ProVideo Coalition.com: the EDITBLOG on PVC by Scott Simmons

There’s really a lot for a new user to learn in order to master Resolve and after just a week of kicking the tires I’ve got more questions than answers. But one specific question I had was just how easy (or difficult) it would be to conform a properly prepped edit and get it into Resolve. I say properly prepped as Resolve is based around a singe-video-layer so sloppy FCP timelines aren’t going to make their way in. Dirty editors need not apply before a timeline cleanup. This Editblog post might be worth reading if you tend toward the sloppy timeline.

Conforming edits via various workflows

As a workflow test I took several different edits from Final Cut Pro, Avid Media Composer and Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 and moved them into Resolve.

First was a 4 + minute music video (cut from around an hour of 23.98 ProRes) that I had on my media drive with the picture locked, offline edit in FCP. From this single-layer timeline I exported an EDL. After loading all of the footage from the edit into the Resolve media pool I imported the EDL, named it and there was the conformed edit. It had no dissolves but there was a couple of dips to black (created in FCP via Cross Dissolves to a slug) and they imported just fine.

I didn’t take time to work on grading the piece but I did play around a bit and was able to get 5, 6 ,7 nodes playing in realtime off the internal RAID depending on what type of corrections I had applied. With native H.264 I was still getting realtime at one point with 7 nodes. Realtime performance has been great.

Resolve claims the capability to grade a lot of native formats, including Canon H.264 files. I had a timeline in FCP of some 7D footage that I wanted to try sending over to Resolve. Normally I don’t edit native 7D files in FCP as I cut my 7D stuff in Premiere Pro CS5 these days but this was some footage I shot of my kid before CS5 shipped and I wanted to send that to Color. I exported an EDL, went to Resolve, added the native H.264 files to the media pool and ... the conform didn’t work.

Since the native H.264 files don’t have any real metadata including timecode and reel / tape numbers there’s no data for Resolve to conform with. There’s no data in the EDL and to a lesser extent in the files. Since Resolve supports AAFs (AAF is the Advanced Authoring Format that many post applications support) I thought I would try that as well since an AAF carries so much more information than an EDL.

FCP doesn’t support AAF export out of the box so I tested both Automatic Duck’s Pro Export FCP and Boris AAF Transfer. The AutoDuck tool is designed for both OMF and AAF export from FCP. Selecting AAF and choosing settings that matched my sequence proved a successful conform of the H.264 media into Resolve. The Boris AAF Transfer is marketed as a way to move from FCP to Avid Media Composer but since it’s an AAF file that it exports I tried that for the H.264 conform test and it worked as well. Maybe Resolve will support FCP’s XML export in the future but until it does it might be worth investing in a AAF export for FCP if you’re going to be working heavily between FCP and Resolve. While an EDL will probably work fine under most circumstances I always feel like an AAF provides a level of comfort when I send an offline over for conform.

Adobe Premiere Pro CS5, on the other hand, supports AAF export right out of the box as well as editing support for native Canon H.264 files. I have a number of edits I’ve completed in PPro CS5 so I tried to conform several of those in Resolve via AAF and they all worked fine. Some of these edits had dissolves and those came across as well. You won’t see a traditional dissolve icon in the Resolve Conform room but rather there will be clip overlap between the dissolved clips where you’ll see the dissolve happen. As I mentioned above, performance grading the native H.264 files was very good as well getting 7 nodes of realtime correction on my “unsupported” system on one particular shot. At that point I didn’t have anything else I wanted to do to the image!

I was curious as to how speed changes would work on conform so I tried several constant speed changes from FCP and PPro (variable speed changes never seem to move from system to system) and none of those worked. It seems as if the slow clips would come into Resolve too fast and fast clips too slow. Speed changes are supposed to work so that’s going to take some research.

The other test I wanted to try was to move an edit from Avid Media Composer and grade DNxHD .mxf files. Avid support isn’t right out of the box with Resolve for Mac as you have to purchase $499 Avid File Support. A quick install will allow Resolve to see native .mxf media and I was able to add an entire Avid Media Files folder full of clips in the Resolve Media Pool. I then exported an AAF from MC and it conformed perfectly.

It’s a shame that Avid support is half the cost of Resolve for Mac. I’m not sure what the reasoning is behind that but full ProRes support requires an install of Final Cut Studio so there’s been a price paid to get that as well. Of course you’ve probably bought FCS as part of doing business so it would be nice if Avid support would be included for those who have a Media Composer install existing on the Resolve machine.

The joy of using the Tangent Wave

My first few sessions kicking the tires on Resolve for Mac was with a mouse and trackball. As with Apple Color, if you’ve used a dedicated control surface you’ll feel like your hands are tied as you manipulate the creative settings. Resolve uses little left to right control sliders to do a lot of the work so they take a precise click and drag to move them. I was using an Apple Mighty Mouse so the scroll ball would also move them but most often I would hover the cursor over the slider and spin the ring of my Kensington trackball.

Over the weekend I brought our Tangent Wave panel home to try that out. The Resolve preferences have an indicator to check which control surface you have attached. The current options are the DaVinci panel, the Wave or none:

You can see in the Resolve Preferences you can choose the control surface type as well as your video hardware and add media storage volumes.

The Wave is a real pleasure to use with Resolve. After checking the preference and relaunching Resolve it recognized the panel and it was ready to grade. There’s nothing in the Resolve documentation about the Wave’s operation but it’s pretty self-explanatory as the different functions are well labeled on the Wave’s displays.

Toggling through the displays via the Wave’s arrows keys allows for control of a number of Resolve functions: input sizing, image blur, lots of Primary controls, Power Window functions and HSL Qualifier functions. Alexis Van Hurkman has posts on his blog about some other functions of the Wave with Resolve including a breakdown of the F keys. The Wave includes an ALT key for additional functionally that doesn’t seem to do anything at this point in time so hopefully there can be some additional functionality added.

Lot of learning left to do.

All of these notes and observations come after just over a week kicking the tires on Resolve for Mac. There were a few basic questions that I wanted to address for myself to get started; mainly basic workflow questions about how I could get edits in and out of Resolve from the three main editing applications that I use. These tests proved to me that it’s not a difficult process with the proper preparation of an offline edit.

But I also see that Resolve is going to take some time and effort to master. And I haven’t even mentioned Resolve functions like tracking, dynamics and memories. It’s a more complex application than Apple Color that’s for sure. I refuse to ask myself the inevitable question of which is better as that’s like trying to decide which is better between Final Cut Pro and Media Composer. One may be better than the other for certain users or certain tasks. Truth be told it’s best that we have choices of our post-production tools and Resolve for Mac is yet another great choice added to the mix.

Now back to Resolve.

How the Blackmagic Cinema Camera will indirectly take sales from AJA, Matrox, and MOTU

Allan Tépper | 05/10

What are you talking about Allan? AJA, Matrox, and MOTU don’t manufacturer or sell cameras! How will the Blackmagic Cinema Camera take sales from AJA, Matrox, and MOTU? The reason is related…

Blackmagic Design To Host NYC Blackmagic Roadshow on May 24th

PVC News Staff | 05/09

Event will include Blackmagic Design’s complete range of products for broadcast, post production and live events

Blackmagic Design will host the Blackmagic Roadshow in New York on May 24th.

Color Correction Practice Game

Steve Hullfish | 05/05

Test your skills, improve your eye

I found a very cool little site that tests your ability to match a specific color based on hue, saturation and brightness. At first, I thought it was just kind of cute,…

You must be registered to comment. This is an effort to reduce spam. Please REGISTER HERE.

I have to make a comment about the wrap up of the article…refusing to answer the question of which is better, Color or Resolve is, pardon my bluntness, a cop-out.

The ONLY scenario in which Color is superior is if you posted in FCP, are on a tight deadline, and don’t know/don’t have time to learn Resolve. Which of course is a VERY valid situation.

But don’t mistake ease of use for superiority. Having been a Color user since the day it was released, Resolve is superior in every way except ease of use. In many cases, far superior.

If you had said, “I refuse to say which is better, iMovie or Final Cut Pro”, most readers would understand exactly what I mean by the above.

Posted by Nate Weaver on 10/04 at 01:11 PM

I hope to read your follow-up article on the Resolve soon. And now for a bit off-beat question for you - have you heard of any plans to release it for PC?

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 10/04 at 01:54 PM

Nate - thanks for the comments but for me to even attempt to say one is better than the other would be disingenuous since I’ve been using Color for several years now and have only been using Resolve for just over a week. As I mention in the article there are entire features in Resolve that I haven’t even tried, hence the “kicking the tires” focus and not the article being a full on review or shootout between Color and Resolve. But this whole ‘which is better’ debate between software, cameras, platforms etc. is a tired debate. The better application is the one the user is most comfortable with and can do their best work on.

Lauri - haven’t heard about Resolve coming to the PC.

Posted by Scott Simmons on 10/04 at 02:34 PM

“But this whole ‘which is better’ debate between software, cameras, platforms etc. is a tired debate. “

True. I’ve been involved in a couple camera shootouts, one of them imploded before publication because of online discussion in the vein you’re trying to avoid.

I suppose the core issue is you simply didn’t get into the functionality that makes Resolve a more mature product than Color…and when you do, I suspect you’ll say as much.

Posted by Nate Weaver on 10/04 at 03:08 PM

“I suppose the core issue is you simply didn’t get into the functionality that makes Resolve a more mature product than Color…and when you do, I suspect you’ll say as much.”

That’s true Nate. Since I’m still learning Resolve I didn’t think it fair to the software to get into the grading functionality. My first question was with workflow between editing applications. There’s a LOT of things in Resolve that make it seem like a much more mature application than Color, first and foremost realtime. Rather than saying which is better I often think about which application would I use more often and I suspect that Resolve would win over Color but as if right now I still don’t know Resolve well enough to say that for sure. But man that realtime is very, very nice.

Posted by Scott Simmons on 10/04 at 03:20 PM

Nice Job Scott..I’m looking to building my Mac Tower for this set-up it was nice to know that u were testing this without the recommend system and still get a good performance out of it. Just a question though the BD HD 3D card seem to a little big will this card block the PCI another slot? I heard that u can install the card with out the HDMI daughter card..but i would love to use the HDMI out to my HD TV set it home…once i save enough $$ i would buy a monitor with HD-SDI input n use that…. again love the way you explain this..i’m an Avid guys. Seem to me you are not just an editor but seem to know where your way around a machine room..that where i start..in the machine room work my way up to the Avid bay hehe..i’m suprise a lot editors i work with got no clue in the machine room.. will anyway i bookmark your blog and this page PVC..best site for post info!!

Cheer
Dara

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 10/12 at 03:57 PM

Dara, thanks for the comments. I don’t have the DeckLink installed just yet on this system. It’s sitting right beside me, have to get between projects. I don’t think you can use the HDMI daughter card if you want the recommended configuration as there aren’t enough slots. We need more slots on a Mac Pro for all these damn cards!

And yes ... been around the machine room a time or two.

Posted by Scott Simmons on 10/12 at 04:58 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: