When will we get full screen preview on second monitor?

When will we get full screen preview on second monitor?
Like in any other professional editing suite.

Read page 1885 of the Resolve 15 manual: "Limitations When Grading With the Viewer on a Computer Display." This goes into some detail why you cannot accurately monitor directly from the computer and operating system. You have to have a color-managed output, like one from a Blackmagic display card, preferably on a calibrated external Rec709 display.

And this also goes for editing.

And this also goes for editing.

It really doesn't Marc, most certainly not for offline editing.

And whilst I'm very happy with the software as is on my regular workstation (with a BMD monitoring card), I'd still very much welcome the addition of preview monitoring to second screen as it would greatly enhance my editing experience when I'm offline editing at home.

Get Nobe Display then (timeinpixels.com).

Marc, every time you respond to this type of question I get a mental image of Mr. Wilson yelling at the neighborhood children to get off his lawn.

Marc, every time you respond to this type of question I get a mental image of Mr. Wilson yelling at the neighborhood children to get off his lawn.

and mr wilson had a splendid lawn because of it

It really doesn't Marc, most certainly not for offline editing.

It does as far as Blackmagic Design is involved. If you need this capability, then there's a good chance that Resolve is not for you. Avid, Premiere, Lightworks, or FCPX might be a better choice.

Me personally, I think spending $150 for a monitor adapter to get a third "hero display" from the computer is a small price to pay. Feel free to disagree, but neither of us make the design decisions involved with Resolve. Note that both Resolve and the earlier versions of daVinci (2K, 888, Renaissance, Classic, etc.) could be used with just a computer display output, so this is an intentional design element that goes back roughly 30 years.

Marc, every time you respond to this type of question I get a mental image of Mr. Wilson yelling at the neighborhood children to get off his lawn.

Read page 1885 of the Resolve 15 manual: "Limitations When Grading With the Viewer on a Computer Display." This goes into some detail why you cannot accurately monitor directly from the computer and operating system. You have to have a color-managed output, like one from a Blackmagic display card, preferably on a calibrated external Rec709 display.

And this also goes for editing.

Who cares about color managing if I want to just cut edit?
Resolve is not just grading tool anymore, but worlds best NLE (at least according to BM).

Hey Marc

Gotta say first that I really appreciate the time and effort you spend sharing your knowledge on these forums. I know I've really benefited from it personally, so I probably ought to just leave 'full screen preview' threads like this one well alone (like I usually do) but....

Me personally, I think spending $150 for a monitor adapter to get a third "hero display" from the computer is a small price to pay. Feel free to disagree...

I don't disagree on that front at all, it's a bargain. I've been grading with one since v8 or so and it works great. What I disagreed with was the previously unqualified assertion that a colour managed output to a calibrated reference monitor is needed for editing, which is largely nonsense... although I do note that you did now qualified that position as being "as far as Blackmagic Design is involved."

...but neither of us make the design decisions involved with Resolve.

For sure... but lets not forget that BMD have been fantastically responsive to user feedback as Resolve has developed, so surely we should be encouraging users to engage in discussions here, to make their case for features they want to see, not trying to shut them down with (arguably) irrelevant redirects.

Note that both Resolve and the earlier versions of daVinci (2K, 888, Renaissance, Classic, etc.) could be used with just a computer display output, so this is an intentional design element that goes back roughly 30 years.

C'mon man, Resolve today is a very very different beast than it was just a few years ago let alone 30 years, and whilst I agree that its grading tools are still best served when limited to a colour managed output, we're now working with a much broader toolset. Like it or not, Resolve is no longer just for colourists. Broadening the already impressive functionality to include flexible full screen preview options from the Edit page would do it no harm.

Alright... I guess I'll crawl back under my rock. Thanks for listening.
Andy

Think of it this way. Resolve comes in 3 price points: Standard, Studio, and Studio+. Free for Standard, $300 for Studio and $300 + BMD output device for Studio+.

Still a great deal.

Well their are two really issues as i see it.

One, resolve was created for grading initially , and thus a lot of the core is set-up around how a colorist "thinks" everything should work. This is a big issue, because its 2019 and resolve us used for a lot more than color grading now.

two, as a whole the GUI is (pick a negative verb), that's looks like something out of the 90's. The premise that you will only have two monitors is misguided at best. Any gpu worth using has 3 outputs, not to mention the diversity of monitors on the market that you could use for the GUI. You have everything from 32:9 super ultra wides, to 43" 16:9 monsters. You can forget about truly utilizing such monitors though, because the GUI is ridiculously inflexible.

Well their are two really issues as i see it.

The third is that Blackmagic is a hardware company.

Well their are two really issues as i see it.

The third is that Blackmagic is a hardware company.

They should look into becoming a software company then, because personally I have no interest in 99.9% of their hardware.

They should look into becoming a software company then, because personally I have no interest in 99.9% of their hardware.

Rather pleased they aren’t.

The software subscription model is a terrible user experience for the vast majority of software, which is the direction most software companies are transitioning toward.

Want a full screen preview monitor?

Purchase a BM card with a once off fee of $145 paired with the free Resolve software, or purchase a subscription with a software company ($240 per year, or as high as $500 per year).

The software subscription model is a terrible user experience for the vast majority of software, which is the direction most software companies are transitioning toward.

Yep, and that's one of the reasons why I have a general disdain for sales/marketing people. I got rid off all my Adobe products when they adopted the subscription model.

Software companies can generate a lot of income using a subscription model, with the plus being more money for development. But the downside being users becoming upset and possibly looking for alternatives. But if the company thinks there are no viable alternatives and they are the standard, then they have nothing to lose and everything to gain moving to subscriptions. That’s what Autodesk did in the Architectural, Engineering, and Design world. There is competition, but Autocad has become the standard. Same thing with the Adobe Suites and Apple. Once you are perceived to be the industry standard, you don’t worry too much about making users angry. It’s why BMD products are reasonably priced at this time, they are the “alternative”. If (when) they become the standard things might possibly change.

Subscription model gives more prediction and steady income for companies. This is so important for companies these days. Not only software providers operate this way but production companies as well. Most big place like Technicolor etc. moved to operate based on OPex model rather than CAPex.
It's only Resolve which is fairly cheap, but when you look at other NLEs then Adobe subscription model comes at about same cost. There are some fundamental pros and cons for both models. If you think Adobe model is bad then what about spending 20K on software and then being charged 6K every year for support and then when new version comes you have to pay for nice features anyway! This is so common for enterprise apps. In this case I rather pay every month for Adobe. I know how much and what I can expect for it.

Autodesk gave up on Flame massively. They had no choice. They tried hard for long time ( I know this form "inside" quite well) not to upset big boys, but today every one can run Flame. It's not anymore 1M$ app as those have no place in current reality. Subscription model is what can actually generate you money and don't forget that every app developer at the end wants to make profit, not develop things for fun. Apps became "cheaper" and all what counts now is knowledge and skills.

The software subscription model is a terrible user experience for the vast majority of software, which is the direction most software companies are transitioning toward.

Yep, and that's one of the reasons why I have a general disdain for sales/marketing people. I got rid off all my Adobe products when they adopted the subscription model.

Even if in reality it does cost you at the end about same money when you look at eg 3 years period

Perhaps BMD doesn't want to make the product too appealing to low-end "amateur" users because they generate a huge mount of support "noise" when compared to professional users and, since most of them will be using the "free" version, they generate no revenue.

However, if the full-screen feature was part of the studio version only, perhaps this would boost sales and produce greater revenues.

As has been said, when Resolve was simply a color grading program then requiring a full-screen monitor to be calibrated would make sense (although there's no guarantees that the computer monitor where the windowed version of the display is shown will be calibrated anyway so who cares?). Now that Resolve is a full-featured (except for that full-screen mode on a second generic monitor) NLE, it is time to consider the different needs of the market it addresses.

Again, as has been said in this thread before, not all operations in Resolve that benefit from a full-screen display are color-related. There is sharpening, masking and a raft of other operations that benefit from the better resolution achieved when running the footage in full-screen mode.

I find it ironic that Fusion 9 allows full-screen display on a second monitor -- whilst providing color-grading tools. Why the disparity?

The software subscription model is a terrible user experience for the vast majority of software, which is the direction most software companies are transitioning toward.

Yep, and that's one of the reasons why I have a general disdain for sales/marketing people. I got rid off all my Adobe products when they adopted the subscription model.

Even if in reality it does cost you at the end about same money when you look at eg 3 years period

Not everything is about cost, principals play a part as well.

Just saying
I use to hate Premiere and today I use it the most out of all NLEs as no other is so "complete" and has as many plugins and features. Funny enough, but it's something which I use to point as a cause of main Premiere weaknesses

Read page 1885 of the Resolve 15 manual: "Limitations When Grading With the Viewer on a Computer Display." This goes into some detail why you cannot accurately monitor directly from the computer and operating system. You have to have a color-managed output, like one from a Blackmagic display card, preferably on a calibrated external Rec709 display.

I don´t know why you constantly repeating this nonsense. The whole world outside of Resolve has calibrated workflows without an extra 1990´s 2d graphics card.

And this also goes for editing.

For sure not.
It would be in Blackmagics interest to ad this tiny feature to catch up with other editing suites which of course have this feature. Every editor which is coming from an other NLE scratches their head why this obvious thing doesn´t work.

Just saying
I use to hate Premiere and today I use it the most out of all NLEs as no other is so "complete" and has as many plugins and features. Funny enough, but it's something which I use to point as a cause of main Premiere weaknesses

Personally I think Resolve is just as good, and could be even better. BM just needs to get out of the agile development mindset of pumping out new features as fast as possible. Resolve already has a lot of features in it, they just don't always work properly.

The also need to do a much better job of documenting features. The constant why doesn't resolve run on X os or Y hardware is proof enough that documentation is lacking. Lets not even talk about features that exist that have no documentation what so ever.

Not when your work is limited mainly to simple editing and complex delivery. I jump through so many codecs, subtitles handling, closed captioning, audio/video legalisation, plugins etc. Even fact that you can so simply queue Premiere projects in AME is very important for me. In Resolve you either work or export (or use remote rendering which I did not try- does it actually work well?). Not good enough for todays NLE. Not going to mention interlaced handling, things like DPP exporter or limited export options when it comes to broadcast delivery. Things like free NDI preview plugin where I can pipe preview over internet sounds more like a dream when it comes to Resolve. Of course now I have ProRes in Premiere which is real deal breaker as 75% of industry uses it as main intermediate codec.
Resolve is not there for me. Still quite far away to be honest, but recently I started dealign with HDR->SDR conversions and then it's useful.
I'm also not that keen on putting all conversions through RGB, specially with such a poor chroma subsampling handling. What is already in YUV should stay there if there is no specific reason for going back to RGB.

Yes, Resolve could be even better. When word "could" is gone then I will switch for sure

Which BM Card to use for the second monitor output?

I have a two monitor set-up with with a Decklink feeding a third 42" Plasma mounted on the wall above for color correction. Sure would be convenient to be able to send the video to my second monitor when just editing though. All they need to do allow Ctrl+F to go to second monitor while still allowing access to the timeline.

All they need to do allow Ctrl+F to go to second monitor while still allowing access to the timeline.

It would be as simple as that, but then they would probably lose 50% of their I/O product sales, and then have to charge way more for Resolve, or Heaven Forbid, switch to a subscription plan.

All they need to do allow Ctrl+F to go to second monitor while still allowing access to the timeline.

It would be as simple as that, but then they would probably lose 50% of their I/O product sales, and then have to charge way more for Resolve, or Heaven Forbid, switch to a subscription plan.

or they could just have a $195 add-on that enables the feature. For example, like what Panasonic does with V-Log L.

They already offer that, it's called "Blackmagic Design DeckLink Mini Monitor 4K". Just 195,-

They already offer that, it's called "Blackmagic Design DeckLink Mini Monitor 4K". Just 195,-

Does this work alongside NVidia Rtx cards?

They already offer that, it's called "Blackmagic Design DeckLink Mini Monitor 4K". Just 195,-

They don't. Useless for laptop users and can't even do 60p.

They already offer that, it's called "Blackmagic Design DeckLink Mini Monitor 4K". Just 195,-

They don't. Useless for laptop users and can't even do 60p.

Or a thunderbolt Mini Monitor for a laptop. Yes I know it's only HD and does not have 60P.

When i see people talking and supporting subscription software models i instantly think they are insane.

I left Premiere behind and purchased Resolve just because it doesn`t have a subscription model, and now you tell me that the are people who want this here ?

They already offer that, it's called "Blackmagic Design DeckLink Mini Monitor 4K". Just 195,-

They don't. Useless for laptop users and can't even do 60p.

Or a thunderbolt Mini Monitor for a laptop. Yes I know it's only HD and does not have 60P.

This is where the 1080 Ti sits in a Core X. And that is already suffering insufficient bandwidth.

As the 1080 Ti is what renders the frame and has it in memory already, it's the most appropriate thing for it to also display it.

Anything else is engineering non-sense and doubles bandwidth requirements which are already exhausted with TB3.

Also I don't buy this entire business model thing. Happy to pay 1000 EUR for a plugin that allows a proper full screen viewer on another screen. Not everyone can or wants to use a full blown editing workstation these days.

These IO cards make sense for a studio environment where Resolve originally comes from. That's all good and nice and nobody wants to take that away at all. It's now just about enabling mobile or hybrid use cases as well.

I left Adobe behind as soon as they started the subscription model. Still sometimes have to use Premiere on another system but genuinely find Resolve better - it has a more professional feel to it and once you know where all the bits you use are, I think it's faster than Premiere and close enough to FCPX speed. YMMV.

When i see people talking and supporting subscription software models i instantly think they are insane.

I left Premiere behind and purchased Resolve just because it doesn`t have a subscription model, and now you tell me that the are people who want this here ?

I think you need to read what I actually wrote! I did not advocate a subscription model.

They already offer that, it's called "Blackmagic Design DeckLink Mini Monitor 4K". Just 195,-

That assumes people want BM hardware, a lot of people don't..

[Rohit Gupta]

...
I'm also not that keen on putting all conversions through RGB, specially with such a poor chroma subsampling handling. What is already in YUV should stay there if there is no specific reason for going back to RGB.

This is not true. If you are rendering from a YUV codec to YUV codec without applying effects, the data is just passed through.

It use to be true for sure.

I've tried latest Resolve (15.2.3) and here it's changed, which is good.
v210 export back to v210 gives 100% same video.
ProRes to ProRes doesn't as Resolve doesn't do smart rendering, but this is a separate matter.

Happy to pay 1000 EUR for a plugin that allows a proper full screen viewer on another screen.

You can get that for considerably less: https://timeinpixels.com/nobe-display/

Didn't that one have sync/lag issue with audio?

Yes. A proper I/O device can do it better. But for 20 bucks it's not so bad, you can even load a LUT.

Think of it this way. Resolve comes in 3 price points: Standard, Studio, and Studio+. Free for Standard, $300 for Studio and $300 + BMD output device for Studio+.

Still a great deal.

i see several price points
- free + low power machine with no i/o = $1,500+
- free + reasonable machine + i/o + low cost monitoring = $4,000+
- studio +reasonable machine + i/o + low cost monitoring = $4,300+
- studio + spec power machine + i/o + reliable monitoring + plugins + small surface = $35,000+
- studio + spec power machine + i/o + reliable monitoring + plugins + advanced surface = $65,000+

and many inbetween steps, but i'm thinking most are going to be close to one of those five - i've not yet heard of someone with a Advanced surface + X310 on a macmini, or an i5/8g sys ram/2g Vram machine

pretty cool that the software can serve a wide range of users, if a hobbiest then AvidFirst, LightWorks, Hit Film and Nucoda Academy might be a better choices, but really haveing all the tools under one hood is a competeing and valid approach, one i value highly

i'm making the month end for the last few decades with this gig, i'm thrilled with a $1k i/o card that puts out 12b 4k, that's trivial compared to the total cost of the room, and trivial compared to the cost of an i/o card a few years ago with a fraction of the functionality

but i do see a ROI that makes sense, as a hobbiest, maybe not so much.....

i think story telling as a hobby is pretty cool way to de-stress, and fire brain cells if in a routine day job - awesome and positive actualy.... hats off to those artists who create and keep life together day and out with a day job that's soul destroying

Ha Ha Ha. Resolve 16.1 Studio now have full screen preview on second monitor! No need additional I/O hardware. Better late than never.

Well, i'm glad they cut out that BS, but it would be nice if we could have HDR metadata on the second (or third) monitor as well. I know Windows is capable of it as well as newer Linux kernels. Right now I need to write my HDR video to usb stick and walk it over to my TV. Live preview would be an improvement.

Ha Ha Ha. Resolve 16.1 Studio now have full screen preview on second monitor! No need additional I/O hardware. Better late than never.

How can it be done? Where to connect the second monitor?

Ha Ha Ha. Resolve 16.1 Studio now have full screen preview on second monitor! No need additional I/O hardware. Better late than never.

How can it be done? Where to connect the second monitor?

Connect all your monitors to one gpu.

Ha Ha Ha. Resolve 16.1 Studio now have full screen preview on second monitor! No need additional I/O hardware. Better late than never.

How can it be done? Where to connect the second monitor?

Connect all your monitors to one gpu.

Dan, could you please describe the process step by step? Two monitors are connected to one video card, but the image in Da Vinci is not transmitted to the second monitor. Thank you in advance.

will the colors be accurate using a gc instead of black magic deck card ?

will the colors be accurate using a gc instead of black magic deck card ?

Good enough for editing, but not for pro-level color grading, no.

This was provided specifically to support editors with the caveat that a normal graphics card simply is not suitable for pro-level grading work, calibrated or not. After calibration it *might* be ok if your work is only ever distributed over the Internet, but certainly not for broadcast or theatrical distribution.