Full Screen 'Viewer' on second display...

I ran for 1.5 year on Resolve 12.5 on a 2013 15' MBP and attached to the TB1 ports a Cinema Display , a TB raid with 4SSD's for storing the source files and at the end a TB mini monitor which fed an Color corrected EIZo over SDI. Ran it in sort of clamshell mode so disabled internal monitor hidden away under the desk.
Only edited/graded on ProRes and worked fine if i stayed away from NR or other heavy OFX stuff.
I i needed that i tuned that in slowly (and with patience) , then cached the results and moved on.
Far from ideal but got me started on the Resolve way and was able to do about anything i wanted.
Also if you understand the bottleneck and how to work around them , you can do most of the stuff you want.
Now with the current generations of much faster and more powerfull laptops, you should be able to get work done if you plan your workflow properly.

What i still love from laptop in combination with a nice central DB setup is that you can do some quick scratches, starts, some light stuf, proxy work. Then open the project on you main workstation and do the heavy lifting.
Now even better with the resolve remote render options i can submit a job from the laptop onto my 32 resolve core render VM and deliver from heavy source material with full NR/OFX etc.
Its all about workflow and smart setup of your resources.
Comparing laptops with workstations is useless. Use both for what they are good at.

Wireless112 -
Thanks for getting the thread back on topic.
DIY cooling fan replacement? Really?

+1 "I wasted one of my high throughput PCIe slots on a decklink card, when all I need is a window to view fullscreen."

"The upper class of professionals also have far different environments, from the wannabe's."
I have huge respect for the pros here but they also have different budgets.
I'm not a wannabe and have no aspirations, nor the time and talent, to become a pro.
I do need an NLE with "Full Screen 'Viewer' on second display" as is supported by my GPU. (4K HDR10 4:2:0 monitor or TV)

What is the BMD official position please? This issue is a deal breaker for me.
I was hoping to see it in Resolve 16. If BMD has no plans to add this simple feature then I must look elsewhere. One of my other concerns is that user feature requests on the forum are primarily from the Pros - many of which I don't even understand. The product is becoming increasingly complex with increasingly expensive hardware demands. I was happy with the ver15 Edit page.
I see DR moving toward an Avid competitor for the pros and may sell at Avid prices.

I'm neither a pro or a noob. I built my first PC in the 90s using Canopus DVREX (now Grass Valley) as my intro to DV and NLE. I have used Premiere, Edius, Vegas and others.

I agree with the need for a moderator to ensure users stay on topic.

I believe BMD's position is that if you want full-screen then buy a DecLink card.

This is definitely their call and even though I (like many others) can't understand why they don't just include it in the list of "studio" features, I guess they have their reasons.

Sadly for me, although I was planning to spend the extra money on a card, my current editing rig has no free slots so this will have to wait until the next time I upgrade my hardware (probably in about a year's time once the Rizen3/NAVI prices have stabilized or pushed down the equivalent Intel/NVIDIA prices due to competition).

In the meantime I'll just take the hit of having to grade and edit with what amounts to a view that is little more than a thumbnail on steroids

The whole topic has been debated ad-nauseum so I suggest that folk do some searches of the forums here to see what's been said (and re-said) before.

I see DR moving toward an Avid competitor for the pros and may sell at Avid prices.

Yeah you clearly have not been paying attention to Resolve price development over the last 10 years from 100k+ down to 1k , down to 300$ down to free.

See your own footer : Resolve 15.3 "free" Win 10 64bit.

I agree with the need for a moderator to ensure users stay on topic.

I agree as well as this topic would have thankfully been gone 2 years ago as groundhog day syndrome (asking /demanding for things over and over and over and over again expecting a different result.)
BM's point is simple and cheap. Get a card or get over it or elsewhere.

I agree as well as this topic would have thankfully been gone 2 years ago as groundhog day syndrome (asking /demanding for things over and over and over and over again expecting a different result.)
BM's point is simple and cheap. Get a card or get over it or elsewhere.

You realise that even with Resolve been free BM still can't afford such a thinking?
It's not price problem which it has been said many times. People are happy to pay for this feature to cover BM loss on the card sale (not sure how much BM makes money on card which is 150$- not much at all). BM can only win on it and make actually more money.

If BM stayed thinking this way and also people stayed "quite" Resolve would still cost 100K. So think twice before saying that such posts are not needed

Just stating (as also has been done a bilion times in this thread) the status , not the possibilities or wishes etc.
So with current status you can either accept and build your system accordingly so you can work with Resolve the way BM designed it to work or move to something that fits more your needs. I , as many, chose the 1st years ago and never looked back. Only 2 options.
I plan my build/purchases before and tailored to the tools i want for my workflow, not try and push endlessly for the tools to adjust to my systems

Same with the whole prores discussions. You can just get a mac (either as primary or next to your main OS) and use it to build prores content or try and change the minds of large corporations endlessly.

People are happy to pay for this feature to cover BM loss on the card sale (not sure how much BM makes money on card which is 150$- not much at all)

The majority asking for this feature appear to be on the free version of Resolve, and more than likely are not willing to pay the additional cost of upgrading to the Studio version - especially if the cost of the Studio version increases by $150.

What's the next demand? To use AJA cards for the full screen viewer for both the Studio and the free version of Resolve?

What's the next demand? To use AJA cards for the full screen viewer in Resolve?

Nah, you already know a few from this forum. Like to change the entire gui to a Adobe trainwreck gui.

Just stating (as also has been done a bilion times in this thread) the status , not the possibilities or wishes etc.
So with current status you can either accept and build your system accordingly so you can work with Resolve the way BM designed it to work or move to something that fits more your needs. I , as many, chose the 1st years ago and never looked back. Only 2 options.
I plan my build/purchases before and tailored to the tools i want for my workflow, not try and push endlessly for the tools to adjust to my systems

Same with the whole prores discussions. You can just get a mac (either as primary or next to your main OS) and use it to build prores content or try and change the minds of large corporations endlessly

I accept it and even say this to others- get BM card atm.
This is still somehow separate from a need of talking about 2nd full screen monitor preview.

Well I've seen at least few people saying they have no problem paying for this. They rather pay 150$ for software monitoring than buy card for 150$. I'm also all over software solution as it has many advantages.
Whoever can afford to buy BM card will also pay for 2nd screen monitoring. Both options can easily co-exist and increase BM users.

There are also some who would like to have AJA monitoring as well (big places mostly), but this is a separate debate.

ProRes after DPX, TIFF, EXR is the most stable and used format out there. It's actually good format. You think it's easy to stop sending it?
Well you simply did not work for bigger clients. It's not you who decides what to send but the other side. If you want to get rid-off ProRes you don't talk to post houses (as they are just service providers/instruments), but to people who hold money. Post-houses can't really change it, specially now.

Same with the whole prores discussions. You can just get a mac (either as primary or next to your main OS) and use it to build prores content or try and change the minds of large corporations endlessly.

You think it's as easy as "get a Mac". I do already have a Mac and it still doesn't change much.

When I edit I export to ProRes as in 70% this is what I need to send to clients (and sometimes I send 100s of files a week).
If I have to go Mac route then I need to have Mac+ good network. Gigabit is not enough, so I need 10gig card etc. Then I need to export first something from my NLE and then do 2nd convert to ProRes. If you worked on a project for 3 months and doing single export it may be not a big deal, but if you deal with so many files it's huge deal as you waste so much time. In case something goes wrong it's the same process again.
You can't apply your "local" scenario (whatever it's) to everyone on this forum. Needs can be way different.
Well designed software is flexible and covers many scenarios (of course staying stable at the same time).

After seeing that Adobe got ProRes (which I though won't come easily), Scratch, now Edius as well (and AJA for capturing) it's time for Resolve as well.

btw.. I also have enterprise transcoder which supports ProRes officially on Windows, so "having a Mac" is even less relevant for me.

After seeing that Adobe got ProRes (which I though won't come easily) export, Scratch, now Edius as well (and AJA for capturing) it's time for Resolve as well.

Why not continue with Premiere then, or use Edius?
These seem to be a better fit for you.

I do use Premiere and Resolve for special needs, eg. HDR. v16 got some features which I like and maybe 1 day I could use it more (if there is a ProRes export). Once Edius gets ProRes I may also use it more as well. I'm not a person who is 1 NLE fanboy- this way I could not do my work efficiently as atm. not a single NLE is perfect (and most likely never will be).

The truth is, though, I'm not a fan of running Resolve on a laptop unless you've got a really powerful laptop and are running fairly light-duty files and just editing. There was a terrific article a few weeks ago on one of the post websites where they revealed that about 75% of all major films were cut using Avid DNxHD 145 files, which are actually pretty small, lightweight HD files that run on just about anything recent. And you could absolutely cut a movie using those on a decent laptop running Resolve or Premiere or Avid.

Hi Marc - Interesting point. "Oscar Workflow Breakdown of Every Best Picture and Editing Nominee" states "Looking at all the films, there are a couple of what you might call “givens.” First, all the features were edited on Avid, using either DNxHD 36 or DNxHD 115 codecs at 1080p" 1080p? I was surprised as big budget films have the money for 4K edit hardware.
https://blog.frame.io/2019/02/25/oscars-2019-roundup/

Edited- mens editing was done on AVID from proxies as this is good enough for editing stage.
They were not finished from AVID for sure, but from some finishing tool, like Flame etc. and this has nothing to do with AVID DNxHD proxies.

This is exactly the point- people think that eg. Technicolor works on uncompressed 4K from start to finish and has crazy machines in every room

Then I need to export first something from my NLE and then do 2nd convert to ProRes. If you worked on a project for 3 months and doing single export it may be not a big deal, but if you deal with so many files it's huge deal as you waste so much time.

Not needed, just set up a resolve remote render node and you have your singe export to prores workflow.
Having a smart workflow is part of the deal. And for rendering itself 1GB is enough, your CPU is typicaly the bottle neck. Did lots of experiment with it. But a 10G is easy and cheap to add if you build (about 100$ ebay, like i did) or add via TB2/3 if native mac (or a mini with 10G). So many options so many ways.
And all faster and more efficient then waiting for company X to implement what you want.

And of course you can go for software Y if that works better then X. Nobody said you cant. Use what works

With Resolve I could use remote render, but it's an old Mac Pro and not very fast as for todays standards. It also takes a lot of precious space in the rack in data centre which I want to use in better way. It would need new GPU, so another cost. This is the point- I don't need another 3 new hardware pieces (which get so quickly obsolete) if all can be solved by single new export option (even paid).
I saturate gigabit very easily- way not fast enough for me. It's not like Resolve export would be only 1 task happening. There is always way more activity and now 10gig starts to be a problem. There are more 4K jobs, so situation complicates quickly. Dealign with 1x 4K 2h ProRes master is fine, but when you receive eg. 50 of them them as 1 job then this is not so easy anymore (and deadline is for tomorrow ).

Well, exactly this is why I can't even afford to use single tool. NLE X or Y is about irrelevant for me. Every small step counts these days and things like ProRes exporter in Resolve is actually a huge benefit (not only for me for sure).

Glenn,

Yeah you clearly have not been paying attention to Resolve price development over the last 10 years from 100k+ down to 1k , down to 300$ down to free.

No need for sarcasm - We have pros here who worked on $100K Resolve. $300 is a consumer price and free is the reason I chose to try it. Happy to pay if it has the features I need - ie 2nd screen preview.

@Andrew KolakowskiI

Yep in that scenario you would need a bigger setup for that extra machine. But the good side of it is that it will be working while you can use your primary workstation. (regardless if mac or win) . Since i started working that way (big powerfull render VM with 10G ,GPU, etcetc etc) i wont go back anymore. Eventhough i can do all my rendering and proress on the same machine as all Mac.

But running all on Mac is also an option you decide for or not. When a lot of people, for very good reasons for sure, decided to move to windows, it has consequences you have to build your landscape for ,rather then first move and then try and force software to fall in line with your move. So every decision you make in your landscape has pros and cons.

My main point is , ITS NOT THERE (in Resolve win) , same for the 2nd viewer, so up to you to just set up your systems the best way that works for you and for the tools you use and not keep hoping for the world to adjust to your workflow. You will have way more fun that way. At least i dont spend a single day on waiting or screaming for features that i dont have.

There is no Mac Pro which suits my needs, so going OSX only is not an option. Wasting money to buy so old Mac Pro is not an option. Nothing else goes into rack. Macs are good for home

Runs fine on my dual 12 core xeon supermicro server board, lsi hbas, 10g, multi gpus etc etc But hey if you dont see it you never will.

Up to moment when apple decides not to support them in next OSX and next Resolve will work only on new OSX
I still keep it in the rack, but I would not buy "new" one today.

True and then i will figure something else out. Probably move to linux.
But untill then i will be having fun and running my systems how i want to while other keep hoping for the sun to come up one day and all their request will be met.
Worry about the future later. Nothing in IT lasts more then 4 years. There will always be something else.
I am not one of those that wait for apple or bm or whoever to determine their path but build for exactly what i need as optimal as posible. There are actual still people who are waiting for the magical mac pro. Come on........

I skipped a bunch of posts, but didn't see this as an answer. The Intensity Shuttle USB will give you a full screen output with sync audio, the only issue could be that it has a maximum 1080/30p output on USB 3.0. Support told me that there should be no problem using Resolve's internal scaling to provide a 4k > 1080 or 2K > 1080 datastream to the Shuttle. I have not used it for anything above 1080/24p yet.

They did mention the 60p timelines might be an issue, have to work that out next time I'm working on 60p material.

For me the Shuttle USB was the ONLY way to have this full screen output (for now) and I can use it to bring in a bunch of old tapes at work if we want them so not a real loss.

And from my little bit of testing thusfar, my cheap Lilliput monitor has very little delay compared to the computer monitor, but a BMD Video Assist (5 inch) had a lot of delay and not a good choice.

Skipping all possible issues regarding USB3 itself this card is as good as any other of course staying with its limits of supported formats/features.

I believe BMD's position is that if you want full-screen then buy a DecLink card.

I have never seen any proof of this beside the personal opinions of certain forum blowhards.

One of the more ludicrous opinions I've heard is that BM forces it to make money. If all BM cared about was the bottom line, they would be doing it in software because their are a lot more costs involved with producing hardware than software.

As I've said before (about several topics related to the GUI), If I had to place an educated guess, its because they are dealing with an old and antiquated code base that would take a great deal of time to refactor into a modern interface, and are thus putting it off till they absolutely must do something about it.

I believe BMD's position is that if you want full-screen then buy a DecLink card.

I have never seen any proof of this beside the personal opinions of certain forum blowhards.

Peter Chamberlain outlined this quite clearly:
”Guys, i have seen your requests. BMD offer a video card that provides the only process to monitor on a full screen. There are multiple options available, for laptops and desktops. They are not expensive and they are the solution we are offering. Resolve is engineered to use this monitoring method. I understand you would like to simply connect any other monitor to your computer however that's not how we have designed the system to work.”

source: viewtopic.php?f=21&t=68164&p=478497#p478497

Tnx. This should be the last post in this thread.

Case closed . Move on please.....

http://wavcentral.com/sounds/movies/tron/endline.mp3

Actually, Peter forgot to mention the ctrl+f hotkey as another way to view full screen. Though it overwrites the GUI, the code is there.

For what I use Resolve for (church sermons) I don’t require full screen monitoring, and I’m extremely happy with the free version.

Tnx. This should be the last post in this thread.

Case closed . Move on please.....

Yea yea, you can go! feel free not to participate in the conversation anymore if you don't like the subject matter!

Tnx. This should be the last post in this thread.

Case closed . Move on please.....

Yea yea, you can go! feel free not to participate in the conversation anymore if you don't like the subject matter!

are you just going to ignore the proof given that it isn't going to happen? You can feel free not to use Resolve anymore if you don't like BMD's position.

Nevermind Tom, some , like flat earthers , will never see it even if they look at a picture from space.
Facts are difficult to swallow sometimes.
Anyway as requested , signing of

I believe BMD's position is that if you want full-screen then buy a DecLink card.

I have never seen any proof of this beside the personal opinions of certain forum blowhards.

Peter Chamberlain outlined this quite clearly:
”Guys, i have seen your requests. BMD offer a video card that provides the only process to monitor on a full screen. There are multiple options available, for laptops and desktops. They are not expensive and they are the solution we are offering. Resolve is engineered to use this monitoring method. I understand you would like to simply connect any other monitor to your computer however that's not how we have designed the system to work.”

source: http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewt ... 97#p478497

+1

I had thought that with what Peter Chamberlain had said things were very clear.
There are some who resist ...

I was a bit annoyed when I realised that 2nd screen monitoring wouldn’t work as-is.

But then also realised that to get a 1080p full screen output only needed a 130$ bit of kit. Which to me seems very reasonable considering.

are you just going to ignore the proof given that it isn't going to happen? You can feel free not to use Resolve anymore if you don't like BMD's position.

I mean no disrespect to Peter, but he's a product manager, not an executive or development director. As someone who works in the Industry I know how little control product managers actually have, and how little knowledge they can have about future development plans.

Not to mention just because they don't do it now, doesn't mean they won't do it in the future, because the user base has pressured them into doing it. BM has many times in the past said one thing, only to step back from it in a future release.


Imo, the underlying issue regarding several resolve topics is that a certain segment of the user base treat it as an elitists old boys club, and doesn't like the influx of new users who have different wants and needs.

As far as I'm concerned the writing on the wall, they are on the way out whether they like it or not. Old school cinema is slowly dying.

if you want some proof

• look at Spielberg's latest defensive comments
• take note of how resolve is firmly seated in the consumer price bracket
• Look at the major features released in 16, they aren't geared towards the old boys club.

Imo, the underlying issue regarding several resolve topics is that a certain segment of the user base treat it as an elitists old boys club, and doesn't like the influx of new users who have different wants and needs.

i didn't write that

I think there have been plenty of voices that want the ability to send a full screen output through a second or third video card port. I do hope they implement this in the future. But I can also see where this could impair performance and using a video output card different from the GPU could (possibly) increase baseline performance. I have yet to prove this last concept but one other person noted that after adding one of these dedicated cards, his playback was better while editing/color/etc. That was the final straw for me, I want smoother playback because the output device was cheap compared to the price of a new computer, just trying to limp along for a bit.

Peter Chamberlain outlined this quite clearly:
”Guys, i have seen your requests. BMD offer a video card that provides the only process to monitor on a full screen. There are multiple options available, for laptops and desktops. They are not expensive and they are the solution we are offering. Resolve is engineered to use this monitoring method. I understand you would like to simply connect any other monitor to your computer however that's not how we have designed the system to work.”

source: http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewt ... 97#p478497

+1

I had thought that with what Peter Chamberlain had said things were very clear.
There are some who resist ...

Yep, Peter made it clear. But editing, compositing and audio software which doesn't fully allow multiple monitors out of the box is silly in 2019. It's simply better for a lot of people.

The same goes for the database. We can't group assets (like Resolve, Media, AE, PS, AI, 3D, Scripts etc) into a single source of project truth, or have it portable without import/export and duplicate clean-ups.

Resolve has been chasing markets beyond colour, the problem is that it's working. The genie is out of the bottle so it's time to complete non-colour, non-specialist, non-facility workflows.

And there's no reason to break everything like Apple, why not allow both and be awesome?

I think there have been plenty of voices that want the ability to send a full screen output through a second or third video card port. I do hope they implement this in the future. But I can also see where this could impair performance and using a video output card different from the GPU could (possibly) increase baseline performance. I have yet to prove this last concept but one other person noted that after adding one of these dedicated cards, his playback was better while editing/color/etc. That was the final straw for me, I want smoother playback because the output device was cheap compared to the price of a new computer, just trying to limp along for a bit.

Adding BM card slows down Resolve, not speeds it up. It's additional path where data has to be formed on GPU and send to BM card. Same applies to any other tool- Premiere, Scratch, Flame etc. Any extra SDI card will always mean some performance hit.

People are happy to pay for this feature to cover BM loss on the card sale (not sure how much BM makes money on card which is 150$- not much at all)

Small side-point: the first display card I ever bought when I began working as an independent colorist was a used Mini Monitor, which I was able to get for $90. They pop up occasionally on eBay... and that was 6-7 years ago, when Resolve was $995. And I was glad to get Resolve at "only" $995, knowing the last version I used in early 2009 was Resolve 6, which was somewhere north of $400,000 (full system). [Just checked, and there's 2 or 3 Mini Monitors on eBay U.S. right now for about $100, new and used.]

If anybody wants a good laugh, here's a link to the Resolve 6 manual (when it was manufactured by daVinci Systems of Florida):

https://spaces.hightail.com/space/Bi9fa

Read that and mull over what life was like for colorists 10 years ago, and what we have today.

Peter Chamberlain outlined this quite clearly:
”Guys, i have seen your requests. BMD offer a video card that provides the only process to monitor on a full screen. There are multiple options available, for laptops and desktops. They are not expensive and they are the solution we are offering. Resolve is engineered to use this monitoring method. I understand you would like to simply connect any other monitor to your computer however that's not how we have designed the system to work.”

And that's pretty much the final word on the subject. The answer basically is: if you want to work differently, that's cool, and you can choose Avid, Baselight, FCPX, Mistika, Lustre, Nucoda, Premiere, Pablo/Neo, Scratch, or Vegas. I've used five out of those programs at different facilities, and every single one of them was using a dedicated GPU for a calibrated color-correction display, not from the OS. Would it work without one? I'd rather not take the chance and go instead with what I'm absolutely sure is a rock-solid signal path I know will work.

The answer basically is: if you want to work differently, that's cool, and you can choose Avid, Baselight, FCPX, Mistika, Lustre, Nucoda, Premiere, Pablo/Neo, Scratch, or Vegas.

Lump it or leave it, we get it! But it begs the question, why add Fusion, Fairlight, or create a new Cut page and chase new types of users in the first place?

I've used five out of those programs at different facilities, and every single one of them was using a dedicated GPU for a calibrated color-correction display, not from the OS.

Agreed, it's definitely best. And over the years I've used some of those programs on laptops/portable monitors in hotels after a day shooting. Different strokes for different folks - right?

Would it work without one? I'd rather not take the chance and go instead with what I'm absolutely sure is a rock-solid signal path I know will work.

Agreed. But BM is aggressively chasing us lower-end users and we’re often using scopes only. If Peter truly understood the reality, I'm not sure he'd be so emphatic but happy to be wrong.

To be clear, free is incredible. But screen real estate and portable projects are also important, and neither change would effect existing workflows - everyone wins right?

People are happy to pay for this feature to cover BM loss on the card sale (not sure how much BM makes money on card which is 150$- not much at all)

Marc, please learn how to quote correctly. I did not write that.

That quotation rests entirely with Andrew Kolakowski
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=77838&p=500113#p499722

People are happy to pay for this feature to cover BM loss on the card sale (not sure how much BM makes money on card which is 150$- not much at all)

Small side-point: the first display card I ever bought when I began working as an independent colorist was a used Mini Monitor, which I was able to get for $90. They pop up occasionally on eBay... and that was 6-7 years ago, when Resolve was $995. And I was glad to get Resolve at "only" $995, knowing the last version I used in early 2009 was Resolve 6, which was somewhere north of $400,000 (full system). [Just checked, and there's 2 or 3 Mini Monitors on eBay U.S. right now for about $100, new and used.]

And before this we had dinosaurs running on the Earth. Does it change much for someone who is starting his business or hobby today?

Marc, please learn how to quote correctly. I did not write that.

Slip of the quote key. We'll fix it in post.

And before this we had dinosaurs running on the Earth. Does it change much for someone who is starting his business or hobby today?

It never hurts for people starting out to begin doing it correctly. There are always simple, affordable solutions out there if you try hard, ask the right questions, and shop around carefully. I've said before: we cheat and actually use four Macs for our main Resolve system in the office: a 12-core Mac for the main workstation for color; a Mac Mini for scopes; a Mac Mini for the project database; and a desktop Mac just for rendering. (And sometimes a fifth Mac, my laptop, when I need to do something mundane like back up files or scene-detect a flattened file.)

I think the first thing anybody should do when jumping into a new line of work (or a "hobby") is to find out how people are doing it effectively. The problem is there are bad habits they can learn early on, and after awhile the bad habits become second nature. Using bad monitors is one; not understanding scopes is another. Not understanding the value of control surfaces is a third. Failure to read the manual is a fourth. I could go on, but there are pages and pages and pages of discussion here that hit the same comments every single day. You can always ignore good advice at your own peril, but bear in mind I'm not saying it just to hear my own voice -- it's really what I feel. Everybody starts out at a relatively low level in the business, and even a wedding videographer or a guy shooting YouTube videos can get a calibrated monitor, a cheap video card, and a computer with enough power to actually edit and color-correct video with reasonable performance.

And again, the glass is half-full: 10 years ago, that would've cost up upwards of $20K. Now, I think you could put together a minimal system for maybe $5K. Or a bottom-level HD system for maybe $2K. How cheap does it have to get before it's affordable?

We'll fix it in post.

We'll fix it in the packaging.

Mark -
With all due respect to you as a successful professional we all agree a card is needed for a calibrated color-correction display which is an essential tool for any professional colorist as was a $600K Resolve system not so long ago.
It's a great option for those who need it but many of us publish to the web focused on content and acceptable color. I certainly don't have the skills to use one.

Affordable technology has come a long way since then including consumer 4k and now even 8K cameras. They are not Arri or Red raw (which I can't afford) but use lossy long GOP codecs log capture formats using HEVC which is significantly better than AVC.

Virtually all consumer TVs are now UHD with HDR 10 bit 4:2:0 support. H.265 HDR looks like it may the future TV broadcast standard.
I can get 4K aerial shots now with a consumer 3 axis stabilised drone camera that would have required a Hollywood budget to hire a helicopter with a 3 axis HD camera not so long ago.
My focus is on wildlife and outdoor sports documentary and promotional (tourism) vids and am moving to 4K/UHD.
My planned workflow is small portable action cams (GoPros and DJI drones) and a DSLR all capturing H.265 HDR 100Mbit and publish H.265 HDR. It's not a pro workflow but I'm looking for acceptable results on a non-pro budget.
It may not be acceptable for broadcast but I have downloaded, and tested several camera 4k HDR clips and it looks pretty damned impressive to my untrained eye when viewed on my 55" Samsung UHD TV compared to what I see on satellite broadcast TV.

I would like to use Resolve to edit and publish but am going for a 3 screen system for workspace with one for full screen preview (4k HDR monitor or TV) as supported by my existing GPU and use the additional PCIe slot for another GPU if needed. I don't need, or want a BMD card.
This is a software feature request using existing OS and hardware capabilities.
All NLEs are constantly improving. I will choose the one that best suits my needs. (comments, critics and suggestions welcomed)

And before this we had dinosaurs running on the Earth. Does it change much for someone who is starting his business or hobby today?

It never hurts for people starting out to begin doing it correctly. There are always simple, affordable solutions out there if you try hard, ask the right questions, and shop around carefully. I've said before: we cheat and actually use four Macs for our main Resolve system in the office: a 12-core Mac for the main workstation for color; a Mac Mini for scopes; a Mac Mini for the project database; and a desktop Mac just for rendering. (And sometimes a fifth Mac, my laptop, when I need to do something mundane like back up files or scene-detect a flattened file.)

I think the first thing anybody should do when jumping into a new line of work (or a "hobby") is to find out how people are doing it effectively. The problem is there are bad habits they can learn early on, and after awhile the bad habits become second nature. Using bad monitors is one; not understanding scopes is another. Not understanding the value of control surfaces is a third. Failure to read the manual is a fourth. I could go on, but there are pages and pages and pages of discussion here that hit the same comments every single day. You can always ignore good advice at your own peril, but bear in mind I'm not saying it just to hear my own voice -- it's really what I feel. Everybody starts out at a relatively low level in the business, and even a wedding videographer or a guy shooting YouTube videos can get a calibrated monitor, a cheap video card, and a computer with enough power to actually edit and color-correct video with reasonable performance.

And again, the glass is half-full: 10 years ago, that would've cost up upwards of $20K. Now, I think you could put together a minimal system for maybe $5K. Or a bottom-level HD system for maybe $2K. How cheap does it have to get before it's affordable?

Doing it "correctly" and asking for full screen preview are different things.
I don't even care about color accurate preview (I would prefer it though), but about possibility at all.
We are not anymore talking about Resolve as a grading tool, but NLE and in there is tons of work done in NLE which cares 0 about accurate preview (for me it's basically 100% of jobs). I want to see full screen preview easily, that's all. People ask for different possibilities which is nothing special. You can always have BM card if you need it. One doesn't negate other. Does owning BM card solve color accurate preview?. It doesn't at all until you have full path calibrated. With properly designed 2nd screen preview you get exactly the same and those who will care about it will be able to achieve it owning BM card or not.

. How cheap does it have to get before it's affordable?

It's not always about the money Marc!

. How cheap does it have to get before it's affordable?

It's not always about the money Marc!

But at end it is. 100$ does not require platinum credit card.

I understand the need of a full monitor for editing and certainly is doable. As it was doable do the "offset" control on a tangent panel (remember that?) As it is doable having apple prores for window export.

It comes down to company policy, Peter stated that is not happening for now. Period.

To the poster that stated something on the line that he does know what he is talking about, I would like to tend that when Peter stated that a new version if free of charge, suddenly he know what he is talking about.
"Two weights for two measurements".

Let's say that resolve is free if you don't want a full monitor preview, and a minimum of 195$ if you do.

Every page in this thread has the same two arguments over and over: can we put it at rest?

But at end it is. 100$ does not require platinum credit card.

As so many of you of a certain mindset have in the past, you have missed the point completely. Everyone who refuses to buy a card is doing it for different reasons. I know people who wouldn't put a BM card in their machine if you paid them to, they simply don't want hardware from a small boutique company.

Every page in this thread has the same two arguments over and over: can we put it at rest?

I think you are going to find that this topic is never going to go away, until one of two things happens. One BM just does it, or two Grant steps in front of a camera and says BM will never do it.