Time for a Resolve Lite Editor's Version

I know most people will disagree. But I would still try to logically build up my case. We need a version for editors and editors only.

DR has come a long way from what it was in DR 10 (from the time I had been using DR) to now. And it is now a great editing tool also. With the second monitor now available, it can be used a full-fledged editing system. So why not bifurcate and also make it a proper editing software?

Well, I mean the editors do not need to correct colours. They are also not interested to mix 5.1 sound. They know certain things are best left to graphics artists or the sound designers. They want to edit, need a few plugins for transitions, well a few more tricks like FX, managing the media and giving xml's. Resolve has them all. But the editors are scared to run Resolve because it has too many functions (tabs), which they don't need. And also, they can't edit with their normal laptop or an old Desktop, because DR needs high-powered machines. And that's the reason they stick to FCP, Premiere and Avid. They are scared with DR.

Why not make something for the Editors and only the editors? They don't need full resolution files, they need proxies. That can run on low-speced machines. They just need good media management (which DR already has), a few sound management tools, FX library and may be three colour wheels. That's about all.

DR can actually become the market leader in Edit software.

I second the proposal that was made in this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=96573

But I wouldn't call it for Prosumers. I would say this is needed for professional editors. For editors, don't mix up things please.

Now, go ahead and rip me apart.

So you basically want to pay for a version that can do less than the free version?

I don't get it.

There is nothing in what you are asking for that can't be done with the current software. Proxies can be generated and used already. You can hide the tabs you don't want to use.

What Frank said.

I think what most of those wanting something just above the free version, want hardware accelerated decode/encode of h264/265. They don’t want to pay the full price for just this feature.

the option to hide any of the "page" icon's exists, just hide fusion fairlight & color icon's, and maybe even cut... leaving media, edit and deliver icon's only

but no way around paying for studio if you need studio's tools and features...

What Frank said.

with both hands...

I think what most of those wanting something just above the free version, want hardware accelerated decode/encode of h264/265. They don’t want to pay the full price for just this feature.

This is my assumption as well.

But the editors are scared to run Resolve because it has too many functions (tabs), which they don't need. And also, they can't edit with their normal laptop or an old Desktop, because DR needs high-powered machines. And that's the reason they stick to FCP, Premiere and Avid. They are scared with DR.

Just as an aside, these are the people you fire, as they are either to dumb, or lazy, to learn.

I don't think there is anything forcing anyone to use anything other than the edit page, is there?

As for the H264 hardware acceleration... well if anyone's too miserly to stump up the $300 then they can just use Handbrake to transcode into a less CPU/GPU-intensive format.

Oh, what's that... doing such a thing would take extra time?

How much extra time?

Too much?

Then your time can't be worth much if $300 doesn't cover it.

I would still try to logically build up my case.

I don't think your argument rests on logic.

I've come to realise that there are people in this world that if you shoved diamonds up their rectum, they'd complain that the diamonds weren't large enough. What has this world become?

You get something amazing for free and people complain. You get something even more amazing for a pittance or free with a camera and people complain. If there were 632 versions of Resolve, someone would pipe up and complain that there's not a 634th version.

You owe me a new keyboard and a cup of coffee to replace the one I lost all over it!

This is one of the most strange posts I have read.
A lot of Media Composer editors I know mainly doing work for the BBC, are being asked to do more and more audio work, with titling and other stuff.
Okay when the sound gets to maybe 16 tracks + and gets complex hand it off to a sound guy.
Fairlight is definitely a "work in progress" but for basic stuff works well.
They have some great plugins there and very useful too!!
With the latest announcement of the Samsung 100+ megapixel sensor going into mobile phones, media is going to be coming your way in all directions during the next few years, just look at what BM are doing with their 6K pocket camera?
The ability to add punch to your footage via the colour tab is a magnificent mainstay of Resolve.
And if you try them some of the OFX could be very useful to you, just try them out.
If you have ever used After Effects and got to around 30+ layers you will delight in the nodal based approach of Fusion, very logical and easy to follow.
The biggest criticism of Resolve is maybe the development work is going on at such a fearsome pace then I believe every quarter they should take a deep breath, stop and focus on the really critical issues which you can very quickly find thematically running through these forum posts.

I think what most of those wanting something just above the free version, want hardware accelerated decode/encode of h264/265. They don’t want to pay the full price for just this feature.

Yes, for Windows people probably. What I need is DR 16 running on low specced machines. The way FCPX or Premiere or Avid runs or FCP7 used to run. DR just crashes. Take my example. I can easily edit with proxy files on my Macbook Air on FCPX, can't do that with DR.

But the editors are scared to run Resolve because it has too many functions (tabs), which they don't need. And also, they can't edit with their normal laptop or an old Desktop, because DR needs high-powered machines. And that's the reason they stick to FCP, Premiere and Avid. They are scared with DR.

Just as an aside, these are the people you fire, as they are either to dumb, or lazy, to learn.

But they are great editors who don't comment on the jobs done by colourists. And editors normally have the eye to differentiate between to and too.

So you basically want to pay for a version that can do less than the free version?

I don't get it.

There is nothing in what you are asking for that can't be done with the current software. Proxies can be generated and used already. You can hide the tabs you don't want to use.

No not really. The Edit page with the Resolve FX plugins (a very useful tool for the editors), which are not there in the free edition.

As for the H264 hardware acceleration... well if anyone's too miserly to stump up the $300 then they can just use Handbrake to transcode into a less CPU/GPU-intensive format.

Oh, what's that... doing such a thing would take extra time?

How much extra time?

Too much?

Then your time can't be worth much if $300 doesn't cover it.

That won't help. Handbrake doesn't retain the TC of the original footage. So you can't relink the footage for DI even if you export an XML. So, that's a strict "no" for any serious work.

So you basically want to pay for a version that can do less than the free version?

I don't get it.

There is nothing in what you are asking for that can't be done with the current software. Proxies can be generated and used already. You can hide the tabs you don't want to use.

Please check the above.

I've come to realise that there are people in this world that if you shoved diamonds up their rectum, they'd complain that the diamonds weren't large enough. What has this world become?

Diamonds (and cinemas) are forever. No software is.

That won't help. Handbrake doesn't retain the TC of the original footage. So you can't relink the footage for DI even if you export an XML. So, that's a strict "no" for any serious work.

That's what ffprobe, ffmpeg, and a batch script is for.

What I need is DR 16 running on low specced machines.

That's another way of saying you want BMD to spend money (on development) so you don't have to (on hardware).

I'm not convinced by such an argument.

Just pay the $300 and be done with it. If someone is a professional editor (not a prosumer as you insist) then $300 for software that is being constantly improved by a company that has never charged for an upgrade is really nothing. Even for a prosumer it's just a pittance considering every other software company charges you for upgrades year after year.

If you want Resolve to run on lower spec machines I would think that is a programming issue and removing the color page etc would not solve the problem. Resolve has always been pretty demanding but it seems to be getting better with each release and computers are improving all the time.

Coming from Vegas Pro I actually get better playback in Resolve and the rendering is light years faster. Plus I know with Resolve if I upgrade my GPU it can actually use all the power I can throw at it which is something Vegas has been trying to implement for years with little success.

That won't help. Handbrake doesn't retain the TC of the original footage. So you can't relink the footage for DI even if you export an XML. So, that's a strict "no" for any serious work.

That's what ffprobe, ffmpeg, and a batch script is for.

Frankly, that's not required. Editors (offline, for cinema or web series type) normally work with proxy rushes generated from DR (proper version), many of them with TC marking on the proxy footage like the old cinema (celluloid) days when telecine machines used to do that for non linear editing.

But sadly, they still prefer to work on FCP, Avid, Premiere and the like. Though, according to me, DR is a great editing software if it goes through a little bit of tweaking and allows low specced machines to work on. That's the reason I asked for a "lite" version.

That's my opinion, opinions differ. I remember those days when people were against a second monitor output from DR. The purists always pounded on whoever wanted a second monitor output. Now DR 16.1 has given that.

I know most people will disagree. But I would still try to logically build up my case. We need a version for editors and editors only.
.....

Hello Krishna

You are from the company FILMWALLAH ™ and is a professional studio and production house run by Subrata Sen Communications

What I need is DR 16 running on low specced machines.

That's another way of saying you want BMD to spend money (on development) so you don't have to (on hardware).

I'm not convinced by such an argument.

I never said that the software should come for free. All good edit softwares come at a price. Pricing is a marketing issue, let BMD decide on that.

Personally, I don't believe in free softwares. I don't like subscription based softwares either, that's a different issue. But I firmly believe softwares should come at a price. Even peanuts are not free.

Now, if you say that DR is free and DR Studio is available for the price of peanuts, I have a problem. DR is not free, it's a bait to go for DR Studio. DR Studio pricing is crazy, but that's the domain of BMD marketing team, when I bought it, it costed me $995. But I was lured through the free DR bait.

I know most people will disagree. But I would still try to logically build up my case. We need a version for editors and editors only.
.....

Hello Krishna

You are from the company FILMWALLAH ™ and is a professional studio and production house run by Subrata Sen Communications

Yes, I look after the colour grading and DI that's been done here. Also other things on post production.
But this is my personal account, nothing to do with the company.

I never said that the software should come for free.

Nor did I suggest you did.

But let me rephrase.

You want BMD to spend money on development so you can spend less on a Lite version than you would have to on new hardware.

I just don't find that a good argument.

DR is not free, it's a bait to go for DR Studio.

You just went off the deep end.

I know most people will disagree. But I would still try to logically build up my case. We need a version for editors and editors only.
.....

Hello Krishna

You are from the company FILMWALLAH ™ and is a professional studio and production house run by Subrata Sen Communications

Yes, I look after the colour grading and DI that's been done here. Also other things on post production.
But this is my personal account, nothing to do with the company.

OK

When we do this kind of advertising: we close his big mouth to pay $ 300!

about filmwallah

FILMWALLAH ™ is a professional studio and production house run by Subrata Sen Communications. Located in Kolkata we provide high quality support from production to post-production of movies and video. Run by a team of experienced professionals, the studio provides cameras and sound equipment for any kind of shooting and makes all your post-production like editing, color grading and DI and mastering in all possible formats.

We are in the East of India delivering high quality DCPs for screening in any theater, including DCPs for International Film Festivals, National Awards and National Panorama. We are the only one in this region to have the affiliation from the International body of digital cinema, the Intersociety Digital Cinema Forum (ISDCF), who gives us our unique code after checking our DCPs.

We provide complete professional solution for shooting a film or video. We have a wide range of professional cameras. We also provide on-field sound recording equipment for that clarity.

Our edit setup is cross-platform and hence we have the flexibility to provide you with the best possible comfort. Our setups are well-maintained with adequate backup systems and we can guarantee you almost zero downtime when you are working with us.

Our aim is to provide world-class service for every customer, as per their specific needs. While we have worked with many big banners, we also provide support to filmmakers who work to fulfill their independent dreams. In short, we lend creative and technical support to India filmmakers in a big way.

Because paying "à la carte" the different options of Davinci Resolve: it may come back to you more expensive. Good now, like today everything must be free: you can always try.

Personally I do not care. It's not my money.
After all it was just to see more.

[

When we do this kind of advertising: we close his big mouth to pay $ 300!

about filmwallah

FILMWALLAH ™ is a professional studio and production house run by Subrata Sen Communications. Located in Kolkata we provide high quality support from production to post-production of movies and video. Run by a team of experienced professionals, the studio provides cameras and sound equipment for any kind of shooting and makes all your post-production like editing, color grading and DI and mastering in all possible formats.

We are in the East of India delivering high quality DCPs for screening in any theater, including DCPs for International Film Festivals, National Awards and National Panorama. We are the only one in this region to have the affiliation from the International body of digital cinema, the Intersociety Digital Cinema Forum (ISDCF), who gives us our unique code after checking our DCPs.

We provide complete professional solution for shooting a film or video. We have a wide range of professional cameras. We also provide on-field sound recording equipment for that clarity.

Our edit setup is cross-platform and hence we have the flexibility to provide you with the best possible comfort. Our setups are well-maintained with adequate backup systems and we can guarantee you almost zero downtime when you are working with us.

Our aim is to provide world-class service for every customer, as per their specific needs. While we have worked with many big banners, we also provide support to filmmakers who work to fulfill their independent dreams. In short, we lend creative and technical support to India filmmakers in a big way.

Because paying "à la carte" the different options of Davinci Resolve: it may come back to you more expensive. Good now, like today everything must be free: you can always try.

Personally I do not care. It's not my money.
After all it was just to see more.

We have paid more than $300 on our systems. For example, Baselight. But that's a different forum. And not my domain. Told you, I look after a small section. I am not a colorist, nor an editor. But I look after them also. That's about all. And by the way this FILMWALLAH (TM) is now FILMWALLAH (R), needs correction.

DR is not free, it's a bait to go for DR Studio.

You just went off the deep end.

What Frank said.

What do you mean? My thread opened with "most people will diagree"

What Frank said.

Marc, a serious question. Do you still believe that DR is only a DI/grading software like it used to be?

Or it is a great software for editors too? And sound designers and graphic artists also for that matter?

For editors, the second monitor is now available. I followed the forum and know how you resisted. Why not make some more room for them, the editors I mean? I have been following you for almost 10 years now, I seriously value your opinion.

Why not make some more room for them, the editors I mean?

Nothing you've suggested here would give editors something they don't already have (or are capable of having) with this software.

In fact the reverse is true. You're idea would take away capabilities that already exist.

I don't find that a good move for BMD. Especially if the only motivation is for you to save money.

If the current Free or Studio versions don't work on your hardware, pony up and get better hardware.

Problem, solved.

First of all, what makes you think that moving the editing page out from the rest of the software would make it run any faster? I highly doubt it would.
Resolve works fantastic on my extremely low end hardware that doesn't even meet the minimum system requirements. I'm editing 1080p footage extremely smoothly. Are you trying to run it on a potato?
And you even say you don't even need it to run full resolution files, but only proxies. So just scale the proxies to whatever can run on your system...

No. Resolve doesn't run fantastic on extremsely low end hardware. It barely runs at all. Crashes constantly. You need way better specs for this NLE than for Adobe, Apple, or Avid NLEs - IME.

That isn't even close to the truth, unless all you're doing is creating proxies in media management.

I always tell people who ask me that the price for Resolve is co.parable to Avid, because often they'd need to upgrade their machines to run at comparable performance levels.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Are you trying to run it on a potato?

ROTFL... I'm loving this thread.. haven't laughed so much in ages. I thank you for the entertainment!

I know most people will disagree. But I would still try to logically build up my case. We need a version for editors and editors only.

So why not bifurcate and also make it a proper editing software?

You are saying Resolve is now a proper editing software but needs to be made into a proper editing software.

Well, I mean the editors do not need to correct colours. They are also not interested to mix 5.1 sound. They know certain things are best left to graphics artists or the sound designers. They want to edit, need a few plugins for transitions, well a few more tricks like FX, managing the media and giving xml's. Resolve has them all. But the editors are scared to run Resolve because it has too many functions (tabs), which they don't need. And also, they can't edit with their normal laptop or an old Desktop, because DR needs high-powered machines. And that's the reason they stick to FCP, Premiere and Avid. They are scared with DR.

Why force your editors to change when they have all the best professional editing tools already available? All those software also have many functions your editors don't need like 5.1 sound, colour correction tools etc. so that argument is not logical.

I would be VERY worried if an editor was scared of too many functions (tabs) in an editing software app.

I only see two issues holding you back from using Resolve as the main editing software:

1. Your editors need training.
2. Your company needs to invest in appropriate hardware.

Personally I think your editors are already using the best tools for long form work. Resolve still can't compete in some areas.

I've come to realise that there are people in this world that if you shoved diamonds up their rectum, they'd complain that the diamonds weren't large enough. What has this world become?

I must put that line on a T-shirt.

Marc, a serious question. Do you still believe that DR is only a DI/grading software like it used to be? Or it is a great software for editors too? And sound designers and graphic artists also for that matter?

I think it's anything the users want it to be. The fact that PeterC and the other development team have given users the ability to turn off any UI page they don't want to see means you can hand Resolve 16 to (say) an audio person, kill the Color and Fusion pages, and say, "this is your copy of Fairlight." And then you take the same program and hand it to an editor, kill the Color and Fairlight pages, and say "this is your Resolve Editing program." And so on. Just ignore what you don't need.

I think there is always a danger with full-featured software companies when they become afflicted with rampant featuritis -- this is a known problem for any software company struggling to finalize their work. At least with BMD, they're aware that they serve several different markets, and I think they're trying to keep everybody happy as much as humanly possible.

First of all, what makes you think that moving the editing page out from the rest of the software would make it run any faster? I highly doubt it would.
Resolve works fantastic on my extremely low end hardware that doesn't even meet the minimum system requirements. I'm editing 1080p footage extremely smoothly. Are you trying to run it on a potato?
And you even say you don't even need it to run full resolution files, but only proxies. So just scale the proxies to whatever can run on your system...

If you think 2015 13 inch Macbook Pro 2.6 GHz Dual Intel Core i5, 16 GB ram is a potato so be it. But FCPX and Adobe NLE work perfectly on this potato.
If Resolve projects itself as a proper NLE (like it does in numerous ads), it needs to run on this potato, it should not need a pumpkin.

No. Resolve doesn't run fantastic on extremsely low end hardware. It barely runs at all. Crashes constantly. You need way better specs for this NLE than for Adobe, Apple, or Avid NLEs - IME.

That isn't even close to the truth, unless all you're doing is creating proxies in media management.

I always tell people who ask me that the price for Resolve is co.parable to Avid, because often they'd need to upgrade their machines to run at comparable performance levels.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

+1

If you think 2015 13 inch Macbook Pro 2.6 GHz Dual Intel Core i5, 16 GB ram is a potato so be it.

That's a millennial hipster machine. it's for the people who care more about the logo on the outside than what the hardware inside can do!

If you think 2015 13 inch Macbook Pro 2.6 GHz Dual Intel Core i5, 16 GB ram is a potato so be it. But FCPX and Adobe NLE work perfectly on this potato.

That's because FCPX and Adobe Premiere are still in 2015, it's now 2019.

If Resolve projects itself as a proper NLE (like it does in numerous ads), it needs to run on this potato, it should not need a pumpkin.

It's actually the users of Resolve that consider it to be a fully fledged NLE, at least those now living in 2019.

1. Possibly not. Try running a Premiere 2019 project on an Premiere 2015 timeline and you would know.

2. True that. But you know what? We are on Mac Pro 2012 5.1 and Resolve 2019 runs on it fluently like it used to do with Resolve previous versions (probably 10.5 in 2012). So, Apple created computers in 2012 for Resolve to run in 2019?

So you're not comparing Apples with Apples?

Good point.

Resolve is definitely more demanding on the hardware than the other major NLEs that are being discussed here. That is an area that I too would like to see BMD make some improvements in, but I don't think for a minute that simply stripping out a few features from the code will magically improve that somehow. It doesn't work that way.

Resolve is definitely more demanding on the hardware than the other major NLEs ...

yes -- that's how i would describe it too!

especially on linux, where resolve is indeed often utilized just for editing tasks, because there are not so much alternative NLEs available on this platform, this is really an annoying issue. in this particular case you are often unable to run resolve on common mid-range hardware, even if it would work somehow on the same hardware on windows. so it it's not only to slow and unsuitable for more demanding tasks, no, it simply wouldn't start at all! the actual hardware requirements on this platform and its much more drastic differences concerning free vs. studio edition simply can't be whitewashed or neglected...

but this kind of worries only affect a very small minority, just like in case of the thematic feature request of this thread.

nevertheless i don't think, efforts to solve this kind of marginalized needs, have to be seen as rival and threat for the majority. nothing has to change inevitably for the worse in case improving the related aspects of the application.
to the contrary! -- processing efficiency improvements concerning limited computing resources could very likely also have significant positive consequences and outcome on much more powerful high-end machines and more common mainstream usage scenarios. both interests often stimulate and complement each other in a very constructive symbiotic manner.

If Resolve projects itself as a proper NLE (like it does in numerous ads), it needs to run on this potato

That's a non-sequitur.

It isn't the minimum specs that make Resolve an NLE, it's the feature set.

+1. Dumbing down Resolve, and creating another SKU to handle is just a bad idea. Sorry - I am sympathetic to those living in countries where $300 seems like a lot, but the proposed solution is not likely to get any support from the user base, and it risks re-directing effort away from the main product.

There are many, many consumer level NLE's at this price point. They're not that bad.

I would refer the OP to the DR Configuration Guide https://documents.blackmagicdesign.com/ ... _Guide.pdf

On the top of page 4 in the Configuration Guide:

The key thing to keep in mind when selecting your config is unlike traditional editing, grading, audio post or finishing systems, image processing in DaVinci Resolve is graphics processor (GPU) based and so some of the features require a higher end GPU that you might be accustomed to. High performance GPUs or multiple GPUs will offer the best experience

Perhaps you should look into other software for your editors to use, software from which an EDL can be exported to DR for color grading and rendering.

+1. Dumbing down Resolve, and creating another SKU to handle is just a bad idea. Sorry - I am sympathetic to those living in countries where $300 seems like a lot, but the proposed solution is not likely to get any support from the user base, and it risks re-directing effort away from the main product.

There are many, many consumer level NLE's at this price point. They're not that bad.

It's not a question of shelling out $300 for Resolve. But a question remains. $300 for Resolve and $5000 for the new Mac Pro remains the best bet for running Resolve. Other Mac computers need e-gpu, Raid drives, etc. So the effective cost for Resolve Edit comes to minimum $2000.

For people living in countries who can afford $300, it's not that easy to shell out $2000. Specially for personal use. Even it's easy, why would they?

Now look at the pricing of the other NLEs and compare. Many editors prefer to work from home in their own laptops and do not hire a studio.

I am not talking about dumbing down Davinci Resolve. I am saying a "lite" DR can exist simultaneously for editors.

Why? Because it's needed. Look at Blackmagic I/O cards. Starting from Decklink at $145 to Intensity at $299. Different pricing for different needs.

Look at BMD cameras. Starting from $995 to $5995, catering to different needs.

Oh and your own Davinci Resolve panels. Starting at $1025 and ending at $24000.

Do you think Blackmagic Pocket Camera 6K is dumbing down? Do you think the Resolve Micro Panel at $1025 is dumbing down?
If not, why do you think Resolve Lite for editors will be dumbing down?

I know, BMD can cater to people's needs. They have done this for many products without dumbing down anything. They just addressed specific needs. Hence the request for a NLE which runs 'lite' on lesser specced machines.

That's all Sir. Living in India, most of us can afford to pay $300, even more, for that "lite" edition.

I would refer the OP to the DR Configuration Guide https://documents.blackmagicdesign.com/ ... _Guide.pdf

On the top of page 4 in the Configuration Guide:

The key thing to keep in mind when selecting your config is unlike traditional editing, grading, audio post or finishing systems, image processing in DaVinci Resolve is graphics processor (GPU) based and so some of the features require a higher end GPU that you might be accustomed to. High performance GPUs or multiple GPUs will offer the best experience

Perhaps you should look into other software for your editors to use, software from which an EDL can be exported to DR for color grading and rendering.

That's what people normally do. Editing is normally done in Premiere or Avid. Many still use the legacy FCP7. Few work in FCPX. Then the XML or EDL is generated and people go for grading in Resolve or Baselight. Sound studios almost invariably run on Protools.

But, just a minute. Wasn't that supposed to change from DR 15 in 2018? When it was advertised that Davinci Resolve is now "the" perfect NLE?

DR 16? It has added so many new editing features. For who then?

I would refer the OP to the DR Configuration Guide https://documents.blackmagicdesign.com/ ... _Guide.pdf

On the top of page 4 in the Configuration Guide:

The key thing to keep in mind when selecting your config is unlike traditional editing, grading, audio post or finishing systems, image processing in DaVinci Resolve is graphics processor (GPU) based and so some of the features require a higher end GPU that you might be accustomed to. High performance GPUs or multiple GPUs will offer the best experience

Perhaps you should look into other software for your editors to use, software from which an EDL can be exported to DR for color grading and rendering.

That's what people normally do. Editing is normally done in Premiere or Avid. Many still use the legacy FCP7. Few work in FCPX. Then the XML or EDL is generated and people go for grading in Resolve or Baselight. Sound studios almost invariably run on Protools.

But, just a minute. Wasn't that supposed to change from DR 15 in 2018? When it was advertised that Davinci Resolve is now "the" perfect NLE?

DR 16? It has added so many new editing features. For who then?

Professional editing is a very loose description. There are many types of professional editors and most have differing needs. Dr has added hundreds of new features for professionals that need them.
But not all professionals need them. If you want to know. Shop around maybe youll find one the works for you. Check CyberLink director a very capable nle.

Ricardo Marty

Professional editing is a very loose description. There are many types of professional editors and most have differing needs. Dr has added hundreds of new features for professionals that need them.
But not all professionals need them. If you want to know. Shop around maybe youll find one the works for you. Check CyberLink director a very capable nle.

Ricardo Marty

Ah! Again. We've shopped Premiere CC, Avid, FCPX and DR. Hence the request is after all this shopping.

I'm using Premiere Pro to edit primarily 1080P 60 h264 footage.

In an effort to escape Adobe's subscription business model, I downloaded among other things, the free version of DR.

My initial experience is that even the relatively light load of 1080P h264 is too much for my Intel motherboard, Core i7 W10 12 GB system. Even with all cores showing about 50% utilization, timeline playback is glitchy and scrubbing is worse. I haven't even attempted rendering.

Now, I find that my Nvidia GTX780 GPU is completely ignored by DR in both decoding h264 and timeline rendering.

Most of the other deleted "freemium" features like noise reduction, collaboration, 3D, etc. are justifiably omitted by BMD. They don't affect the core functionality.

But crappy scrubbing? Even on plain Jane HD footage? Inexcusable. Especially since it's not my hardware that's the limiting factor, it's the DR code. Seeing 50% utilization on all eight cores in Resource Monitor seems the smoking gun to me. Please correct me if I'm mis-interpreting these data.

I find the software nearly useless to me as-is. So, it's not really much of a "bait" at all, is it?

I am not talking about dumbing down Davinci Resolve. I am saying a "lite" DR can exist simultaneously for editors.

The lite version would be the dumbed down version. By necessity; can't be different price for same feature set. In your hardware examples, all of the cheaper products are "dumbed down" versions of the more expensive ones. Very common practice in hardware in order to share R&D across multiple price points. But hardware ages and gets chucked out relatively rapidly. You don't "upgrade" in the same way as software. You also don't have as high a level of support and maintenance over long periods of time.

This might make some sense in the long run once DR's market share stops growing and BM look to maximize cash from earlier R&D (i.e. typical consumer end-game strategy) but not now.

I suspect that the feature of DR that taxes the hardware is the engine that converts video to (as I understand it) 32-bit float uncompressed representation to allow it to be processed with effects such as color grading. Blackmagic would look at the level of difficulty of pulling this engine out of the software Vs whether or not this would improve their business case.