DR 16 The revolution in editing starts at 9AM PDT on April 8

Nvidia has a blog post out that said that Blackmagic Design is going to be working on integrating the Tensor cores.

Blackmagic DaVinci Resolve: World’s most popular color-grading application, using Turing Tensor Cores in Resolve 15 to accelerate AI inferencing for graphics enhancement.

This says resolve 15, except there was no update that claimed that increased performance using the tensor cores so it's probably going to be in 16

Source https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2018/08/13/turing-industry-support/

Resolve 15 has cudnn64 lib included, so *something* is using it.

I know for the fact that indeed, Resolve 15 is already using RT cores and AI on systems with Turing GPUs. Don't know which, though...

Piotr

well i work on advertisement design company, lots of designers are using affinity over illustrator and the company buy a few licences, designers working on affinity work faster and easier! and i know others companies are thinking about switch... i know affinity is still on development and adobe y far away but today affinity is the only software that seems be serious compoetitor... Corel is powerfull but it look so 1998.

If Affinity meets your needs, use it. There's a reason why software like PaintShop Pro, Xara Designer, etc. still exist. They still sell copies, because even though Adobe is industry standard, there are still a lot of people who don't need that level of power and can benefit by spending less on something more in line with their requirements (less excess functionality). Affinity fits that bill for a lot of people.

The statement about CorelDraw's UI is lost on me. Frankly it looks not much different than Adobe Illustrator, or a dozen other vector graphics editors...



The UI was revamped a few years ago, so you're a bit behind the curve with that criticism. Affinity Designer isn't really blazing any new territory there, outside of the Personas system which many designers have stated they could do without.

Avid looks like it's still designed for the late 80s, but that's not stopping it from continuing to dominate the Film editing industry.

IMO, Affinity is doing more to [further] marginalize the cheap alternatives (Paintshop Pro, Xara Designer, Pixelmator Pro, etc.) and F/OSS (GIMP, Inkscape, etc.) options than actually competing against Adobe.

In many areas, it doesn't even eliminate many of their drawbacks. It just repackages them. The same issues I see opening PSDs in a 3 year old version of PaintShop Pro, I can reproduce by opening the file in Affinity Photo (macOS, latest version from Mac App Store).

Doesn't work for me. Glad it works for you.

I wasted $100 on them, so clearly I was willing to go all in. It's just not possible because I still have to interchange a lot of files with Photoshop users.

Avid looks like it's still designed for the late 80s, but that's not stopping it from continuing to dominate the Film editing industry.

Avid is prevalent in Hollywood because it meets some very specific workflow needs of a particular type of production. Outside of Hollywood, it's barely used these days. To say it "dominates" editing generally is quite a stretch.

@ Greg
drive Baselight and Nucoda for a day or two and get back to us on that thought

Ok...so since that's not a realistic option, why don't you tell us what specific features you wish were implemented in Resolve that are currently possible in Baselight and Nucoda?

Baselight has Basegrade, with a spectacular set of tools to deal with Log footage... including tools well incorporated into waveform scopes and 5 zones of separation control (3 in Resolve), fairly accurate exposure tools and more complex transformations options...

LAB workflows are better incorporated into it too

nicely described on their web page:
"The most sophisticated yet simple grading tool we’ve ever developed. The Base Grade is new, both as a feature and as a concept in colour grading. It provides a set of unique, ground-breaking tools to make beautiful images based around the way people actually perceive colour – instead of the traditional lift/gamma/gain approach that grew from how we could adjust colour electronically"


I would much appreciate better Log tools in V16.... More than anything else I think.

I'm a simple man. At least that's what it says on my psychiatric evaluation. Anyway, I'd be happy if they would just make it so you can access the different "versions" of a clip from the menu bar (on the Color page) instead of having to show the clips and right clicking on them. They take up too much real estate, even on my 43" monitor.

Avid looks like it's still designed for the late 80s, but that's not stopping it from continuing to dominate the Film editing industry.

Avid is prevalent in Hollywood because it meets some very specific workflow needs of a particular type of production. Outside of Hollywood, it's barely used these days. To say it "dominates" editing generally is quite a stretch.

It's also due to fact that most senior editors there use AVID and they simply don't want to change (don't know well enough other NLEs). As you said- outside Hollywood AVID's dominance is shrinking massively.
I know huge VFX house which would happily reduce Flame usage (as it's really expensive), but experienced artist don't know well enough other tools, so they simply can't switch.

@ Greg
drive Baselight and Nucoda for a day or two and get back to us on that thought

Ok...so since that's not a realistic option, why don't you tell us what specific features you wish were implemented in Resolve that are currently possible in Baselight and Nucoda?

Baselight has Basegrade, with a spectacular set of tools to deal with Log footage... including tools well incorporated into waveform scopes and 5 zones of separation control (3 in Resolve), fairly accurate exposure tools and more complex transformations options...

LAB workflows are better incorporated into it too

nicely described on their web page:
"The most sophisticated yet simple grading tool we’ve ever developed. The Base Grade is new, both as a feature and as a concept in colour grading. It provides a set of unique, ground-breaking tools to make beautiful images based around the way people actually perceive colour – instead of the traditional lift/gamma/gain approach that grew from how we could adjust colour electronically"


I would much appreciate better Log tools in V16.... More than anything else I think.

Never done much in Baselight, but seen a bit and talked to operators. For me it looks like another level on top of Resolve. In some cases it's good in others not necessarily. Very complex tool is not always a good thing.

Never done much in Baselight, but seen a bit and talked to operators. For me it looks like another level on top of Resolve. In some cases it's good in others not necessarily. Very complex tool is not always a good thing.

Hey Andrew

Not that complex... and much needed with most types of footage shot these days ...

Anyway, I'd be happy if they would just make it so you can access the different "versions" of a clip from the menu bar (on the Color page) instead of having to show the clips and right clicking on them.

CMD+N for next version and CMD+B for the "before" version.

For Windows I'm guessing it's CTRL+N and CTRL+B.

I rarely show the clips and those shortcuts is what I use to cycle forwards or backwards to other versions.

They have advertised it as a revolution I am quite excited as to what changes they have made.

hmmmm..the last company who created a revolution in editing lost most of their high end user base.....just say'n. No slings and arrows required

I was thinking the same thing. It better not be another elastic time line. I hate fcpx. Final cut workaround as I call it.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Wish they just add a little bit of freedom to timeline. Quick and easy Vegas-like workflow way more usable for small projects.

1. Resolve use separate area for audio tracks (kind of same rudimentary layout from early days of classic fcp/premiere design), which makes it less usable for free timeline traveling and putting clips randomly whatever you want.
I really would like to see an option to disable fixed bottom timeline area for audio tracks and be able free move audio+video clip on timeline as single object similar as in Vegas app.

2. Hope they will add simple drag and drop crossfades that don't destroy clips when you move them. Similar to used in Vegas, SoundForge and Reaper editors for decades. Hold Shift+Alt when dragging is not the same. It works only in one direction. Never can't get why crossfade itself acts as separate object.

Baselight has Basegrade, with a spectacular set of tools to deal with Log footage... including tools well incorporated into waveform scopes and 5 zones of separation control (3 in Resolve), fairly accurate exposure tools and more complex transformations options...

Thank you for explaining.

I really would like to see an option to disable fixed bottom timeline area for audio tracks and be able free move audio+video clip on timeline as single object similar as in Vegas app.

That would be moving from a professional design to a consumer design. Not a good idea for Resolve, I think.

What new features can they add (...)? It seems to have most everything that's needed already there and sorted out.

German-language user interface

Nvidia has a blog post out that said that Blackmagic Design is going to be working on integrating the Tensor cores.

Blackmagic DaVinci Resolve: World’s most popular color-grading application, using Turing Tensor Cores in Resolve 15 to accelerate AI inferencing for graphics enhancement.

This says resolve 15, except there was no update that claimed that increased performance using the tensor cores so it's probably going to be in 16

Source https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2018/08/13/turing-industry-support/

Resolve 15 has cudnn64 lib included, so *something* is using it.

I know for the fact that indeed, Resolve 15 is already using RT cores and AI on systems with Turing GPUs. Don't know which, though...

Piotr

I just saw this blog which nvidia put out yesterday. Essentially they use it for scaling in Resolve 15.

With NVIDIA RTX, broadcasters can revive archived content, easily up-resing SD or HD content to 4K or 8K using AI. See how in Blackmagic Design’s DaVinci Resolve using Super Scale technology in the South Hall (SL216).

https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2019/04/05/nvidia-rtx-powers-game-changing-workflows-nab/

Any revolutionary tool in DR16 is welcome . The only thing I hope, is they don't move in the fcpx direction.

Avid looks like it's still designed for the late 80s, but that's not stopping it from continuing to dominate the Film editing industry.

Avid is prevalent in Hollywood because it meets some very specific workflow needs of a particular type of production. Outside of Hollywood, it's barely used these days. To say it "dominates" editing generally is quite a stretch.

Perplexed by this response... Clearly misinterpreting what I wrote, intentionally...

Avid targets and markets towards a specific market. It dominates that market. How many films in the graphics in post #2 in this thread have been edited in anything other than Media Composer? Very few. I don't think it's a stretch to think people on this forum would know what I was referring to - given the general audience. Avid is also used quite a bit in broadcast.

To turn around and say that I'm saying it dominates "generally" is actually a much bigger stretch than anything I wrote in that reply....

… which wasn't food for debate. It was only one example of one app that has an interface that looks decades old that is dominant within its markets. Pro Tools is another one. In fact, we can say the same thing about a lot of high end workstation software. Those companies are more concerned with delivering performance, functionality, scalability and reliability. Looking cute isn't super high on the priority list - and neither are needless UI revamps.

Affinity Photo/Designer can have the best UIs the world has ever seen. That's ultimately useless if I get a document with 20 layers and 4-6 of them look blank due to feature disparities when importing documents saved from Photoshop or Illustrator.

It's not a stretch to say that Avid dominates "generally" because Avid as a company includes Media Composer, Pro Tools, News Cutter, Nexis, Sibelius, S6, Venue Live Sound and Broadcast Graphics. As a whole they dominate media creation for Film, TV, News/Broadcast, Music Mixing, Audio Editorial and is a major player in Front Of House Live Sound Mixing.

Media Composer is one part of that mix and it dominates feature Film Editorial and is a major player in news production.

I love Resolve for color grading and I applaud they have a free version but when it comes to someone paying for editorial on a deadline or in a collaborative environment Avid dominates.

Sorry had to say it.

Wish they just add a little bit of freedom to timeline. Quick and easy Vegas-like workflow way more usable for small projects.

What do you mean VEGAS-like? The ability to do a quick edit without creating a project? This is basically already possible in Resolve. Just double click "Untitled Project," edit and render out and never save it... The only thing editors like VEGAS Pro do, is save you that extra step (they open with Untitled Project (i.e. New Project) loaded by default.

Workflow is just as easy for small projects. Resolve just loads slower and can't create proxies (Optimized Media) in the background like VEGAS Pro

1. Resolve use separate area for audio tracks (kind of same rudimentary layout from early days of classic fcp/premiere design), which makes it less usable for free timeline traveling and putting clips randomly whatever you want.

There are only downsides to doing this, and no benefits. Even people who use NLEs that allow you to place any type of object on any track (Typeless Tracks or Object-Oriented Editing i.e. MAGIX Video Pro X) default to putting the audio Tracks under the video tracks; for the same reasons NLEs like Resolve and others default to putting a splitter between the two track types.

VEGAS Pro allows you to do this because it started off an as Audio Editor, and track order isn't really that big of a deal with them as track order does not affect visibility (or track volume) in those applications. This capability in VEGAS Pro is vestigial. It's something they decided "not to remove" when the product focus shifted from Audio to Video - not something they added to it as an NLE to make editors' lives easier.

I really would like to see an option to disable fixed bottom timeline area for audio tracks and be able free move audio+video clip on timeline as single object similar as in Vegas app.

See above.

Also, VEGAS Pro doesn't have Audio+Video Tracks. Final Cut Pro X, MAGIX Video Pro X, and Pinnacle Studio (for Example) have Audio+Video Tracks. VEGAS Pro has Audio Tracks and Video Tracks. The two are distinct, and it simply creates linked objects by default when you add video clips with audio channels to the timeline.

That is assuming I'm correct in my assumption of what you are referring to- Video Objects with little audio waveforms attached to them, like Final Cut Pro X or MAGIX Video Pro X. Final Cut Pro X still puts Audio objects under the Primary Storyline, and video overlay/generators (or as clip video clip effects, naturally).

2. Hope they will add simple drag and drop crossfades that don't destroy clips when you move them. Similar to used in Vegas, SoundForge and Reaper editors for decades. Hold Shift+Alt when dragging is not the same. It works only in one direction. Never can't get why crossfade itself acts as separate object.

This is fairly standard behavior in Audio Editors and DAWs. VEGAS Pro is basically an NLE built on top of an audio editor. This is why it behaves this way. It also differs in how it implements Rippling, Slide, and a number of different things. Bewildering things that completely stomp users who used VEGAS for years and move to an NLE with more "standardized" behavior.

Transitions in VEGAS Pro do act as effects. Sometimes you want something different than the standard Dissolve. If you go to the VEGAS Pro Transitions tab and drag a "Dissolve" between two clips, the Effects Editor opens up by default. They are treated as effects, just like in other NLEs. The ability to automatically add Dissolves between overlaid clips, and the way it allows clips to cover non-destructively is vestigial from its days as an audio editor. Again, stuff they decided not to remove - as they were still keeping this functionality to maintain its ability to edit audio well as a competitive advantage over NLEs that were most one-dimensional - not something they "added to an NLE" as a convenience to make editors' lives easier.

It's not hard to drag a clip back out if you accidentally dragged anything over it. Resolve has very good trim tools, and an Undo function.

It also has a Fairlight Page, so you can do Audio Work without being distracted by video tracks. The Fairlight page has a video preview built into it - naturally.

There has been a pretty nice increase in "Make it like VEGAS"-inspired feature suggestions the past month or two... Interesting trend, but I think a lot of people doing this don't understand why VEGAS behaves the way it does, and why 75% of these are more applicable to the Fairlight Page than the Editing Page.

-----

Interesting to know how many people here would intersperse audio tracks between video tracks in an NLE if the software allowed them to do this, and why. That seems like an odd feature request I never did that in VEGAS Pro.

I do change track order in DAWs all the time, though. Track order doesn't matter in Audio Editing applications, as they don't affect track volume the way video track order affects visibility (not speaking of surround sound channels, that's different); and when mixing for video, I generally rendered out stems to import back into the video editor...

There has been a pretty nice increase in "Make it like VEGAS"-inspired feature suggestions the past month or two... Interesting trend, but I think a lot of people doing this don't understand why VEGAS behaves the way it does, and why 75% of these are more applicable to the Fairlight Page than the Editing Page.

Not that I don't think Vegas is sweet and everything....
But, considering its popularity, spread and usage across professional industries, usual target users and times it switched hands in the past 20 years - should anything really be more Vegas-like?

Not that I don't think Vegas is sweet and everything....
But, considering its popularity, spread and usage across professional industries, usual target users and times it switched hands in the past 20 years - should anything really be more Vegas-like?

Exactly. What happens in Vegas, should stay in Vegas.

I never liked Vegas GUI. Looked so cluttered.

Speaking of television and social networks (NO of cinema)

I think the way in which davinci resolve can revolutionize the editing video market is natively supporting the integration with Adobe, such as dinamic link ... I know that BlackMagic has Fusion, but most users receive from them graphic designers files from Illustrator or photoshop, and animate in after effects ... I think Davinci should take out the Fusion panel, and integrate directly with Adobe after effects, as well as premiere pro ... that would cause a massive migration of other softwares to Davinci Resolve.

Under Vegas-like I mean only timeline freedom and more user friendly transitions. Actually most other useful and ergonomic features where already copied to Resolve from Vegas over last years.
I just can't get the idea why most NLEs force me to keep all audio tracks somewhere at the bottom. In Vegas i just can put any clip whatever i want. If i don't need audio i put it all somewhere at the bottom, but if i need to keep an eye on some reference track i can always put it right near video track. So simple.
Same goes to transitions. They just could be improved in Resolve.

I just can't get the idea why most NLEs force me to keep all audio tracks somewhere at the bottom. In Vegas i just can put any clip whatever i want. If i don't need audio i put it all somewhere at the bottom, but if i need to keep an eye on some reference track i can always put it right near video track. So simple.
Same goes to transitions. They just could be improved in Resolve.

FCPX went that way....
And look how well that worked out for them in the professional market.

I never liked Vegas GUI. Looked so cluttered.

Vegas just have unlucky and very complicated history. It was started as simple editor and later resold many times to many different companies that try to improve it to modern reality without large success. Its original GUI actually don't have a GUI, it just use native Windows skin, but only in last versions draws another skin over it and makes things slower.
I used it in early days and was really happy because it was like all in one simple solution. Flexible full featured video + audio editor and even 3D transforms for more complicated compositing like After Effects or Fusion can do.

There has been a pretty nice increase in "Make it like VEGAS"-inspired feature suggestions the past month or two... Interesting trend, but I think a lot of people doing this don't understand why VEGAS behaves the way it does, and why 75% of these are more applicable to the Fairlight Page than the Editing Page.

Not that I don't think Vegas is sweet and everything....
But, considering its popularity, spread and usage across professional industries, usual target users and amount of time it switched hands in the past 20 years - should anything really be more Vegas-like?

VEGAS Pro has switched hands twice. Once from Sonic Foundry to Sony (at version 4... around 2003) and then to MAGIX (after version 13, around 2015-16?).

It has switched ownership a whopping 1x more than DaVinci Resolve, Fairlight, and Fusion.

VEGAS was quite popular in the past. It was basically the Final Cut Pro X of the Windows ecosystem. Maybe not super popular in the high end Film Production market, but it was pretty early in supporting a lot of features we take for granted today. Mixed format/framerate timeline editing. Real-Time Effects (Render-less) playback. They were probably the first NLE to support 4K (certainly one of the first), 3D Video (that turned out well), etc. They were very early to support R3D and some other (fairly popular) formats (like 4K XAVC).

It's actually a really deep NLE, since it was developed as both an Audio and Video Editor, with small slices of a compositing app built-in. It also has great support for Windows APIs, which we don't tend to get from cross platform applications.

VEGAS Pro supports things like RAW Camera Image formats and HEIF natively, simply by virtue of supporting the applicable Windows APIs. It can also use DirectShow Encoders and Decoders, so you don't need an application update to add support for formats if there is an Encoder/Decoder available for it to use. It has a lot of really good Audio Plug-Ins built-in, even if the UIs aren't super-modern. It supports DirectX as well as OpenFX and VST Plug-Ins, allowing it to share Plug-Ins (both ways) with other Windows products with good system support (like SONAR and others). It supports Media, Clip, and Track Effects for Audio and Video, as well as Adjustment Layers (not called that, but can function identically to them).

I think people underrate that software. A lot of the features that BMD added in recent versions of DaVinci Resolve were in VEGAS Pro for like a decade. No, it isn't a fantastic color grading solution (though the color correction is more than serviceable).

Unfortunately, it also happens to be one of the most undocumented NLEs, these days, and a lot of people gauge accessibility by the level of content available to aid in learning the software (contributing to people saying it's "too complicated to use" or "hard to learn"). Most people coming from VEGAS are basic users, at best, but they have latched onto some of the "Audio Editor" features which feel - to them - like major conveniences for video editing. The bad product documentation doesn't help matters, and authors stopped writing VEGAS Pro books around version 11 or so. A LOT has been added since then.

Yes, there are dozens of features in VEGAS Pro that would be useful to have in Resolve. However, when making a suggestion, you have to account for how Resolve is designed as an overall system and aim that suggestion in the correct general direction. Otherwise, it can come across as nonsensical.

Exactly. What happens in Vegas, should stay in Vegas.

I never liked Vegas GUI. Looked so cluttered.

Vegas just have unlucky and very complicated history. It was started as simple editor and later resold many times to many different companies

It changed ownership twice. 2 is a couple, not many.

VEGAS Pro has switched hands twice. Once from Sonic Foundry to Sony (at version 4... around 2003) and then to MAGIX (after version 13, around 2015-16?).

It has switched ownership a whopping 1x more than DaVinci Resolve, Fairlight, and Fusion.

VEGAS was quite popular in the past...

I didn't mean to disrespect Vegas... I love all NLEs , I currently teach 4, and have 8 of them installed on my laptop. I'd probably have Vegas too if it had a Mac version.

But it's not us... the world made its verdict. I've been in this industry for the past 20+ years and Vegas was always around... yet never a part of things. With all its potential innovation and niftiness, its not the choice, or go-to app for anything that matters (mostly), and I believe it never was.

And Resolve switched hands once since 1982... "whoppingly" different than twice since 1999

Okay. While responding to post on BMC User about Premiere's Freeform project window, I thought of something that would be way more useful and totally be awesome.

Being able to do an auto rough cut based off metadata would be way better though. Imagine shooting with a Blackmagic Camera, then upon creating a project, Resolve can comb through metadata, then create a master timeline named after the in-camera project name. That master timeline would then consist of timelines for each scene in order. Inside each of those scene timelines would have the shots placed in order, with takes grouped to be used with the Take Selector with takes and shot from different cameras put on different tracks.

If you have confidence in Resolves ability to link clips with external audio based on audio or timecode then those tracks could be full synced with each other. If marked takes as Good then you can have it group them lower on the Take Selector or keep the bad takes off the timeline but still have them in the Media Pool.

That way, if you pay attention to setting metadata correctly in-camera, you can let Resolve do the procedural stuff for you, and you to get to the actual creative stuff quicker.

All of this stuff would be provided as options after clicking "Create Project Using Metadata" and if you don't want it to create timelines then, at the very least, that data along with time data can be used to group footage in the Media Pool to find them quicker.

BOOM. I think that would be awesome and it's really not complicated to implement

and it's really not complicated to implement

you should have no trouble creating a python script for it then

you should have no trouble creating a python script for it then

True. Though I don't know anything about how much access Resolve gives to developers for creating timelines and stuff.

you should have no trouble creating a python script for it then

True. Though I don't know anything about how much access Resolve gives to developers for creating timelines and stuff.

Everything you described to create project/timelines etc is already accessible via python in DR15. So if you parse metadata you can then already do this. Just takes time and python skills. See for example also Igor metafide program who creates complete structures in resolve based on a simple template.

Im going to make a call on some sort of AI, machine learning that will allow selection of edit options based on the last clip added. Rather than trawling through clips it will use Audio, Video, Metadata analysis to bring up a selections with estimated in point, ranked using probabilities. Pie in the sky stuff, but someone mentioned Fusion 10 so why not?

Everything you described to create project/timelines etc is already accessible via python in DR15. So if you parse metadata you can then already do this. Just takes time and python skills. See for example also Igor metafide program who creates complete structures in resolve based on a simple template.

Oh! For some reason I thought Tom was talking about making a plugin. I forgot there was a console in Resolve because I never really used it but I'll have to try it out.

While you can add clips to a timeline, there is very limited access to actually changing properties and location of a clip. In Resolve v15, this can't be scripted with the public API.

They did add two new methods for the first time in a very long time in v15.3.1, so hopefully BMD developers haven't been discouraged about the lack of good user scripts for Resolve (I'm not counting Fusion scripts in this case).

And Resolve switched hands once since 1982... "whoppingly" different than twice since 1999 [/size]

DaVinci Resolve was released in 2004, not 1982.

The earlier da Vinci systems were not DaVinci Resolve. Those were different products.

You have an interesting way of interpreting history

Didn't think you were bashing anything, really. I just think it's easy for people to fall into the trap where they feel the need to denigrate one product to justify their preference for another. The hyperbole tends to reach a fever pitch rather quickly.

DaVinci Resolve was released in 2004, not 1982.

The earlier da Vinci systems were not DaVinci Resolve. Those were different products.

You have an interesting way of interpreting history

No I don't.

Da Vinci Resolve evolved from 2K, Renaissance and Classic ... that color correction system (generally called Da Vinci) switched hands 1 time since its start way back 37 years ago.


Again.. I didn't mean to denigrate anything.

Vegas is cool.

Take care.

Reading Nate's (great!) summaries has me longing for the past with Vegas. The features that stuck with me, if you thought Vegas was hard to learn, it wasn't. True they stopped documenting it but it always had something better, context sensitive help, with just enough right where you needed it, right when you needed it, in the sandbox you were playing in. It was super fast to edit, a bunch slower with renders. Seems like you can do about everything in Vegas, maybe more, but each and everything not quite as well. The windows API, every window could be resized, relocated. Still I like the preview/output windows in Resolve better. Vegas always felt a little cheap with the rendering codecs, resolve has the good hardware support and decklink and raw support. I left Vegas at V12 or about the time when Sony unloaded and tried to replace it with Catalyst. I felt abandoned, felt Vegas was dead, wishing the best for it now. To me, I hope Resolve 16 isn't so "revolutionary" that I have to relearn where they relocate/change my favorite features. I want improvement but consistency. The nicest improvement would be to allow me to change the project frame rate after I'm underway.

Is Resolve 16 so revolutionary it becomes a paid upgrade?

I never had any real complaints about Sony's NLE but when I saw the direction MAGIX were taking it and the almost total lack of support that was forthcoming - I switched to DR and have never looked back. Yes, there are some elements of Vegas that I'd love to see in DR but then I just stop and think about MAGIX and their reputation in the market and continue with DR and a big smile on my face.

I voted with my wallet.

DaVinci Resolve was released in 2004, not 1982.

The earlier da Vinci systems were not DaVinci Resolve. Those were different products.

You have an interesting way of interpreting history

No I don't.

Da Vinci Resolve evolved from 2K, Renaissance and Classic ... that color correction system (generally called Da Vinci) switched hands 1 time since its start way back 37 years ago.


Again.. I didn't mean to denigrate anything.

Vegas is cool.

Take care.

Nope. But not worth wasting time debating. Have a nice one.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

@ Tomroper:
Is Resolve 16 so revolutionary it becomes a paid upgrade?

Where did you found this info or is this speculation?

Dirk PEL

Reading Nate's (great!) summaries has me longing for the past with Vegas. The features that stuck with me, if you thought Vegas was hard to learn, it wasn't. True they stopped documenting it but it always had something better, context sensitive help, with just enough right where you needed it, right when you needed it, in the sandbox you were playing in. It was super fast to edit, a bunch slower with renders. Seems like you can do about everything in Vegas, maybe more, but each and everything not quite as well. The windows API, every window could be resized, relocated. Still I like the preview/output windows in Resolve better. Vegas always felt a little cheap with the rendering codecs, resolve has the good hardware support and decklink and raw support. I left Vegas at V12 or about the time when Sony unloaded and tried to replace it with Catalyst. I felt abandoned, felt Vegas was dead, wishing the best for it now. To me, I hope Resolve 16 isn't so "revolutionary" that I have to relearn where they relocate/change my favorite features. I want improvement but consistency. The nicest improvement would be to allow me to change the project frame rate after I'm underway.

Is Resolve 16 so revolutionary it becomes a paid upgrade?

Tom,
I share your thoughts about Vegas in 100%. In fact, most of my classical music, multicamera HD videos which became finished products (to be bought as DVDs only; unfortunately the HD BDs somehow never sold well) I edited in Vegas Pro and authored in DVD-Architect... However, when I switched to UHD/4K cameras my media became too heavy for full speed playback in Vegas - something extremely important when you need to synchronize audio with millisecond precision, in each of those many takes/angles of a 6-10 camera projects - even the most powerful GPUs didn't help, as playback GPU acceleration with CUDA has virtually been abandoned for nVidia GPUs newer than the 500 series (Maxwell). So when I saw how Resolve plays back 4k@50p (not to mention UHD@25p) media, and caches them after the grading node structure becomes really heavy - I abandoned Vegas completely for Resolve. Some keep saying OpenCL GPUs from AMD can still accelerate Vegas timeline playback - but somehow I never liked the AMD graphics...

Especially with my current CPU's architecture quirks, I'd hope the new Resolve 16 will be able to do more things in the background (caching, exports etc.) - just like Nuke Studio does today. We can dream

Cheers, my Friend

Piotr

Avid looks like it's still designed for the late 80s, but that's not stopping it from continuing to dominate the Film editing industry.

Avid is prevalent in Hollywood because it meets some very specific workflow needs of a particular type of production. Outside of Hollywood, it's barely used these days. To say it "dominates" editing generally is quite a stretch.

They just "redesigned" the UI for inspire the next generation editors.

Avid looks like it's still designed for the late 80s, but that's not stopping it from continuing to dominate the Film editing industry.

Avid is prevalent in Hollywood because it meets some very specific workflow needs of a particular type of production. Outside of Hollywood, it's barely used these days. To say it "dominates" editing generally is quite a stretch.

They just "redesigned" the UI for inspire the next generation editors.

Yes they have, now it looks like Resolve!

Yes they have, now it looks like Resolve!

Exactly!
That's what I thought too.

Yes they have, now it looks like Resolve!

Exactly!
That's what I thought too.

Interesting news, I wonder what Blackmagic have to offer that will push them forward as Avid seems to be very similar now.

With Media Composer 2019, aspiring and professional editors, freelancers and journalists will be inspired to work more creatively by taking advantage of a new user experience, a next generation Avid media engine with distributed processing, finishing and delivering capabilities, a customizable role-based user interface for large teams, and so much more.

. https://www.avid.com/press-room/2019/04 ... a-composer

Yes they have, now it looks like Resolve!

Exactly!
That's what I thought too.

Really? To me it looks so much like Premiere it's scary. The timeline used to have a real premium feel about it, now they are going with the flat style that Premiere has, and the track headers are basically identical, just wider. Mostly I like what they've done but this aspect is horrible (still have to see whether the changes are more than just skin deep and if they have done anything to make finishing work easier. Bet they don't even have composite modes still, or scopes that are usable)

Does not look like DR16 will have ProRes Raw included. Peter
https://www.provideocoalition.com/prore ... -nab-2019/