imac 3.4GHz Quad-core Intel

i was thinking about using an imac 3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7 with a aja Lo XT Box for a thunderbolt drive and NEC MultiSync PA271W-BK-SV 27" Widescreen LCD Monitor for color grading with Resolve. Any thoughts on this?

i was thinking about using an imac 3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7 with a aja Lo XT Box for a thunderbolt drive and NEC MultiSync PA271W-BK-SV 27" Widescreen LCD Monitor for color grading with Resolve. Any thoughts on this?

As long as you have a minimum 16GB DDR3 memory and the fastest GPU, the GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5 memory, the iMac is fine for most purposes. All Resolve functions will not be real time of course but some may be.

As for the grading monitor, if you want to be able to grade larger than standard HD resolution, I like this Eizo 27" 2560x1440 calibrated monitor:
http://www.eizo.com/global/products/col ... index.html

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Thanks Rick i will have 32gb DDR3 memory and will look into that monitor.
Pat

The "NEC MultiSync PA271W-BK-SV" is a fine GUI monitor, but not a video monitor, ergo not a grading monitor.

[CaptainHook]

The "NEC MultiSync PA271W-BK-SV" is a fine GUI monitor, but not a video monitor, ergo not a grading monitor.

I graded a music video that was #1 on the NZ music charts here on that monitor, it looked exactly as i expected when broadcast. Sure it's not a "grading monitor", but that's not necessarily right for everyone IMHO anyway:

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4597&p=30871#p30871

Sure it's not a "grading monitor", but that's not necessarily right for everyone IMHO anyway

You're right, a grading monitor isn't necessary for someone not doing grading. if you want to call yourself a colorist and charge clients for your services as such, the bare minimum you need to have is a properly calibrated color critical monitor. Some grading systems allow you to use a computer monitor for this purpose, they tend to be turn key solutions, that can control the OS, OS version, gfx card, and graphics driver, as well as choice of GUI monitor,so that they can have certainty that the image is properly displayed. Resolve is not designed like this. It's much more simply designed to use equipment specifically built to accurately display a video image.

I'm glad you were satisfied with the way your program looked, there is however a very good reason why if you walk into any professional grading room you won't see a colorist working off a computer monitor. It's like mixing with headphones, if you get reliable/accurate results, it's a bit of a coincidence.

[CaptainHook]

It's like mixing with headphones, if you get reliable/accurate results, it's a bit of a coincidence.

Actually, my background is music production and i was the previous Head Engineer here at one of the top 2 recording studios in this country ( http://www.yorkstreet.co.nz/people.php?id=captainhook ), i've been mixing in Headphones for the last two years even though i had access to my own very good monitors - Dynaudio BM15a's - which i've recently sold, including mixing the latest album for the NZ's Got Talent winner which i've just about completed on headphones. Sure it took me 2-3 months to learn the headphones initially and how they translate elsewhere, but it's doable. Not that i would recommend it to others, i would just never rule such things out.

I do understand your point and i'm not trying to be argumentative for the sake of it. It won't work for everyone and i know why you get frustrated by it. But while people are learning and just getting started with colour grading i think an option like an Eizo/Nec should be okay to use with Resolve (and the software should support working that way), people will do colour work in FCPX/Premiere/AE/etc on their pc monitors so i think Resolve should at least be a better option that they can learn and get started with. BMD need to consider this IMHO, they've invited in people to the software that won't be full time colour grading (or even want to be) and so they should at least give them the best chance possible with their existing setups. I'm not talking about professional grading suites here. Those should be unaffected by the change.

They're giving out free copies of the full version of Resolve with their camera. That's saying something IMHO. Resolve isn't JUST for professional colourists anymore.

I do understand your point and i'm not trying to be argumentative for the sake of it. It won't work for everyone and i know why you get frustrated by it. But while people are learning and just getting started with colour grading i think an option like an Eizo/Nec should be okay to use with Resolve (and the software should support working that way), people will do colour work in FCPX/Premiere/AE/etc on their pc monitors so i think Resolve should at least be a better option that they can learn and get started with. BMD need to consider this IMHO, they've invited in people to the software that won't be full time colour grading (or even want to be) and so they should at least give them the best chance possible with their existing setups. I'm not talking about professional grading suites here. Those should be unaffected by the change.

They're giving out free copies of the full version of Resolve with their camera. That's saying something IMHO. Resolve isn't JUST for professional colourists anymore.

Would be nice if I can send colour-correct 10bit video to a 10bit monitor displaying Resolve's GUI screen via mini-DisplayPort off an iMac but I think Apple limits their monitors to 8bit at the present. So it may be that Apple could step up to the plate as well in terms of their support of better graphics. Waiting for Apple to make a change to 10 bit might even be longer than waiting for the BMCC MFT. Still would support the direction your post is going, Captain.

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD