Blackmagic Forum

I know what you're thinking, "why would you post that on THIS forum??!!"

Don't misunderstand. After 9 months of working with it, I love DR. It is really powerful and that is part of the problem. My system just can't handle it. I've done all of the tricks and tips to help with a smoother playback but I can't even see if my audio and video are syncing up. I have a playback rate around 3-4. I have to render everything, then watch the rendered file to see if everything is synced. When it is not, it takes guess work and more rendering, watching, repeat,etc. I am spending so much time on this that it until I get a new laptop, it probably isn't worth it.

So until I get a new laptop, are there any alternatives you would recommend instead of DR?
what attracted me to DR originally was:

-the .wav audio rendering (none of that 500-600 kbps compromises) I want .wav quality 1536 kbps audio quality in the rendered file.
-great video quality. Even on low settings, I still felt like there was no degradation from my original video.
-fusion-I love the professional look of the titles.

I never used the color correction, fairlight, etc. I am willing to pay maybe up to around 100 USD if necessary.

any suggestions would be helpful.

If you're only willing to pay up to $100, I think you need to go for "free." You didn't say what operating system you're using, but I'm guessing Windows.

Check out https://www.provideocoalition.com/free- ... 017-guide/. The first two choices there are Resolve and Fusion, but if you scroll further down you'll see some other options. Kdenlive is now available for Windows in beta and I checked it out last year; it might be worth a look. It was originally developed for Linux, and the Linux version is more full-featured, but I was able to edit video in the Windows version without any crashes. On my Linux machine I can work with ProRes HQ files in Kdenlive; I haven't tried that on the Windows beta.

I know what you're thinking, "why would you post that on THIS forum??!!"

Don't misunderstand. After 9 months of working with it, I love DR. It is really powerful and that is part of the problem. My system just can't handle it. I've done all of the tricks and tips to help with a smoother playback but I can't even see if my audio and video are syncing up. I have a playback rate around 3-4. I have to render everything, then watch the rendered file to see if everything is synced. When it is not, it takes guess work and more rendering, watching, repeat,etc. I am spending so much time on this that it until I get a new laptop, it probably isn't worth it.

So until I get a new laptop, are there any alternatives you would recommend instead of DR?
what attracted me to DR originally was:

-the .wav audio rendering (none of that 500-600 kbps compromises) I want .wav quality 1536 kbps audio quality in the rendered file.
-great video quality. Even on low settings, I still felt like there was no degradation from my original video.
-fusion-I love the professional look of the titles.

I never used the color correction, fairlight, etc. I am willing to pay maybe up to around 100 USD if necessary.

any suggestions would be helpful.

What are the specs of your computer?

Mark Grgurev wrote:What are the specs of your computer?

Version 10.0.15063 Build 15063
Other OS Description Not Available
OS Manufacturer Microsoft Corporation
System Name
System Manufacturer Hewlett-Packard
System Model HP EliteBook 8470p
System Type x64-based PC
System SKU D3L44UC#ABA
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3360M CPU @ 2.80GHz, 2801 Mhz, 2 Core(s), 4 Logical Processor(s)
BIOS Version/Date Hewlett-Packard 68ICF Ver. F.43, 7/16/2013
SMBIOS Version 2.7
Embedded Controller Version 66.54
BIOS Mode Legacy
BaseBoard Manufacturer Hewlett-Packard
BaseBoard Model Not Available
BaseBoard Name Base Board
Platform Role Mobile
Secure Boot State Unsupported
PCR7 Configuration Binding Not Possible
Windows Directory C:\WINDOWS
System Directory C:\WINDOWS\system32
Boot Device \Device\HarddiskVolume1
Installed Physical Memory (RAM) 12.0 GB
Total Physical Memory 11.9 GB
Available Physical Memory 9.01 GB
Total Virtual Memory 13.7 GB
Available Virtual Memory 10.5 GB
Page File Space 1.81 GB
Page File C:\pagefile.sys
Device Encryption Support Reasons for failed automatic device encryption: PCR7 binding is not supported, Hardware Security Test Interface failed and device is not InstantGo, Un-allowed DMA capable bus/device(s) detected, Disabled by policy
Hyper-V - VM Monitor Mode Extensions Yes
Hyper-V - Second Level Address Translation Extensions Yes
Hyper-V - Virtualization Enabled in Firmware No
Hyper-V - Data Execution Protection Yes

According to HP's website here's the key info on your graphics processor, which is probably the root of your problem:

Integrated: Intel HD Graphics 4000
Discrete: AMD Radeon HD 7570M, with 1GB dedicated GDDR5 video memory

Resolve is unlike any other NLE in the demands it places on the GPU.

Brad Hurley wrote:According to HP's website here's the key info on your graphics processor, which is probably the root of your problem:

Integrated: Intel HD Graphics 4000
Discrete: AMD Radeon HD 7570M, with 1GB dedicated GDDR5 video memory

Resolve is unlike any other NLE in the demands it places on the GPU.

so if I had a similar laptop with a better GPU, I wouldn't have any problems? meaning, my GPU is my only problem?

Jim Figurski wrote:
so if I had a similar laptop with a better GPU, I wouldn't have any problems? meaning, my GPU is my only problem?

Hard to tell -- you don't have a lot of system memory either -- you should read the Resolve configuration guide to learn what specs you need on a Windows laptop. http://documents.blackmagicdesign.com/D ... _Guide.pdf

It's odd, though: I have no trouble doing basic editing of video and audio on my Mac Mini, which has similar specs to yours: i5 processor, only 8 gigs of RAM (you have more), integrated Intel graphics. I can even do one-node color grading with no problems; once I start adding multiple nodes or more complicated stuff with power windows, etc. it starts skipping frames. But the Windows requirements are different and maybe your machine just can't handle it -- check out the configuration guide.

What kind of video are you editing? 4K? 1080p?

Hi.

I don't know what version of Resolve you are using?

Resolve 12 have less demand on hardware, but you Laptops specification is very low.

Regards Carsten.

What I'm really thinking is: why would you post this twice?

Jim Figurski wrote:up to around 100 USD if necessary.

iMovie?

jPo, CSI

Edius will do it for you, but it's 500$. It's best option for editing on low spec hardware.

I’m on an iMac, at the beginning I had jumpy playbacks, if I even added a title or do one color correction in the color page. Then I found out Prores 422 HQ was a problem, since I shoot everything XDCAM, Prores 422 LT, has given me a smooth playback.
But still I know I need a faster machine, in the mean time, for 2K Prores 422 LT, works best for me, I shoot XDCAM 1080.
Fusion now is neeeding 32 GB, it started out with 8GB.

Hope this helps.

Yasir

iMac 3.3 GHz
Core i7 Late 2015
16GB Ram,
Intel Iris Pro graphics 6200 1536
On High Sierra.

you might want to look at shotcut or openshot:

https://shotcut.org/
https://www.openshot.org/

they are nowhere near as deep as dr but for a weak system and simple needs they might be enough.

BabaG

We prefer Lightworks as an NLE for all our medium and long form programmes and perform all our sound multi track Stereo and 5.1 mixes there (exporting a pre-mixed WAV file) but we Conform from AAF/EDLs and finish in Resolve. Lightworks will allow Red 8K file editing on relatively low spec laptop so you could try the Free version but output codecs and resolution are compromised. The Pro version is available on a Month, Annual or Buy Outright basis. see: http://www.lwks.com

Microsoft Movie Maker? $0.00

I was using Sony/Magix Movie Studio on a dual-core 8GB system with a low-spec video card and it was "usable" but not pleasant. Videos played at their proper frame-rate on the timeline and I think the list price is under US$100 but be aware that the support (in my experience) is crap and there are a lot of bugs that take forever to get sorted between versions. However, it *is* an option -- but one I'm glad that I'm no longer using

I second Lightworks. Runs well on a similar spec’d Mac Mini.
If you publish online only, it’s free.

this laptop is not ok neither to run Battlefield.
Resolve uses more hw resources than video games.

thanks for everyone's responses.

Yesterday I tried Kdenlive, but right off the bat, it would not accept my .wav file. From what I saw, it looked user-friendly and might re-visit it at another time but I am in a bit of a time crunch.

I tried shotcut and it was pretty good. still a little laggy on my laptop but I think I'm going to look into it. I tried LW a few years ago and I'll go back and revisit that as well. Thanks, I totally forgot about that.


Ultimately, I ended up using DR just because I love it and feel comfortable with it (despite not knowing a lot of basic functions). It took me into the wee hours of the night, but I love the result.
One thing that helped me when I was using DR was I shrunk the preview window to like 14%. It was hard to see though. I have tried to rollback to a previous version, but for some reason it wouldn't let me. And it doesn't seem to really matter what video format/codec I put it, it is all the same. I even encoded some of my videos I was working with to a DR-friendly format, but it really didn't matter.

I haven't had too much of a problem with DR until now because I have been making "normal" videos for youtube. But the one I'm working on now, is a guitar cover of myself playing with a death metal song. It is extremely fast and being a few 10ths of a second off will throw the video/sync off.

I'm going to try to LW later, but ultimately, I just need a better machine to satisfy DR

Hi.

Have you considered a Desktop next time?
It will even be cheaper for the same performance, or much higher performance for the same price.

Regards Carsten.

Carsten Sellberg wrote:Hi.

Have you considered a Desktop next time?
It will even be cheaper for the same performance, or much higher performance for the same price.

Regards Carsten.

I do have a desktop (that needs an upgrade too) but the convenience of a portable machine is indispensable. I can get so much done having it always near me.

Jim Figurski wrote:[
I do have a desktop (that needs an upgrade too) but the convenience of a portable machine is indispensable. I can get so much done having it always near me.

Okay, but at the risk of sounding like a broken record, read the Configuration Guide to see what is recommended in terms of laptops. If you want to run Resolve on a laptop, it's going to be an expensive laptop. You might be able to get away with a lower-spec laptop if you're only editing and not doing any color correction or Fusion, but ignore the Configuration Guide at your peril.

yes I will heed them next time. I have no idea what they mean, but i have a "computer guy" friend who will be able to decipher it for me. just out of curiosity, how much do you mean by an expensive laptop?

Jim Figurski wrote:so if I had a similar laptop with a better GPU, I wouldn't have any problems? meaning, my GPU is my only problem?

Yes.
Take your 100, add 300, forget your laptop and buy a decent GPU to put in your desktop.

Jim Figurski wrote:yes I will heed them next time. I have no idea what they mean, but i have a "computer guy" friend who will be able to decipher it for me. just out of curiosity, how much do you mean by an expensive laptop?

Not much to decipher; the guide actually lists three recommended Windows laptops:

HP ZBook series
Dell Precision M7000 series
Razer RZ09-195 14" laptop

I'm in Canada, so the prices I'd give you on these would be 20% higher than what you'd pay if you're in the US, but you can look them up online. The Razer is about $2,400 USD and the HP and Dell are likely higher.

There are plenty of other laptops that could run Resolve, and others can chime in here with recommendations, but it's not going to run well on a standard consumer or business laptop. Someone complained here that it wouldn't run on their "industry standard" Thinkpad, but that's the wrong industry. Business laptops are not meant for editing video.

Brad Hurley wrote:HP ZBook series
Dell Precision M7000 series
Razer RZ09-195 14" laptop

Hi.

I am sorry they are all old models. Peter Chamberlain wrote yesterday that 'When He get back to the office He will start a review' of the Resolve 15 Configuration Guide.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=78120

Regards Carsten.

I'm just gonna repeat the sentiment that you need a better laptop but point out that that's true for any NLEs. You generally want a good amount of RAM and a good GPU with a decent amount of GPU memory.

Even with compressed footage or bayered footage, the frames that NLEs work on will be stored uncompressed and debayered in memory so that alone can quickly eat up system or GPU RAM.

When doing any sort of color grading or applying any kind of effects (this would also apply to transitions), an NLE will see the frame as an array of pixels with the given color grading or effect operation needing to be applied to be applied to each pixel usually without dependence on the previous pixel. Since GPU's have thousands of cores and even HD footage contains about 2.2 million pixels, this is an ideal task for them which is why a good GPU is so important for NLEs.

That's not to say that certain NLEs can't use GPU and memory more efficiently than others, just that what's good for one NLE will generally good for all NLEs.

music covers for youtube? maybe you should look at reaper. its video functionality is minimal but good for what it sounds like you're doing and it's very lightweight. also free to try and something like $60 to buy for personal use.

BabaG

Mark Grgurev wrote:That's not to say that certain NLEs can't use GPU and memory more efficiently than others, just that what's good for one NLE will generally good for all NLEs.

This is true, but the Resolve configuration guide states explicitly:

"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."

So I think it's fair to say that your GPU specs are more critical if you want to use Resolve than most other NLEs.

Mark Grgurev wrote: That's not to say that certain NLEs can't use GPU and memory more efficiently than others, just that what's good for one NLE will generally good for all NLEs .

Hi

In Resolve the CPU is used to run the app, disk I/O and compression and decompression of codecs.
Resolve does all its image processing in the GPU on the graphics card. More CUDA/OpenCL Cores are better.

And on page 19 in the current Resolve 15 Configuration Guide:

For HP and DELL Laptops is says

'While performance for many applications and UHD resolution will be limited' ... 'for Resolve use.'

Regards Carsten.

Carsten Sellberg wrote:[
And on page 19 in the current Resolve 15 Configuration Guide:

For HP and DELL Laptops is says

'While performance for many applications and UHD resolution will be limited' ... 'for Resolve use.'
.

Right, but the OP said he never does any color correction or Fusion. It's all basic video editing and audio sync. I actually think that much can be done on a much lower-spec machine (I have been doing that on my i5 Mac Mini with 8 gigs of RAM and integrated Intel graphics for the last 9 months; I use that machine for convenience and testing...real work gets done on a Mac Pro).

Craig Marshall wrote:We prefer Lightworks as an NLE for all our medium and long form programmes and perform all our sound multi track Stereo and 5.1 mixes there (exporting a pre-mixed WAV file) but we Conform from AAF/EDLs and finish in Resolve. Lightworks will allow Red 8K file editing on relatively low spec laptop so you could try the Free version but output codecs and resolution are compromised. The Pro version is available on a Month, Annual or Buy Outright basis. see: http://www.lwks.com

You beat me to it. I've found LightWorks to be faster than even Edius (which is impressively fast). And it's efficient and user friendly; I've edited a few shorts filmed in 8K using LightWorks on an HP Spectre x360 with a 2GB Pascal GPU.

Try that with... well, just about ANYTHING else.

Brad Hurley wrote:Okay, but at the risk of sounding like a broken record, read the Configuration Guide to see what is recommended in terms of laptops. If you want to run Resolve on a laptop, it's going to be an expensive laptop. You might be able to get away with a lower-spec laptop if you're only editing and not doing any color correction or Fusion, but ignore the Configuration Guide at your peril.

Unless it has a fruit on it, not that expensive. I can work with 8K on a $1500 HP laptop... and that's no longer even a current model.

Rakesh Malik wrote: Unless it has a fruit on it, not that expensive. I can work with 8K on a $1500 HP laptop... and that's no longer even a current model.

Hi

Don't you think you need to add the cost of the 1080Ti in the RazerCore?

Regards Carsten.

Another option for the O.P. who wants the immediacy and portability of his laptop is the use the tried & true off-line/on-line post scenario where he edits on his laptop, exports an EDL/AAF/XML then grades and finishes in Resolve on his Desktop machine. With some HD, 4K and now 8K material, using lower res Proxy transcodes on the laptop and full rez raw or whatever on the Desktop is still a valid method, especially as most if not all laptops will not have reliable and properly calibrated grading display screens.

Carsten Sellberg wrote:In Resolve the CPU is used to run the app, disk I/O and compression and decompression of codecs.
Resolve does all its image processing in the GPU on the graphics card. More CUDA/OpenCL Cores are better.

Of course the CPU is used, it's central to all processing on a computer. That being said, for editing and color correction, it looks like memory and GPU performance tend to be a bottleneck to performance more often then CPU performance. When it comes to budgeting for an editing computer, regardless of the NLE someone intends to use, they'll likely be better off with a $250 CPU and a $500 GPU than a $500 CPU and a $250 GPU.

Nucoda Academy should be avb shortly, it's the full tool set of Nucoda, minus the DVO plug-in's, and limited to HD /ProRezLt export, or playout to an external recorder like the hyperdeck through a decklink or AJA equlivent

it calls for much less GPU power than Resolve

it's free, and worth downloading / testing for color only, no editing, no gfx

for a hobyist haveing Resolve, Lightworks, AvidFirst, Nucoda Academy on your machine should be a no-brainer

Dermot Shane wrote:Nucoda Academy should be avb shortly, it's the full tool set of Nucoda, minus the DVO plug-in's, and limited to HD /ProRezLt export, or playout to an external recorder like the hyperdeck through a decklink or AJA equlivent

it calls for much less GPU power than Resolve

it's free, and worth downloading / testing for color only, no editing, no gfx

for a hobyist haveing Resolve, Lightworks, AvidFirst, Nucoda Academy on your machine should be a no-brainer

+1

Carsten Sellberg wrote:

Rakesh Malik wrote: Unless it has a fruit on it, not that expensive. I can work with 8K on a $1500 HP laptop... and that's no longer even a current model.

Hi

Don't you think you need to add the cost of the 1080Ti in the RazerCore?

Regards Carsten.

I can work with up to 2K without the RazerCore in Resolve and LightWorks.

Dermot Shane wrote:for a hobyist haveing Resolve, Lightworks, AvidFirst, Nucoda Academy on your machine should be a no-brainer

I'm looking forward to getting familiar with Nucoda.

From memory, Nucoda is one of the few pro Colorist programmes which 'correctly' uses your GPU for reliable video display so not requiring a Decklink or Aja I/O board. Confirmation?

Craig Marshall wrote:From memory, Nucoda is one of the few pro Colorist programmes which 'correctly' uses your GPU for reliable video display so not requiring a Decklink or Aja I/O board. Confirmation?

no -- mistika and flame/lustre (to name just the linux based ones) also come with sufficient resp. not artificialy limited GPU output support and reliable display filter capabilities, although you'll most likely use them with dedicated video i/o cards and sdi connected monitors in real world studio envrionments.

It's changing. Some studios with Flames are moving away from SDI monitoring. I don't know if Flame GUI preview is/can be color managed, but it supports 10bit now.