Fix the UI so. you can move panels around on Edit

Venting some long term problems with the Edit page -

my setup has LEFT, technically center , monitor as primary, the right monitor is well off to the right as secondary screen. here are the problems -

The effects panel is ALL the way to the right and I can barely drag anything from that panel over to the TL on the other screen. Using Wacom Large tablet in mouse mode. no I'm not switching to tablet/screen mode, that makes be crazy with how fast the mouse moves and lack of sensitivity , never mind wild arms swinging around. it doesn't work for me.

Why can't the effects panel be on the left side right next to the TL on the left screen ? basically flip the layout.

It would be super helpful to have the inspector panel share a tab with the mixer even in single screen view. I usually don't need both at once. This would let you have the entire top width of the screen for a viewer. double views would get larger, single view would be even better especially for this oddball res project I'm working with 7760 X 10080. Basically 4 HD 1080 screens wide ! having a larger viewer with be so helpful !!!! but the current layout and the inability to change it is painful. I know I'm not the only one to complain about this, we really do need a more flexible layout and moveable panels in the Edit page !

S

Why can't the effects panel be on the left side right next to the TL on the left screen ? basically flip the layout.

Even though I use a 2-display layout for GUI with Resolve, there are times when I need the controls closer, so I just temporarily switch to a 1-display layout, do what I need (with something like the effects panel), and when I'm done, go back to the 2-display layout. The toggle shortcut I use is ^shift⌥D ("D" for dual-screen), which is one of those key combinations I'd never hit accidentally.

You could also program that in a Streamdeck or an XKeys macro panel if you wanted. I do this all the time, plus I also have custom layouts for Conform, Editing, Color, stuff like that. So the layout kind of depends on what I'm trying to do at the moment. The User Presets for Workspace layout can be very powerful, even though you are limited on some of the options (like moving palettes).

I would love so much to be able to move the panels around and dock them into different positions. Then after positioning and sizing the panels, save layout presets and assign them to keyboard shortcuts for fast switching. I do this all the time in my DAW Reaper and it's awesome.

Also this should be available on all of the pages, not just the Edit page. This would be particularly useful in the Fusion page.

+1

This lack of feature is probably the only thing stopping me from buying studio. I cant believe the resistance to this feature that should be considered standard UI 1.0 now and is in most software with panes for well over 20 years now.

This lack of feature is probably the only thing stopping me from buying studio. I cant believe the resistance to this feature that should be considered standard UI 1.0 now and is in most software with panes for well over 20 years now.

I asked about this as long ago as summer 2010, and back then I was told, "if we allowed complete customization of the individual palette location, there would be compromises in performance and speed." My guess (and I have no way of knowing either way) is that if it were easy, it would have been done long ago.

For the record, we did have customizable palettes and pages in daVinci 2K, the hardware predecessor to DaVinci Resolve. But they're two completely different programs -- as far as I know, they don't share any common code. 2K also cost about $200,000, so you figure for $299, there are some compromise. In general, there are a thousand improvements in Resolve compared to what we used to have.

This lack of feature is probably the only thing stopping me from buying studio. I cant believe the resistance to this feature that should be considered standard UI 1.0 now and is in most software with panes for well over 20 years now.

I asked about this as long ago as summer 2010, and back then I was told, "if we allowed complete customization of the individual palette location, there would be compromises in performance and speed."

Maybe they need to look at Reaper for how to implement it correctly? Wasting time having to futz around with each panel individually based on the task is absolutely a compromise in speed.

My guess (and I have no way of knowing either way) is that if it were easy, it would have been done long ago.

Only if they put it as a priority and then actually do it. I can think of dozens of things off the top of my head that should be easy to implement (many of them are partially implemented already) but still hasn't been done.

Maybe they need to look at Reaper for how to implement it correctly? Wasting time having to futz around with each panel individually based on the task is absolutely a compromise in speed.

An audio-only program has nothing to do with a video editing/color-correction/VFX compositing/audio mixing program like Resolve. You could draw a better comparison with Premiere and Resolve... but even then, it's an Apples and Cantaloupe comparison.

Only if they put it as a priority and then actually do it. I can think of dozens of things off the top of my head that should be easy to implement (many of them are partially implemented already) but still hasn't been done.

I think nobody understands what's "easy" and what's "hard" in terms of implementation except the dev team. And goal number one is to make Resolve more reliable and robust, not necessarily to give it a prettier interface to placate people who are new to the platform.

It’s pretty clear to me at least that BMD’s current goal number one is to add “killer features.” Making Resolve more stable and robust is very far behind that.

An audio-only program has nothing to do with a video editing/color-correction/VFX compositing/audio mixing program like Resolve. You could draw a better comparison with Premiere and Resolve... but even then, it's an Apples and Cantaloupe comparison.

While Reaper isn't a video NLE, it does also have video capabilities including video editing features that I'd love to see in Resolve. But if you want a direct apples to apples comparison, then compare Reaper to other DAWs. Reaper is unbelievably light weight, efficient, fast and stable compared to other DAWs despite being the most customizable DAW by a long shot. This proves that allowing for a high level of customization does not have to be a factor in slowing the application down or reducing stability, otherwise Reaper would be far slower and buggier than Pro Tools or other DAWs, but it's just the opposite.

I think nobody understands what's "easy" and what's "hard" in terms of implementation except the dev team. And goal number one is to make Resolve more reliable and robust, not necessarily to give it a prettier interface to placate people who are new to the platform.

How hard is an auto-crossfade mode? How hard is adding more fade curves to video tracks instead of only having linear fades? How hard is it to not delete transitions when moving clips even one frame when in selection mode? How hard is showing a preview of the clip being adjusted in the viewer when adjusting the edge of a transition (Resolve has a split screen view when moving an edit point, why not copy-paste that for transition edges)? How hard is adding standard solo/mute buttons on video tracks just like they have for the audio tracks? How hard is it to remember where I was when switching between pages and restore the screen when I switch back? I'd say that Layered Video Editing should also not be too difficult as this is already essentially done with Audio Layered Editing. Just copy and paste it for video tracks (there are a couple bugs with Audio Layers, but that's another topic). So my point is that even relatively simple things will still not get done if they don't make the decision to do them because they have other priorities.

Finally, this has nothing to do with a "prettier interface for new people", this is a workflow issue. Having to futz around with panels one at a time because you can't position and size them the way you want and save screen sets impacts your workflow. Add on the fact that Resolve "forgets" where I was and what panel, tab, etc. I was on when going from Fusion to the Edit page to preview and then going back to Fusion. The user interface should get out of the way, so we can focus on the task at hand... but Resolve's user interface is constantly getting in my face demanding my attention. I don't have to deal with that in Reaper. I can switch between mixing, editing, MIDI, video, etc. immediately with a single key press and all the panels I need for that task move to where I want them and the ones I don't need are hidden.

What’s easy to implement in one program - say Reaper - may indeed be hard to implement in another like Resolve. The reason though has little to do with the domain (video vs audio) and almost totally to do with how well the codebase has been factored.

If there are small well-defined modules with fairly thin interfaces between them then they can be plugged together like one does in Unix with pipes but on steroids. Or like one does in the Color Page’s node editor.

If the interfaces aren’t clean and simple then the amount of code and amount of dependencies balloon out of control.

This is typical in most software projects as there’s never enough time to “do it right” so the expedient hack is resorted to time and again and pretty soon the code is riddled with bugs and close to unmaintainable.

I’m betting this is the situation with Resolve but again - this is the most common way to make software in our “more for less” business climate. More and bigger features done by fewer developers in less time. Never enough time to go back and fix things - let along refactor things that turned out to need to be carved up differently.

Just look at Boeing. Business drove them to this. Happily nobody dies when Resolve doesn’t work quite right.

As a software developer of over 40 years, I call pure bunk.

Undocking windows will not create any massive complexity or performance problems whatsoever.

Ive seen this repeatedly in software. For some reason developers find certain features that for some reason they dont think are important and just entrench themselves rather than listen to users.

Editing vertical videos right now especially with the way the preview window is fixed is nightmarish. We cant even move it to a left pane, its always relegated to the top. Even CapCut can do it. Surely if CapCut can do it, Davinci can.

What’s easy to implement in one program - say Reaper - may indeed be hard to implement in another like Resolve.

In terms of "easiness" I was responding to the idea that if it was easy it would have already been done, but that's no necessarily the case. Even if it's easy, if BMD never makes it a priority to do it then it will still never get done. The extra features I listed should indeed be easy to do inside Resolve given that everything I listed is partially implemented already, but they still haven't been finished yet.

Whether or not moving panels around in Resolve is "easy" for BMD to do given their codebase, I have no idea. However, Marc said he asked about this 14 years ago and there has apparently been no progress on this. Whether it's easy or not, in 14 years they should have been able to get it done by now even if it was incredibly difficult with slow incremental development over the years. But it appears it's just not a priority for them. If we had customizable workspaces that we could switch between there would have been no need to develop the Cut page, so they could have saved time and effort on that with better results because we could setup the workspace to work best for us.

Mostly agree. I just fear that Resolve is a rickety tower of mess inside. Once that happens it’s pretty hard to do much of anything - other than making fairly self-contained things that you bolt on to the edges of the codebase.

It’s almost funny that so much of our world is now constructed in code but there’s no code inspection like there is building inspection. No unbiased evaluation of what’s going on inside. Nobody has to live in a house constructed that way but we all live in a world controlled by that sort of software.

Of course it may be that Resolve is pristine inside and the things we want that seem easy really are easy but BMD just has no need to listen to us. I don’t think that’s the case but no way I can know.

Of course it may be that Resolve is pristine inside and the things we want that seem easy really are easy but BMD just has no need to listen to us. I don’t think that’s the case but no way I can know.

I think that's unkind and untrue. I think BMD is doing the best they can with the resources they have. Job #1 is trying to fix the crashes, instabilities, and work out whatever problems there are with the ever-changing GPU drivers (and different OS combinations) out there, and that's a horrific moving target. Go over to Adobe Premiere's user forum and you'll see an avalanche of complaints there, far worse than what we have here.

Let's wait and see what Blackmagic introduces at NAB in two weeks. You never know: they've surprised us before.

I’m hoping for some UI love at NAB as well.

I really don’t think I’m being unkind. The part you quoted was what I said I DIDN’T think was going on. I think most likely that the code is a mess inside. They’ve been adding features like mad with what I THINK is a small team. Plus they’ve had to meld three codebases to do so.

I was a software dev for 20 years. Several companies including Microsoft. I know what it’s like. I’m not singling BMD out. This is just the reality of software in a profit-driven world. It’s really hard to avoid this.

I really don’t think I’m being unkind. .

The person being unkind -- especially on the Internet -- rarely does.