The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Why does video editing software suck so deeply? Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 5th April 2019
  #241
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
Are you one Windows 10 ? Resolve sometimes works on Win7 but strange things might happen ...
That's an important point -- Resolve can be very flaky on Windows 7; it's only supported on Windows 10.
Old 5th April 2019
  #242
Lives for gear
 

Thanks Bradh and Yannick. On W10 1809 here. Probably operator error, but I cannot find it. Very frustrating.

The rest of Resolve is great, now that I am on ProRes VLog files out of the Ninja Inferno.
Old 14th April 2019
  #243
Lives for gear
 

Your honour, I rest my case.
Quote:
If you render in Individual Source Clip mode, you will get the source file embedded audio, if any, and/or audio that you have synced to the source files on the Media page. You will NOT get the audio you have on the Edit page timeline unless you render in Single Clip mode.
Dwaine Maggart
Blackmagic Design DaVinci Support

Last edited by David Spearritt; 14th April 2019 at 09:51 AM..
Old 14th April 2019
  #244
Same as previous posters - I render out with separate audio from the timeline nearly every time.
Why are you using 'Individual Source Clip' mode?
You typically would render out the entire timeline, or as single clips, in both cases the audio comes from the timeline mix out, and you can either mute original audio for each clip or separate and remove that original audio completely.
Old 14th April 2019
  #245
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Why are you using 'Individual Source Clip' mode?
Its not "Individual Source Clip" mode, these are the words from the support engineers mind. The words in the actual program Render interface are "Individual Clips", which makes sense when you have a concert with 4 performance pieces and you want one video per clip.

Quote:
You typically would render out the entire timeline, or as single clips, in both cases the audio comes from the timeline mix out, and you can either mute original audio for each clip or separate and remove that original audio completely.
And it doesn't work.
Old 14th April 2019
  #246
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
Its not "Individual Source Clip" mode, these are the words from the support engineers mind. The words in the actual program Render interface are "Individual Clips", which makes sense when you have a concert with 4 performance pieces and you want one video per clip.
It looks like they forgot to update the manual when they changed that render option's name to just "Individual Clips" from "Individual Source Clips."

But ticking that option still renders individual source clips. You would mainly use that option if you're exporting an XML file to another NLE. Search through the manual for "individual source clips" and you'll see all the use cases for it; they are specialized.

To render just a selected portion of your timeline, you use the timeline in the Render page to select just the clips you want to render, and you can also use the Clips filter (up near the top left of the Render page) to prefilter your render timeline.
Old 14th April 2019
  #247
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bradh View Post
But ticking that option still renders individual source clips. You would mainly use that option if you're exporting an XML file to another NLE. Search through the manual for "individual source clips" and you'll see all the use cases for it; they are specialized.

To render just a selected portion of your timeline, you use the timeline in the Render page to select just the clips you want to render, and you can also use the Clips filter (up near the top left of the Render page) to prefilter your render timeline.
But I want to render my entire timeline, but to separate videos for each clip/musical piece. Not an uncommon or unusual request. The only way to get the separate audio to render correctly was to set In Out markers on each clip in turn, select Render In Out and add all the separate clips to the render queue.

I just don't understand that if the timeline plays correctly, why one cannot render same. Choosing to render "Entire Timeline" and "Individual Clips" showed so much promise.
Old 14th April 2019
  #248
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
But I want to render my entire timeline, but to separate videos for each clip/musical piece. Not an uncommon or unusual request. The only way to get the separate audio to render correctly was to set In Out markers on each clip in turn, select Render In Out and add all the separate clips to the render queue.
It's pretty simple: render "Entire Timeline" will render the entire render timeline from start to finish. If your render timeline is unchanged from the overall project timeline (i.e., what you see in the Edit page), the rendered file will be the entire timeline, no breaks.

If you want to render, say, four subsets of your master timeline as four separate videos, you have to modify the render timeline -- that's why there's a separate render timeline to allow you to pick and choose exactly which portions of your master timeline you want to render. So if you have four specific sections you want to render as separate videos, you select those sections in the render timeline (by setting in/out points in the render timeline), and when you've set up those in/out points send that section to the render queue. You should still choose to render Entire Timeline, because you're rendering the entire render timeline, not the entire master timeline. Does that make sense?
Old 14th April 2019
  #249
Lives for gear
If drift of audio sync is an issue (between camera audio and external audio, which is to become the soundtrack), I can appreciate why anyone might choose to break the complete timeline file into subsets of separate videos....as this would minimize the drift, due to smaller accumulations of variance, with decreased duration of files ?
Old 14th April 2019
  #250
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
If drift of audio sync is an issue (between camera audio and external audio, which is to become the soundtrack), I can appreciate why anyone might choose to break the complete timeline file into subsets of separate videos..
I think (but could be wrong) that in this case the entire timeline consists of performances of several separate pieces, so David wants to output separate videos, one for each piece.

I assume each performance is one long clip (one camera)...my timelines usually consist of dozens of clips, but I suppose if you just set up a camera and film a concert, you could have one clip per piece.
Old 15th April 2019
  #251
Lives for gear
 

Is anyone planning on trying the DR 16 that is now in beta testing. Apparently the new DR16 is a lot more than the usual tweak: it is a new platform that offers a streamlined work flow that is much more intuitive. The changes are an effort to offer much quicker pro results for processing multiple clips simultaneously. There will certainly need to be an adjustment period for bug fixes however I am hopeful the new platform can sort out these issues quickly. I am planning to upgrade from DR14 and will wait out the DR16 bug corrections.
Hugh
Old 15th April 2019
  #252
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post

And it doesn't work.
See other posters above.
There are several ways you could achieve what you want to achieve.
It's more operator error than a failing of Resolve.
Old 15th April 2019
  #253
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by hughshouse View Post
Is anyone planning on trying the DR 16 that is now in beta testing. ...
Yes, I'm planning on DR16 Studio. I have DR15 Studio and a Fusion 9 Studio license (dongle) running in both Win10 and High Sierra. The migration to DR16 is a bit more troubling because the database for DR16 is different, and requires a full backup/abandonment of the old DR15, and the DR16 database version is used instead.

The cleaner/easier answer is to simply clone High Sierra, and install DR16 there, leaving my normal Win10 production environment untouched. The two operating systems use separately booted native SSD's.

To explain a bit more about my operating system choices. I have a GTX 1070 8GB video card in the 2010 Mac Pro. Mojave doesn't support nVidia, so I'm sticking with High Sierra. I have hopes/plans for installing a second GTX 1070 in the Mac Pro, and am currently working on some ancillary migration projects (GC-Titan Ridge Thunderbolt, and RME MADIface ExpressCard/PCIe) that will be documented in upcoming articles on my website. Stay tuned, the parts have arrived.
Old 15th April 2019
  #254
Gear Addict
 

I'm using the Resolve 16 beta on my "test" computer (a below-spec Mac Mini); I have active projects underway on my production machine so am planning to keep it on Resolve 15 at least until 16 is out of beta.

Honestly, with Resolve there's not a big difference between beta and official releases anyway; the official releases have their share of bugs. I've been lucky with v. 15, but some users (esp. on Windows) reported steadily worsening performance with each update.

So far I haven't encountered problems with the v. 16 beta, which is a good sign, but many users are reporting bugs, especially on Windows machines and with certain GPUs.

There are useful innovations in v. 16, especially the "cut" page, which is really an assembly page for timelines that can serve as the first step before deeper edits and refinements in the Edit page. A lot of people are saying it's Resolve's attempt to copy Final Cut pro, but people saying that haven't used Final Cut Pro...there are superficial similarities but BMD's CEO Grant Petty was aiming more to recapture some of the efficiencies he remembered from assembling timelines with actual tape.

The Fairlight DAW has some improvements, and they've redone the scopes and added some AI features to the color page. The Fusion integration is reportedly more reliable and less prone to crashing.

If you're upgrading from v. 14 be sure to check the configuration guide to see if your computer can handle it; the requirements for running Resolve have changed considerably since v. 14. CPU and RAM are secondary considerations; the most important limiting factor is the GPU.
Old 15th April 2019
  #255
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
See other posters above.
There are several ways you could achieve what you want to achieve.
Hi Chris, yes, as I said, I got it to work by sequentially defining In-Out boundaries and loading each time into the queue. When this is rendered, I get my audio track.

Quote:
It's more operator error than a failing of Resolve.
Not really, the software could be improved significantly. It will come.

Most timeline rendering from audio programs is done by defining named markers which then form render clips/boundaries, CD tracks, and can be batch exported in one operation. I can't see why video timelines couldn't be done the same way.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #256
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
Hi Chris, yes, as I said, I got it to work by sequentially defining In-Out boundaries and loading each time into the queue. When this is rendered, I get my audio track.
And that's the way it works in Resolve -- you set those in-out boundaries in the render page timeline. Resolve doesn't allow you to set multiple in-out points in the same timeline, but it does allow you to convert an in/out point to a duration marker, and you can have multiple duration markers in the timeline.

If you prefer, you can set up those duration markers in the main timeline on the Edit page and then use those to easily set your individual in/out points on the render timeline (if snap is turned on, you can snap the playhead to the in and out points of your duration marker range, and then type i for an in-point and o for an out point). Just above the render timeline there's an option to render only the in/out range or the entire timeline; select "in/out range" and add to the render queue. It doesn't take much time. Resolve has this tantalizing option in the "Mark" menu to "set in/out from duration marker" but while this works fine on the Edit page I can't see a way to make it work on the Render timeline.

As you point out, you can't batch render all your duration marker ranges; instead you have to transform each duration marker range to in/out points one at a time on the render timeline and add them individually to the render queue.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #257
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradh View Post
And that's the way it works in Resolve -- you set those in-out boundaries in the render page timeline.
Sounds incredibly clunky and retrograde....is there any sort of 'feature request' Resolve forum where the masses can express their dislike and call for improved efficiencies and functionality, similar the the equivalent forum in Reaper, for example ?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #258
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
Sounds incredibly clunky and retrograde....is there any sort of 'feature request' Resolve forum where the masses can express their dislike and call for improved efficiencies and functionality, similar the the equivalent forum in Reaper, for example ?
Yep, on the Davinci Resolve forum page there are threads for feature requests for the next version. There's no formalized bug reporting system but Resolve's engineers and product manager are present on the forum and they do take note and often respond. Like Reaper, Resolve is a largely user-driven product; most of what's there is there because users requested it; the product developers also spend time with people in the field to learn their workflows. As with Reaper this also leads to complex menus and feature bloat, but you can of course pick and choose what you use and you can customize the workspaces to your liking.

I don't think setting in/out points in the Render timeline is very clunky at all, though -- the only clunky part is that you can't simply say "batch-render all duration markers at once." The market for that capability is probably very small and if you already have duration markers set up it takes only 5-10 seconds to set in-and-out points to them (I tried it and timed it).

One key thing to remember with Resolve is that its original market was mainly Hollywood studios where every step of the process is compartmentalized: one person holds the hammer, the other the nail. People who work on the Edit page would rarely go to the Color page or the Fairlight page, for example -- that's not their job. So each page has its own timeline that you can customize however you like -- there's a main timeline that runs across the project, but a colorist might set up groups and filter the timeline only to show a particular group. Similarly, whoever's in charge of deliverables is going to work with the Render timeline and set in/out points there.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #259
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradh View Post
And that's the way it works in Resolve -- you set those in-out boundaries in the render page timeline. Resolve doesn't allow you to set multiple in-out points in the same timeline, but it does allow you to convert an in/out point to a duration marker, and you can have multiple duration markers in the timeline.
I haven't done this myself, but you can create multiple timelines in the same project. Obviously this would be unworkable with dozens of small clips, but if editing a concert for example, could you not create a separate timeline for each song (in the same project), then add each timeline to the render queue?
Which then removes the need to make in and out markers for a dozen clips.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #260
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I haven't done this myself, but you can create multiple timelines in the same project. Obviously this would be unworkable with dozens of small clips, but if editing a concert for example, could you not create a separate timeline for each song (in the same project), then add each timeline to the render queue?
That is the most elegant and simple solution, I should have thought of that myself!
Old 4 weeks ago
  #261
Lives for gear
 

Ideally if one could attach the separate audio track to the media clip outside the timeline (on the media page) that would be ideal. I have tried the Audio Sync tool (matching Waveform) according to the manual, and even with the pretty much perfect match between camera audio and separate audio, sync always fails, "No match was found when attempting to sync these clips."
Old 4 weeks ago
  #262
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
Ideally if one could attach the separate audio track to the media clip outside the timeline (on the media page) that would be ideal. I have tried the Audio Sync tool (matching Waveform) according to the manual, and even with the pretty much perfect match between camera audio and separate audio, sync always fails, "No match was found when attempting to sync these clips."
Sync via waveform in the media pool usually works perfectly for me but I know many users have reported failures. I do try, when possible, to do a double-finger snap or clap at the outset but even in cases (like concerts) where that's not possible Resolve can usually match the waveforms. This is something that might work better in the Mac version; I haven't tried it on my Windows machine as my Windows computer is way below spec for Resolve.
Old 1 week ago
  #263
Lives for gear
If I'm reading the mood of this thread correctly, it seems the 'heavy hitters' in the editing stakes are Da Vinci Resolve ( by a healthy margin) followed by a sizeable fan base for Sony Vegas, Premiere Pro, Power Director and Final Cut ? Is it right to assume they can all handle HD and 4K multiple camera streams (ie 3 or 4 cams) ?

Are there any omissions (or promising newcomers) not listed here which are worthy of attention? I'm looking to assemble a video editing PC soon (probably standalone, as I'm happy with my current audio machine....which is actually a laptop !) I'll probably head over to the Music Computers forum dedicated thread for advice on what components to select for the assembly, as that would create too much thread diversion here.

However in keeping with the intent of this thread, if there are particular CPU or GPU minima I should keep in mind (to avoid the processing logjam associated with the original thread title) ...or editing software which doesn't place such high reliance on these performance factors...then perhaps that could be relevant content here, without delving down into PC hardware too deeply ?

This is an audio forum, but I'm guessing anyone reading this is already drifting down that path of audio/video integration, to satisfy client requests (typically for filmed concerts, rehearsals or sessions....rather than movie or even pop-film clip type creations). Therefore some generalist hardware advice might be appropriate and welcomed (or not ?)
Old 1 week ago
  #264
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
If I'm reading the mood of this thread correctly, it seems the 'heavy hitters' in the editing stakes are Da Vinci Resolve ( by a healthy margin) followed by a sizeable fan base for Sony Vegas, Premiere Pro, Power Director and Final Cut ? Is it right to assume they can all handle HD and 4K multiple camera streams (ie 3 or 4 cams) ?

Are there any omissions (or promising newcomers) not listed here which are worthy of attention? I'm looking to assemble a video editing PC soon (probably standalone, as I'm happy with my current audio machine....which is actually a laptop !) I'll probably head over to the Music Computers forum dedicated thread for advice on what components to select for the assembly, as that would create too much thread diversion here.

However in keeping with the intent of this thread, if there are particular CPU or GPU minima I should keep in mind (to avoid the processing logjam associated with the original thread title) ...or editing software which doesn't place such high reliance on these performance factors...then perhaps that could be relevant content here, without delving down into PC hardware too deeply ?

This is an audio forum, but I'm guessing anyone reading this is already drifting down that path of audio/video integration, to satisfy client requests (typically for filmed concerts, rehearsals or sessions....rather than movie or even pop-film clip type creations). Therefore some generalist hardware advice might be appropriate and welcomed (or not ?)
DaVinci Resolve is very demanding on hardware, especially on the GPU, which will make you pull out your hair if it is under-powered and/or lacking VRAM (8GB minimum!). Some users seem to get by OK with HD material on a laptop. Multiple 4k streams on a laptop? I don't think so. Head over to the BlackMagic forums, where you'll find a brimming-over trove of discussions on hardware for Resolve. BM even publishes specific criteria for building or buying an editing rig. Further, forum admin guidelines all but mandate users to publish HW specs in their post signatures, so you can very quickly get an idea of what everyone is using even by casual inspection.

I moved to Resolve from Vegas, which is far less persnickety about HW, but then Vegas relies far less on a GPU.

My $0.02.
Old 1 week ago
  #265
I think the new BMD Braw format is much easier on editing computers. I haven't edited any yet.
I've been OK editing CDNG raw footage on a 2017 MacBook Pro in DaVinci Resolve.
Resolve is a little biased to Apple products I think. In any case, BMD publish minimum specs on their Resolve product page.
Resolve (free) is a crazy bargain. It is 90% of the paid version, plus no monthly fees and subscription payments.
Old 1 week ago
  #266
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
...it seems the 'heavy hitters' in the editing stakes are Da Vinci Resolve ( by a healthy margin) followed by a sizeable fan base for Sony Vegas, Premiere Pro, Power Director and Final Cut ? Is it right to assume they can all handle HD and 4K multiple camera streams (ie 3 or 4 cams) ?

Are there any omissions (or promising newcomers) not listed here which are worthy of attention?
The only really big one that you're missing is Avid Media Composer, which a lot of studios use, but then you have to deal with Avid.

If you're going to use a PC, that omits Final Cut and you probably wouldn't like it anyway as it doesn't use a traditional track-based approach and you'll want that if you're used to working in DAWs.

As others have pointed out, Resolve is GPU-hungry; it does all its image processing in the GPU and BMD have stated that they don't plan to change this approach. That means if you want to follow the specs in the DaVinci Resolve Configuration Guide, you're looking at an expensive computer. But as Chrisso noted it can run just fine on under-spec computers depending on your demands.

Resolve's power requirements seem to increase with each release; normally you could say "that's fine, I'll just get a version that works on my machine and never upgrade," but the problem is that Resolve is on such an ambitious and accelerated development path that each release has many bugs and sometimes you want to upgrade for the bug fixes rather than the new features. But then you find Resolve doesn't run on your machine anymore because your machine doesn't have the GPU horsepower. For example, I could run Resolve 15 on my i5 Mac Mini with 8 gigabytes of RAM (which I use as a test machine only, not for real work), but can't play back the same footage smoothly in Resolve 16 beta unless I optimize to quarter size.

Bottom line is that even the free version of Resolve is probably the most expensive option among these NLEs because you'll likely have to spend more on a computer that runs it well, especially over the long term through new releases. For me it's worth it because Resolve is so powerful and all my footage looks better in Resolve. I don't care so much about speed and efficiency; most of my projects are on multi-year timelines. I just want the final product to look and sound as good as possible, and Resolve wins that contest for me.

Edited to add: one important caveat for Windows users is that Resolve does not have ASIO support, at least not last I heard. For you this probably isn't a problem unless you want to record directly into Resolve/Fairlight using an interface. But it's worth noting. I do think the Windows version of Resolve tends to have more problems than Mac or Linux, based on reports I see in BMD's Resolve forum, but a lot of those are related to Windows updates and not necessarily to Resolve itself. As usual the safest approach is to get everything working and then cut off your computer completely from the internet, never update Windows and never update Resolve unless you have to.
Old 1 week ago
  #267
Wow, I have to say I'm completely astounded. I can't relate to anything you've just written.
I've been using Resolve for about 8 years at least.
I started out with a 2007 iMac. I mostly edited RAW footage, which is the most resource hungry footage you can use.
Since I've been using Resolve I can't think of any instances where it has been overwhelmingly buggy.
Resolve 16 is just a few weeks into a beta release. I'm not using it because it's a beta release! And my latest version of Resolve 15 is working great for me.
Resolve 16 BETA....BETA is currently 'buggy'.
Surprise, surprise.

I think people have always been able to edit various flavours of ProRes using Resolve on medium level computers. Apple are more expensive than PC, so it's hard for me to quantify the price of using Resolve per-say.
When I decided to upgrade my Mac, I opted for a refurbished MacBook Pro from a couple of years ago.
The benefit of that decision impacts on my music making (PT and Live) and photography (Capture One). So I wouldn't say I've HAD to spend more money than necessary to use Resolve.
Anyway.....the basic Resolve is free, so nation can try it and decide for themselves if it requires an expensive computer, or if it's too buggy to use.
All I'll say is that in the eight or so years I've been using it, I have not thought like that once.
Old 1 week ago
  #268
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Wow, I have to say I'm completely astounded. I can't relate to anything you've just written.
It's probably safe to say that Resolve will run on 90% of Macs, since Apple doesn't make any low-end computers (as I said it even runs on my 2013 i5 Mac Mini, which I only use for testing), whereas it probably won't run on 90% of PCs since the vast majority of PCs are for business use or light duties like internet browsing. There are literally dozens, if not hundreds of posts on BMD's forum from people (mostly Windows users) complaining that Resolve won't run well or won't even launch on their Dell XPS-15 or their Thinkpad, Surface Book, or whatever.

As for bugs, every update contains a long list of bug fixes. Resolve has always been stable for me and I can't remember it ever crashing, but it's not uncommon to discover bugs; it's not only in the beta releases.

I'm just saying that for a Windows user (which is the case in point I was responding to), Resolve is likely to be a more expensive option than other NLEs because its hardware requirements are heavier (in terms of GPU in particular) than most other NLEs. Blackmagic Design even makes this point explicitly in their Configuration Guide.
Old 1 week ago
  #269
The good thing is, people can use it without spending a cent, so they can judge if it's smooth on their computer or not.
Old 1 week ago
  #270
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
The good thing is, people can use it without spending a cent, so they can judge if it's smooth on their computer or not.
True, although most NLEs offer free trial versions as well. But in this particular case, studer58 wants to build/spec a new PC. All I was saying is that if you want to build a PC specifically to run Resolve, it's a good idea to follow the instructions in the Configuration Guide (which are a lot more complex for Windows machines than Macs), otherwise you risk wasting your effort. If you already have a PC and just want to see if Resolve runs on it, that's a no-brainer.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump