process is a common way to do that (reverse engineering is prohibited by law/license, in general).

But many companies invests in Linux (mostly kernel) like Intel, IBM, RedHat, Samsung. They do that for some reason, probably business one. I belive that companies like BMD can do similar, if they find some revenue from such work.

BMD has Linux port of Resolve, yes, and probably codebase better than Adobe (in terms of portability). But maintaining any software is not cheap and can't be free. There must be real business around this. Even for pure opensourced projects there is business somewhere.

I belive that BMD have the best perspective and they know what they are doing. There may be "tons" of problems to solve, even licensing of the 3rd party libs (codecs, fxs, etc). They officially said nothing about Linux port, right? So there is a little hope and Fusion may be a kind of the market test. But on the other side we should no longer wait nor ask for Resolve. It is better to support companies developing actively their products also for Linux.

BR,
Marcin

@waltervolpatto: thanks for the short answer, now its clear that I have to dig around somewhere else...

@Marcin Nowak: already tried Lightworks, its a bit a weird workflow, it seems that I have to decide to learn Lightworks or Blender (which seems to be pretty powerfull in video as well). Both have workflows and shortcuts we are not used to.

About opensource:
Linux softwares don't have to be opensource nor free.
I also have a product on the market which is opensource, there are many people complaining: why do I have to pay for your tool?

Thats not the point.
Mac is dead for pro users. Most of us will not return to Windows. So there is only Linux. I'm glad that for example Adobe is not making Linux CS, it would destroy the freedom we have on this amazing ecosystem.
There are quite a few great tools out there, which I support with donations. The weird thing on Linux is that most softwares are opensource but they never work together, everyone trying to cook their own soup instead of teaming up together, share their knowledge and sources to create even better softwares.

For the guys who don't know much about coding: Nearly every software out there is build on tools which are opensource and even free available. Without GNU tools, fffmpeg, gstreamer etc. we would not be there where we are! Pay for software, donate for freeware, do not support proprietary giants.

do not support proprietary giants.

but still the whole thread is a whine because resolve is not free...

the irony....

do not support proprietary giants.

but still the whole thread is a whine because resolve is not free...

the irony....

No. Because it is not available for Linux Operating System in a similar way as for OSX/Win. Will I get a Linux version of Resolve with one of BMC camera or even standalone 1k$ license ? AFAIK no (correct me if I'm wrong). And that's the point.

BR,
Marcin

no you don't get it, that is BM professional market, move on.

if you want it the price is 29.995, 1/20th of 10 years ago: a bargain.

no you don't get it, that is BM professional market, move on.
if you want it the price is 29.995, 1/20th of 10 years ago: a bargain.

but do you have a reasonable explanation, why BMD doesn't see any needfulness to make money from all mac and windows users in just the same way as for linux? this operating systems have much more relevant market share, and the revenue would be in all likelihood much more worthwhile...

it's just this very obvious discrepancy and the simple fact, that many ordinary linux users are still forced to switch to windows or mac os, if they want to make any use of resolve at all, that can not be relativized by this kind of presentment.

no you don't get it, that is BM professional market, move on.

I don't need this tool anymore, as I said before. I'm not a colourist.

I'm pointing some kind of disproportion and Linux platform ignorance. Not from BMD, but from people like you (a professionalists who can do their work on any OS, even weak one). You don't care, we do. Please give us possibility to talk about Linux port whenever we want, come on.

BR,
Marcin

no you don't get it, that is BM professional market, move on.

if you want it the price is 29.995, 1/20th of 10 years ago: a bargain.

I think that the current "Linux" version is not what most Linux users want. What BMD is offering right now is a complete and dedicated Resolve SW/HW configuration based on Linux. It's basically an OS image that runs on specific certified hardware and the result is a workstation that is streamlined to run Resolve. It's awesome and perfect for big installations, but there is no proper way for anyone to, let's say, install Resolve for Linux on their laptop (There may be some form of hack. Please correct me if I'm wrong).

If we leave the price tag out of the equation for a moment there is still no way to run Resolve for Linux the same way as we can run Fusion for Linux. That is the kind of Linux product we are talking about.

For many people that are used to working in a Unix based environment, whether it's OSX or Linux, switching to Windows will be painful. I was happy as long as I could run Resolve on the Mac but with current Apple hardware out of the game there is no real choice anymore but to aim for Linux. It will be a challenge for all of us, both as customers and for companies like Blackmagic.

I love Resolve, I really do, there is no other software out there that can compete, but my dislike for Windows is even stronger. As soon as there is anything out there that can do what Resolve can do but as a proper Linux package. I'm gonna have to make the change...

I think that the current "Linux" version is not what most Linux users want. What BMD is offering right now is a complete and dedicated Resolve SW/HW configuration based on Linux. It's basically an OS image that runs on specific certified hardware...

yes -- that's true to some degree, but it isn't as hard to work around this kickstarter specific idiosyncrasies.
there are no specific hardware or kernel modification required, just the usual BMD hardware drivers and a little bit of setup, which can by reproduced on other distros as well.

sure -- a more modern and handy installation procedure would be nice as well, but that's not the crucial point. it's more frustrating, when you bypass all this installation obstacles and finally see a dialog asking for a linux dongle (well -- in fact it explicitly says: you should download the free version! )

right now the installation procedure looks very similar to autodesk flame premium -- which in the meanwhile also has abandoned turn key marketing and is now available as pure software on a subscription base. for educational institutions you can even get it for free, and it's still a very powerful and instructive software!

another worth mentioning difference between resolve for linux and the editions for the other operating systems has to be seen the fact, that resolve for linux doesn't work with third party panels. only the quite expensive BMD panel will work.
i think, that's a real show stopper for professional colorists -- people like walter (although he looks more like one of those few talented exceptional cases among professional colorists, who are really able to maintain a linux box themselves, without entirely depending on other specialists of a big facility [please correct me, if i'm wrong]).

If we leave the price tag out of the equation for a moment there is still no way to run Resolve for Linux the same way as we can run Fusion for Linux.

yes -- fusion is available in a very user friendly package on linux. but you shouldn't overlook the fact, that there are some other alternatives available for composting tasks on linux (nuke, natron, mamba, flame, blender etc.). sure, fusion also has it's strengths -- and it's very nice, that we now have another attractive alternative --, but frankly, i hardly ever use it. i personally prefer other choices.

you simply can not compare this circumstances in the compositing area to resolve. this particular application would indeed fill a gap!

For many people that are used to working in a Unix based environment, whether it's OSX or Linux, switching to Windows will be painful.

exactly! -- it's really painful to be reliant on stupid virtual machines and a unloved operating system, just to utilize resolve.

I love Resolve, I really do, there is no other software out there that can compete, but my dislike for Windows is even stronger. As soon as there is anything out there that can do what Resolve can do but as a proper Linux package. I'm gonna have to make the change...

take a look at "nuke studio". it's not the right alternative if you are very focused just on typical colorist work, but in some other respects it's a very interesting software. resolve could learn a lot from it's very flexible/customizable user interface, universal scriptability, fantastic conforming and versioning features, and complex workflow integration capabilities. in all this respects it could be seen as a real alternative to resolve on linux, if not some very unpleasant attributes wouldn't look opposed. but take a look yourself. nuke non-commercial is available to everybody, easy to install even on linux, and definitely worth a test drive!

I think you guys got your wishes!

Hey Walter,

I missed part of what he said. Are we going to be able to use our normal Studio dongle to run Resolve on one of the Linux OS's he mentioned?

Thanks,
Robert

[Peter Chamberlain]

Yes
The existing Mac/Windows dongle will now support Linux Studio. Note ProRes encoding on Mac only.

The previous 'Linux' dongle that was only available with the Advanced Panel will continue to support ProRes encoding on Linux.
The previous 'Linux' dongle will also now support Mac & Windows with ProRes encoding on Mac.


There is a no cost and $995 installer version for Linux that you can put on a CentOS/RHEL 7.3 system.

I will post the read me a bit later as there are a few other nice things in this release.

are you guys offering a free version of the new panel?

[Peter Chamberlain]

are you guys offering a free version of the new panel?

It's before 6am here and i've been up for 3+ hours so that's the best line so far today!

will the new panel (the 3k $) work on Linux?

hello peter,
does this include compatibility with non blackmagic panel like element on linux?

[Rohit Gupta]

will the new panel (the 3k $) work on Linux?

Yes of course. And the Micro too.

Both new panels supported on macOS (including Mac App Store), Windows and Linux. Both with the free and studio version.

will the new panel (the 3k $) work on Linux?

Yes of course. And the Micro too.

Both new panels supported on macOS (including Mac App Store), Windows and Linux. Both with the free and studio version.

where I can order one?

(my wife will definitely kill me if I buy one)

[Peter Chamberlain]

hello peter,
does this include compatibility with non blackmagic panel like element on linux?

Linux only supports BMD Micro, Mini and Advanced Panels

hello peter,
does this include compatibility with non blackmagic panel like element on linux?

Linux only supports BMD Micro, Mini and Advanced Panels

gosh, and i was getting over exited...