Blackmagic Forum

Bob Rooney wrote:I am running Beta3 and tried importing AVI file from 2006. It failed without any message. All my MP4 files worked fine. I tried to upload a 30 second AVI attachment but was too large.

AVI is a container which can hold 100s of codecs so don't expect that every AVI will work.
Support has been added for GV HQ/HQX codecs. There are only few codecs which Resolve imports with AVI container.
If it doesn't work then not much you can do atm.
You can post mediainfo grab (Text view), so we know what codec it's.

Have attached image of the codec for this file.

Thank you.
Bob

It's DV codec, with as far as I remember is not supported in Resolve on PC. On Mac it's supported in MOV container.

Certainly import of DV25 in AVI format is not supported. Same goes for DV50, DVCPro and DVCPro HD. The 'DR_15 Supported Formats & Codecs List' states that these codecs are supported in MOV format, but only on MacOS with Final Cut Pro X installed:

http://documents.blackmagicdesign.com/DaVinciResolve/20180426-942419/DaVinci_Resolve_15_Supported_Codec_List.pdf

That said, I just 'rewrapped' (remuxed) a couple of archived native PAL and NTSC DV (Type II) AVI files to MOV with FFMPEG and 15_beta3 on Windows 10 imported them just fine.

Yes, re-wrap is good try.
Other way is to create QT reference MOV with QT 7 Pro. Even quicker than re-wrapping.

Someone just needs to write a FUSE/Dokan/WinFsp driver that will decode any unsupported input format (AVI/MPG/TS/MKV/whatever) using ffmpeg to uncompressed RGB(A) in a virtual MOV file. That way, everybody will be happy and we won't have to bother BMD any more.

It sort of already exists on PC through avisynth or vapoursynth, but as virtual AVI.
I've asked many times for MOV, but no developer was interested (MOV is quite complex).
Much easier would be virtual DPX/TIFF/EXR sequence.

How does Fusion 9 interface with FFMPEG, out of interest ? I know it requires downloading FFMPEG (Shared version) separately and setting the program path (if not picked up automatically), but how is the decode output from FFMPEG imported by Fusion and could the same not be extended to Resolve ?

It can, BM decision.

After all the discussion I have one last question.

Can support for the AVI DV codec be added in future build?

Apologize for replying a month later but did not receive notification of post update. At any rate, I have attached the codec info.

Bob, can you PM a small sample to me please?

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Yes, re-wrap is good try.
Other way is to create QT reference MOV with QT 7 Pro. Even quicker than re-wrapping.

MPEG Streamclip (Mac/Win) is a good tool for that. It can even open elder video files with the proper accessories and export them in Prores/DNx Quicktimes, with constant framerates. If all done's right at the outset, Resolve will eat the exports up, no problem.

Bob Rooney wrote:I am running Beta3 and tried importing AVI file from 2006. It failed without any message. All my MP4 files worked fine. I tried to upload a 30 second AVI attachment but was too large.

Post a link with a space in the path to a shared dropbox folder.

I had asked for this codec (specs attached) in release 15 but it was not added. I am hoping in this new release that it can be added as i have hundreds of videos that will need to be converted.

Please consider adding it.

Thank you,
Bob Rooney

Did you PM me or post here a link to a sample?

Byron Dickens wrote:+1.

My Nikon D5000 shoots video in AVI, which I have to transcode before I can import in into Resolve.

Avi is the worst container for video, to weakness.
Anyway if you can use the codec you can rewrap to mov/Mxf/mp4 container to be compatible with more applications without transcode and avoid time and space wasted (if you not need a digital intermediate ).


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

Jim Simon wrote:

Bryan Worsley wrote:that's all we are talking about here, changing the container format for the purpose of importing these GV HQX/HQ files into Resolve.

It's more than that, though. We want the files to be readable both inside and outside of Resolve. AVI files usually are readable outside of Resolve because pretty much every Windows video oriented software on the planet (excepting Resolve) can read VfW codecs installed to the system.

We just need that 'inside' part taken care of. Converting to QuickTime could negate the 'outside' part, though.

Uhm not exactly, MacOS and Windows10 are going to remove tons of codecs support and in the last five years many software cannot read codecs from Os, many libraries are skipped to leave to a software developers the support of old codecs. Try to a new fresh win10 read some old animation, uncompressedyuv, diva and more codecs or install old codecs (new divx not support old), many codecs are only32bit oriented and often are not upgraded to 64bit. Many dv variations of codec are losted.

Today I work often with old shooting for documentary, for medical doc where medical machine use proprietary codecs or old (patents free now) codecs and is a very difficult task to manage all. I had some virtual machine with xp, seven and more with many free and pay converter to move on modern codecs these files.
It’s time and space wasted, but today seems that developers think only to h264/265 and few more


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

That's really weird... Unlike the OP, I can export 10bit HQX (AVI) from Edius 8.51, then import & playback in Resolve 15.3.1 with no problems at all (without remuxing).

I do remember installing the HQX codec a long time ago, but I don't know if it has anything to do with it. You could always give it a try...

HQX Codec from Grass Valley: https://www.edius.net/hqx.html

Resolve supports GV codecs natively now (not like mentioned DV). AVI is just a container- which codec is inside is another story.

Hello,

Why not cineform for AVI

This is all out of topic- GV HQX or Cineform has nothing to do with it.
It's not about what to use, but what you already have. There are tons of old DV AVI archived files and this is the problem. Resolve should support DV in AVI as it use to be very popular format.

I'm in 100% agreement, it would be really nice if Resolve supported more import formats... If BMD is moving DR towards reducing turnaround times (hence the new cut page and other features) increasing the pool of supported import formats seems like a logical choice to aid in that evolution. The debate over what's the best/worst Codec would be better off in another dedicated thread.

Sorry: I do not agree

I prefer that BMD Team devotes more time to better features.

There are so many codecs that have existed that it is impossible to satisfy everyone in a single software.

The most plausible is to go through software "Swiss Army Knife" and convert into a contemporary format compatible with the Davinci Resolve.

Hello, please add AVI support for AVIs, that have been built with Hitfilm Pro 12, In Windows 10, 64bit.
The given format is as follows = AVI 8 bit 4:4:4 Lossless Uncompressed + Alpha channel.

This AVI file is not appearing in Davinci as a file, that can be chosen for ingestion.

In case, you need a testable file, I have prepared some in a dropbox folder. I'm not sure, if I should post The link to it here, or somewhere else.

---
And just a little question, in case someone knows the answer:
When ingesting cineform formatted files, I have no problems with HD resolution sized files.
But when ingesting something with a higher resolution, 2 or 4K, the material gets resized, about 1/4 less big and the colors are off. We don't currently, but will own the full version of Davinci soon. Does this possibly have something to do with having a restriction of some kind in the free version of Davinci?

Zongvalid wrote:Hello, please add AVI support for AVIs, that have been built with Hitfilm Pro 12, In Windows 10, 64bit.
The given format is as follows = AVI 8 bit 4:4:4 Lossless Uncompressed + Alpha channel.

This AVI file is not appearing in Davinci as a file, that can be chosen for ingestion.

In case, you need a testable file, I have prepared some in a dropbox folder. I'm not sure, if I should post The link to it here, or somewhere else.

Put the sample on dropbox and post a link here with a space in the path so the forum does not see it as a link.

I disagree.

Let's have resolve read floppy disks then.

Old formats must die. If you have an archive, it is your responsibility to move it to a newer codec every 5 years or so.

Even newer technology like LTO, the readers and compatibility only go back two generations.

There is a big talk in the archival community in how to solve this issue, but keeping a modern software bugged down by decades old and deprecated codec is not a solution.

waltervolpatto wrote:I disagree.

Let's have resolve read floppy disks then.

Old formats must die. If you have an archive, it is your responsibility to move it to a newer codec every 5 years or so.

Even newer technology like LTO, the readers and compatibility only go back two generations.

There is a big talk in the archival community in how to solve this issue, but keeping a modern software bugged down by decades old and deprecated codec is not a solution.

Just to understand better...
Are you suggesting abandoning Windows AVI completely, or just old codecs like DV, etc.?

kinvermark wrote:

waltervolpatto wrote:I disagree.

Let's have resolve read floppy disks then.

Old formats must die. If you have an archive, it is your responsibility to move it to a newer codec every 5 years or so.

Even newer technology like LTO, the readers and compatibility only go back two generations.

There is a big talk in the archival community in how to solve this issue, but keeping a modern software bugged down by decades old and deprecated codec is not a solution.

Just to understand better...
Are you suggesting abandoning Windows AVI completely, or just old codecs like DV, etc.?

Old codecs. If a new camera use avi, it will need to be supported.

I certainly see the wisdom in keeping a relatively lean list of natively implemented codecs versus opening up the doors to every possible oddball codec out there (via VFW) but I sometimes feel a little limited when trying to interchange between programs on Windows. MOV support on Windows 10 is often poor or problematic, so I almost always use cineform as the intermediate. There are some cases where this isn't ideal and it would be nice to have another possibility like MagicYUV or something similar.

Peter Chamberlain wrote:

Zongvalid wrote:Hello, please add AVI support for AVIs, that have been built with Hitfilm Pro 12, In Windows 10, 64bit.
The given format is as follows = AVI 8 bit 4:4:4 Lossless Uncompressed + Alpha channel.

This AVI file is not appearing in Davinci as a file, that can be chosen for ingestion.

In case, you need a testable file, I have prepared some in a dropbox folder. I'm not sure, if I should post The link to it here, or somewhere else.

Put the sample on dropbox and post a link here with a space in the path so the forum does not see it as a link.

-----
Here's the link:
/sh/kh0t6anv84c4v1u/AADvpF3XcjXt 2LOl60I9_sBla?dl=0

I included the AVI file, but also a cineform file, which has been opened badly in Davinci.
Both have been made with Hitfilm Pro 12. In Hitfilm both open without lost quality.
In Davinci free v 5.3 the Avi does not show up.
In Davinci free v 5.3 the Cineform is being loaded with bad colors and only in 3/4th the size of the original from Hitfilm.
Is there a difference for the Cineform format between Davinci free and Davinci Studio?

Zongvalid wrote:Here's the link:
/sh/kh0t6anv84c4v1u/AADvpF3XcjXt 2LOl60I9_sBla?dl=0

Oups... bad link

The link works as Peter Chamberlain wanted to have it on here.

No issue for me: I am with Windows and AVI Cineform/Grassvalley. All OK

Jean Claude: Thanks, Jean. I'll try some cineform stuff, after our System comes back from the repair shop. Maybe the problems are gone after a new installation of everything.

Only the cineform doesn't seam to support 2k scope Material. 2048 x 858 Pixels.
So we might need avi standard as well (the stuff that Hitfilm creates). It would be cool to have it in version 6 of Davinci Resolve. Sadly Hitfilm can't do ProRes.

I deleted the cineform file.

Zongvalid wrote:Jean Claude: Thanks, Jean. I'll try some cineform stuff, after our System comes back from the repair shop. Maybe the problems are gone after a new installation of everything.

Only the cineform doesn't seam to support 2k scope Material. 2048 x 858 Pixels.
So we might need avi standard as well (the stuff that Hitfilm creates). It would be cool to have it in version 6 of Davinci Resolve. Sadly Hitfilm can't do ProRes.

I deleted the cineform file.

Hello Jonathan,

I do not know where but there must be an error somewhere.
Here a cineform 2k scope Material. 2048 x 858 Pixels in a project 2048 x 858 DCI Scope 2.39 works fine with Davinci Resolve V16Beta.

First, I would like to thank you for adding avi codecs to Resolve 16. It has made my life a lot easier. I have found an avi codec still not added. It is attached.

Thank you for all the hard work,
Bob Rooney

DVSD fourcc is Microsoft DV which is very common. If BM added DV support then this should also work.

Thanks for the reply Andrew. I apologize. I retried importing the avi file into Resolve 16 and it worked.

Okay, not trying to drive anyone crazy but I found the codec that should have been listed. This one does not work. For sure. I have attached and appreciate any help on this.

Jean Claude wrote:Sorry: I do not agree

I prefer that BMD Team devotes more time to better features.

There are so many codecs that have existed that it is impossible to satisfy everyone in a single software.

The most plausible is to go through software "Swiss Army Knife" and convert into a contemporary format compatible with the Davinci Resolve.

Better CODEC Support is a better feature worth spending time on.

IMO, just support the relevant Windows framework. Not sure why this seems like a radical idea that everyone fights here... It's probably less work than the Boring Analyzer no one asked for.

Also, it's not always about what footage you have. Sometimes you get the footage from elsewhere and it's in that format, because that's what it was archived in.

Many of these CODECs are built into the Windows OS, and most NLEs I've used will happily use those to access the image, which makes batch converting it in tools like Adobe Media Encoder trivial.

Extended codec support should be very easy:

• In the system preferences set the path to a statically linked ffmpeg program that a user can download separately from ffmpeg sites.
• Pipe non-supported codec/container combinations through ffmpeg (or have a checkbox redirecting to ffmpeg) using raw video or any other internally supported video format.

This, by the way, used to work in an older version of Fusion.

Bob Rooney wrote:Okay, not trying to drive anyone crazy but I found the codec that should have been listed. This one does not work. For sure. I have attached and appreciate any help on this.

This is very old codec which is not worth supporting.

Trensharo wrote:IMO, just support the relevant Windows framework. Not sure why this seems like a radical idea that everyone fights here... It's probably less work than the Boring Analyzer no one asked for.

Yes, just add the same Video For Windows support that every other program has. Resolve doesn't need to care what codec it is, just add VFW support and ALL of them are supported.

Rohit Gupta wrote:Could you provide some samples and we’ll see if we can add read support for them?

Plain ole uncompressed AVI would be nice.

bclontz wrote:

Trensharo wrote:IMO, just support the relevant Windows framework. Not sure why this seems like a radical idea that everyone fights here... It's probably less work than the Boring Analyzer no one asked for.

Yes, just add the same Video For Windows support that every other program has. Resolve doesn't need to care what codec it is, just add VFW support and ALL of them are supported.

VFW is outdated and limited technology. Good apps should have native/optimised implementation of needed codecs. With directshow and VFW you have as many problems as advantages. Fact tat some file can be imported is not end of the story. It's similar like most NLE were using QT engine (which is old and slow) to decode so many codecs.
BM has to also think cross platform, so you can't rely on VFW etc.

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:

bclontz wrote:

Trensharo wrote:IMO, just support the relevant Windows framework. Not sure why this seems like a radical idea that everyone fights here... It's probably less work than the Boring Analyzer no one asked for.

Yes, just add the same Video For Windows support that every other program has. Resolve doesn't need to care what codec it is, just add VFW support and ALL of them are supported.

VFW is outdated and limited technology. Good apps should have native/optimised implementation of needed codecs. With directshow and VFW you have as many problems as advantages. Fact tat some file can be imported is not end of the story. It's similar like most NLE were using QT engine (which is old and slow) to decode so many codecs.
BM has to also think cross platform, so you can't rely on VFW etc.

VFW is a legacy framework. Microsoft has a newer framework which is how theu are developing all of their newer Media CODECs in Windows 10.

That's what people mean, they are just used to referring to the other, cause it was basically the QT7 of Windows.

Also, these people need decoders for Legacy CODECs. VFW more than meets the bar for that, anyways, IMO...

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Old codecs won't have implementation over new framework. You either support natively or not at all. Supporting 'badly' is poor solution. We already had this in eg. Edius etc. There were more complains related to it than positive comments.

So, regarding Cineform
I tested most of it by now and can come to the conclusion, that it works correctly so far, IF one always checks the "highest quality" settings. It must have been crippled tho only in the free version. Since I only use the pro (bought) version now, I can affirm it as working as it should in that one.

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:BM has to also think cross platform

There's a logic to that.

But I work exclusively on Windows machines. It's frustrating to have my experience crippled by mac and Linux users, especially since Windows machines make up more than 90% of the world's non-mobile devices, making it the de facto worldwide standard.