Can Resolve really be an Editor?

Davinci Resolve a top editor?

I have used many editors over the years some good, some not so good, some that were good and now they're not. I'm primarily a Premiere Pro user, and I have Avid when I need to fit into a Post's house workflow, so am I excited about the new editing features in Resolve? Well frankly yes I am. All I ever need from a good editor is excellent media management, quick and simple cutting tools and the ability to play footage in real time without the hassle of using proxies. I couldn't care less which Editor has been used to cut the new 'Oscar' winning movie, software only plays a small part in the creative process. A simple editor is always going to be a welcome for me, an Editor where it's software doesn't get in the way of getting the job done (i.e. Adobe bloatware), can only unleash more time to be more creative. I think that Resolve has something very special in version 11, its simplicity and beautiful user interface along with realtime play back and media management has already got me excited, in fact it could well be the Editor that makes the other Editors out there realise that the 1000 new features they have added are not getting used!

....it depends ....

The editors in the past where "editing" material, mostly cut/slice/slip/fade... Now every offline I get from a vendor is a mishmash of half done VFX, speedcrumps, multiple stacks of clips, and so on...

I will not define resolve as "editor" quite yet. I think that Avid (or FCP) has a much better database handling and toolset.

However, if you have a "simple" project and you need to do a somewhat "simple" edit, you can get away with it...

(My 2 cents...)

Can Resolve really be an Editor? Well, if it's as good as their color correction tools the answer is a resounding 'no'.

I have no first hand experience with 11 yet, but the big weakness I anticipate is footage organization, at least compared with FCP X's whole keyword database system. Resolve also in my experience can get quite slow with saving and media pool changes (importing/removing items) when you have several thousand clips in the media pool and spread across various sequences — this would get pretty annoying in an NLE, if it's not fixed in 11.

I suspect the big thing that will hurt Resolve's adoption as an NLE, however, at least in the short term, is the sort of hardware it requires. Because of its GPU-oriented processing pipeline, Resolve makes it basically mandatory at present to have dedicated graphics hardware, preferably with 2 GB of more of VRAM. That rules out a lot of systems that will run other NLE software just fine. If we look at Apple's lineup, for instance (Macs being rather popular in this business), there's only one credible Resolve system in their laptop lineup, and it costs $2600. I know tons of editors cutting in FCP or Media Composer on 3-4 year on systems that didn't cost that much when they were brand new.

As Walter says, "it depends."

What are you expectations as an editor (the person) for the editing system (the tool) and the program type and delivery requirements. There is also a timeframe question around all this. How much of an editing system will it be in v11, versus 11/1, 11.5, 12, 13, 14... etc.

As with Autodesk smoke, I see it first as conform editing tool. Make any last minute changes and tweaks without the need to go back to the NLE. But my program types are feature films, so my definition of editing system and needs are a lot different than say a simple corporate video for the web of talking heads, titles, etc. Then there is everything in between where your mileage may vary. For example, if you want to streamline editing for multicamera shoots... that's but one scenario where I would not consider using Resolve first but look to any of the other NLE's to meet my needs.

What I do like about Resolve's development is their approach to development. All aspects of the program and workflows get attention as they move forward. An example of that is the number of people using Resolve for dailies workflows. Adding sumcheck and copies to multiple destinations now streamline that process and gives them additional opportunity to track that metadata from the get-go.

So I am looking forward to v11 as well as every version that follows and will integrate it into my workflows to be as successful as it and I can be - and not force it to be what it isn't ready for - even if it is free.


Michael

Can Resolve really be an Editor? Well, if it's as good as their color correction tools the answer is a resounding 'no'.

Art?

Can Resolve really be an Editor? Well, if it's as good as their color correction tools the answer is a resounding 'no'.

Art?

No. That guy was banned for saying the Intensity Pro was 8 bit, YUV and interlaced. I would never say anything so accurate or insulting.

Walter thanks for that input. In the video I watched about 11 today, it looked sort of like FCP X.

There's probably room in the market for a handy, simple but accurate edit program. Especially one that handles raw without an xml round trip requirement for everything.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For the Skateboard YouTube crowd yes 80%
For the high end TVC, Movie, Doco crowd no 20%

Warren

For the Skateboard YouTube crowd yes 80%
For the high end TVC, Movie, Doco crowd no 20%

Warren

Yes, but also there is another market objective: if you are doing Digital Intermediate, having a Resolve Intermediate Editor (pun intended), will help to eliminate the Smoke/Resolve conform for most of the features with small budgets, and simplified editing.

Unless you're a big player or you have 1000vfx clips constantly changing, most of the DI have an initial conform, some re-editing and a handful of vfx. Editorially speaking, if you have a decent Edit capability you will simplify the pipeline 10fold.

If you're doing HI end restoration, you typically have an original version then a dusted one then some vfx for old opticals and whatnot. A simple editor can help (actually v10 is already good enough!.)

I would never use it as an NLE system for the simple fact that the interface is too chaotic. It's trying to do entirely too much. When I use Premiere or Avid it's very clear and simply laid out to see what I am doing. Also, the tools are just 'loose,' it's way too easy to bump and move things around and not see that changes had been made. An NLE needs a folder/bin structure system to pull in resources and for organization. The editing interface is not doing one thing or another (is it for color, is it for editing, is it for conforming), and seems to confuse each aspect by not having enough direction.

I appreciate development, but a more calculated larger step is better than these little 1/2 thought out ones.

I was meaning as a creative offline tool, as a finishing tool it is there already.
It will be very interesting to see where the Resolve will sit in our 2015 ICA/Lift Gamma Gain "What are you editing with today survey?"
New 2014 survey coming soon, if you didn't see 2013 here is a link
http://icolorist.com/what-are-you-gradi ... -8th-2013/

It would be nice if you could offline edit in the same software that you online and grade but I very much doubt that anyone would do anything other than quite a simple offline edit in Resolve 11. The idea of cutting a longform project in it seems a long way off. But the 'online' and finish tools are looking really great.

I was meaning as a creative offline tool, as a finishing tool it is there already.
It will be very interesting to see where the Resolve will sit in our 2015 ICA/Lift Gamma Gain "What are you editing with today survey?"
New 2014 survey coming soon, if you didn't see 2013 here is a link
http://icolorist.com/what-are-you-gradi ... -8th-2013/

Hey Warren,
I don't mean to rebuff what you are saying. However, I don't find that Resolve can output a QT that is 100% in Broadcast Legal specs. Makes me curious how you found it to be as a finishing tool. I hear this is changing in v11?

Purists would add that professional colourists are not editors, nor are editors colourists. So, given editing tools, colourists would need to go back to school to become craft editors, as editors need to do the same to become colourists.

I would suggest that any editor with years of experience would find Resolve awkward, unresponsive and impractical in its current guise. Notwithstanding, it may yet come of age and blur the two skills, so we will all just be operators, handling colour, edit, compositing, audio, coding, vfx, etc etc etc.

....which is pretty much what is happening anyway.....

Paul ( an editor, colourist, compositor, camera operator, audio finishing director.......)

I would suggest that any editor with years of experience would find Resolve awkward, unresponsive and impractical in its current guise.

Actually I can't see much difference to any other NLE when it comes to sheer editing in Resolve - all the bells and whistles are there, and some functions are even more elegant as in other NLEs.

Regarding "unresponsive" - try to edit raw DNG in Premiere, Avid or FCPX.

Hi Frank! Actually you can edit RAW DNG in PPremiere CC and it works, at least for me, very smooth. I think it depends of your edit station. IMO

Without having the same raw control in Premiere as in Resolve, it's a bit meh.

I don't mean to rebuff what you are saying. However, I don't find that Resolve can output a QT that is 100% in Broadcast Legal specs.

I've delivered dozens of projects and not have them bounce back from QC, particularly in terms of levels. (I've had a few that had bad edits or glitches, but those were in the edit, not a Resolve problem per se.)

I think Resolve 11 is getting very close to being a decent finishing tool, essentially replacing Avid DS and Smoke for some users. It's just a matter of time before they add the rest of the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle, but Blackmagic has been keeping things up pretty well.

For those worried about Broadcast Legal issues, at least v11 will have a few clip settings that will act as legalizers.

Purists would add that professional colourists are not editors, nor are editors colourists. So, given editing tools, colourists would need to go back to school to become craft editors, as editors need to do the same to become colourists.

And then there are those of us who have done the actual round trip, not just projects from FCP/MC --> Resolve/COLOR --> NLE of choice, but the occupation as well, and spent a couple of decades at both.

Has anyone been asking if Symphony or Final Cut (or NLE of choice) can really be a color correction system?

"Sauce for the goose" is an old Vulcan aphorism, I understand.

jPo

Has anyone been asking if Symphony or Final Cut (or NLE of choice) can really be a color correction system?

I'd bet you that 80% of all reality shows on network and cable are "vaguely" color-corrected within Symphony prior to air. And I see an awful lot of stuff that could've benefitted from even one solid day of real color-correction with a program like Baselight, Resolve, or Nucoda. It's sad to see the crap that gets foisted on the airwaves without benefit of a final color-correction pass by somebody who knows what they're doing.

Have to agree with Marc here,
Although most of the Onlining I have sat in on was footage filmed on cameras that has no latitude for colour grading because either the compression is too much or the colour space of the camera doesn't make for grading, only light correction. I have known editors to upscale footage from the Canons C300 to over 50% to save and re-frame a shot which I suppose is pretty normal for broadcast but to add heavy colour grading to this also would just blow thee image apart. It's a shame that the tools we use are never fully realised in the end product.

Without having the same raw control in Premiere as in Resolve, it's a bit meh.

I have to agree with you but for offline editing of SHORTS projects, music videos, comercial spots, ...Premiere is a very good tool to work with Cinema DNG files. I've been editind 15 years with Avid but due the BMCC raw material I've been incorporating premiere to my workflow in the past year or so.
Also, for shorts projects the ability of editing in Resolve is great, save you a lot of time IMHO.

Has anyone been asking if Symphony or Final Cut (or NLE of choice) can really be a color correction system?

I'd bet you that 80% of all reality shows on network and cable are "vaguely" color-corrected within Symphony prior to air. And I see an awful lot of stuff that could've benefitted from even one solid day of real color-correction with a program like Baselight, Resolve, or Nucoda. It's sad to see the crap that gets foisted on the airwaves without benefit of a final color-correction pass by somebody who knows what they're doing.

+1. Unfortunately the final audience does not notice the difference, hence even a donkey now can be a "colorist".

Sadly true, many end users have their 84 inch monsters set up "out of the box" auto everything, including terminal aspect ratio errors, visit most bars with a tv, egg shaped heads on news readers, as long as its big its perfect!

Colour Correction is an art form, the end result should be invisible, at least to the observer, who has no idea how the raw material looked when shot.

The only time a punter really sees the difference is through behind the scenes video, which often compare on set footage with graded final clips.

Editors and Colorists generally remain behind the scenes as our audience should never see our work, only feel it.

Paul