PDA

View Full Version : More codecs in DaVinci ?



Phil
05-09-2012, 10:46 AM
Just got to rendering a test, is there anyway to have some more codec options in DaVinci? looks like its all mov or the DNxHD containers, no avi, wmv etc.... I guess the normal route is to render everything twice using the NLE or something which seems a little bit of a shame if your clip has no audio & its effectively finished in DaVinci ;-)..

mbeck
05-09-2012, 12:26 PM
I don't understand your question. Can you give an example of a fork flow that would require other codecs?

Andrew_HD
05-09-2012, 12:33 PM
Resolve has its own exporter and codec choice is limited to rather high-end ones with exception of some proxy options.
There is no AVI, directshow access or even QT, but choice is big enough to fit into any high-end workflow. There us to be ProRes exporter in Windows version, but they have removed it- shame. I think it was based on ffmpeg implementation, so maybe Apple was not happy about it :)

Phil
05-09-2012, 01:03 PM
I don't understand your question. Can you give an example of a fork flow that would require other codecs?

Its not a huge issue I guess, just the issue of time as my footage tends to be very long, I would think it would be really handy to be able to render direct from DeVinci to the final compressed to bits product ;-)... As it is now you can export it to a whole variety of high end codecs which you can stick in a NLE & then render again from there...It seems like they have managed to include so many incredible wonders into DaVinci that adding a few more rendering options could be a nice idea....like now they have added some basic cutting/fading tools..Made is simple to understand for the masses etc

Workflow Record raw - Edit & CC in DaVinci - Render to Vemo/YouTube/DVD/BluRay ;-)

mbeck
05-09-2012, 02:28 PM
Oh, You want to edit in DaVinci? I suppose it could be done.. it would suck though.

StephenM
05-09-2012, 02:32 PM
And don't forget sound. From looking at Resolve 9 at NAB, it will add sound support, but 8.2 does not.

Phil
05-09-2012, 02:49 PM
Oh, You want to edit in DaVinci? I suppose it could be done.. it would suck though.

For some users it could suck for sure but not for me, most of my edit is just cutting & CC. If they got sound in there now then it's obvious that a lot of stuff could be done direct in DaVinci & put on the Tube or Vimo DVD etc.

Hmm I need to think of a reason you may like it! Say for example you wanted to show me a very cool section of footage that your editing in DeVinci.... Click render & there is your Vemo friendly clip! Better then having to render it out & open a NLE make a project stick it on the time line & render it again.....am I clutching straws in the wind? ....why did I have to pick Vegas as my NLE? I bet you guys can just import that XML file! ;-)

mbeck
05-09-2012, 03:04 PM
For most things It would suck for sure but not all the time for me, most of my edit is just cutting & CC. If they got sound in there now then it's obvious that a lot of stuff could be done direct in DaVinci & put on the Tube or Vimo DVD etc.

Hmm I need to think of a reason you may like it! Say for example you wanted to show me a very cool section of footage that your editing in DeVinci.... Click render & there is your Vemo friendly clip! Better then having to render it out & open a NLE make a project stick it on the time line & render it again.....am I clutching straws in the wind? ....why did I have to pick Vegas as my NLE? I bet you guys can just import that XML file! ;-)

Ahh! I see! You are using Vegas.... I can see why you would want to avoid bringing it into your editor :) I kid... but seriously... $60/month for Adobe's CS6 Master collection is a hell of a deal!

Phil
05-25-2012, 12:20 AM
Is there any way to CC in resolve & edit in a NLE without the need to "render" the video file? Is there a NLE thats a little more integrated with DiVinci so they can both share the raw footage Like you can with say Firstlight? Is there anyway to avoid all that rendering before you are able to edit anything?

nickjbedford
05-25-2012, 12:57 AM
DaVinci isn't really designed to be also a media encoder beyond outputting the newly rendered clips. You might want to use something like Adobe Media Encoder after outputting to ProRes or DNxHD as it can do batches.

Phil
05-25-2012, 02:21 AM
DaVinci isn't really designed to be also a media encoder beyond outputting the newly rendered clips. You might want to use something like Adobe Media Encoder after outputting to ProRes or DNxHD as it can do batches.

Its this rendering everything twice thing that Im hoping to avoid, Just the time=money thing. Been looking at the FCP workflow that seems to render everything to ProRes. Is there a drop in quality rendering from prores compared to rendering from raw? for example If I put the raw on a Sony Vegas timeline & render to h264 will it compress better then a FCP compressed ProRes based video rendered to h264?

Macalincag
05-25-2012, 08:08 AM
Is there any way to CC in resolve & edit in a NLE without the need to "render" the video file? Is there a NLE thats a little more integrated with DiVinci so they can both share the raw footage Like you can with say Firstlight? Is there anyway to avoid all that rendering before you are able to edit anything?

Sure. An offline/online proxy workflow w/ EDLs would suit what you have in mind- only one render. Unless you plan on doing additional effects etc., of course, exporting to DPX wouldn't affect quality as I dare say it being lossless. Also, I think it should be mentioned that complicated mult-video-track timelines w/ fancy transitions wouldn't translate well in the EDL, and you might run into instances with certain things not appearing once loaded into Resolve. I would leave it to two tracks, just to be safe, and add the "fancy" transitions along w/ other effects, if desired, after the DPX render.


DaVinci isn't really designed to be also a media encoder beyond outputting the newly rendered clips. You might want to use something like Adobe Media Encoder after outputting to ProRes or DNxHD as it can do batches.

Although DaVinci most certainly wouldn't be the ideal application to encode shit, you can still technically transcode to both flavors mentioned in batches, over-writing or giving unique names to the files, if you wanted to.

laco
05-28-2012, 12:22 PM
Sure. An offline/online proxy workflow w/ EDLs would suit what you have in mind- only one render. Unless you plan on doing additional effects etc., of course, exporting to DPX wouldn't affect quality as I dare say it being lossless. Also, I think it should be mentioned that complicated mult-video-track timelines w/ fancy transitions wouldn't translate well in the EDL, and you might run into instances with certain things not appearing once loaded into Resolve. I would leave it to two tracks, just to be safe, and add the "fancy" transitions along w/ other effects, if desired, after the DPX render.
As far as I know, XML, and AAF can both contain multi-track video, and some transitions.



Although DaVinci most certainly wouldn't be the ideal application to encode shit, you can still technically transcode to both flavors mentioned in batches, over-writing or giving unique names to the files, if you wanted to.
You can use "source rendering" in Davinci, this way all the original clips will be "graded" (like putting a LUT on), and exported in some kind of file

Phil
05-28-2012, 03:11 PM
You can use "source rendering" in Davinci, this way all the original clips will be "graded" (like putting a LUT on), and exported in some kind of file

This sounds interesting, do you have any idea if this works fast? Using proxi video is what Im hopping to avoid.

Another perhaps silly question, does FCP render using the original RAW footage or does it use a Prores version it creates?

Is there any Sony Vegas users out there that know if they will add the ability to read Davinci xml?

randyman
05-28-2012, 04:19 PM
I don't believe FCP currently has any native support for Cinema DNG files.

There is Hamburg Pro Media's MXF4Mac plugin series which claim to provide import capability; it's priced at 499 euros. Ouch.

http://www.hamburgpromedia.com/products/mxf4mac/plugins-for-quicktime/gxf-import-qt.php

JDB
05-28-2012, 04:51 PM
This sounds interesting, do you have any idea if this works fast? Using proxi video is what Im hopping to avoid.

DaVinci resolve is quite fast, I generally see I minimum of real time when transcoding to different formats with a LUT applied. Depends on hardware though.

nickjbedford
05-28-2012, 05:47 PM
I don't believe FCP currently has any native support for Cinema DNG files.

Would you even bother cutting directly with the CinemaDNG files? I would have thought the most efficient editing workflow for raw would be to spit out some efficient, edit friendly ProRes or DNxHD proxies with a basic look applied then round trip colour grade through Resolve 9.

randyman
05-28-2012, 06:37 PM
Would you even bother cutting directly with the CinemaDNG files?

Absolutely - just trying to answer the question. :) No need to hit Resolve with more footage than necessary.

Phil
05-29-2012, 01:50 AM
Would you even bother cutting directly with the CinemaDNG files? I would have thought the most efficient editing workflow for raw would be to spit out some efficient, edit friendly ProRes or DNxHD proxies with a basic look applied then round trip colour grade through Resolve 9.

The whole thing seems a bit "clunky" You need to open the DNG in Resolve & render the entire footage first to Pro res.... Do the edit in FCP & then open the saved xml in Resolve to CC the selected footage....But then sadly you need to render it yet again to get the CC fixes back to FCP to render to a final product using a proxi file rather then the wonderful RAW DNG? Seems bit like rendering a Jpeg from a Tiff & then using the Jpeg to render another Jpeg.... If Resolve could add a few popular options for a final product (ability to add codecs such as Mpeg2,4 Xvid wmv etc etc) you could use FCP for editing & use the original RAW footage for you final render, this would possibly improve the quality of the final product & also save you waiting to render out a finished CC'ed pro res proxi.

The question I guess is ....is there a visible difference in High Detail moving action scenes between a video thats been rendered from a compressed ProRes file against that of a DNG Raw file?

nickjbedford
05-29-2012, 02:15 AM
The question I guess is ....is there a visible difference in High Detail moving action scenes between a video thats been rendered from a compressed ProRes file against that of a DNG Raw file?

Only if the ProRes encoding on the camera itself isn't close to or as good as what you can do with Resolve. Word on the street is that ProRes, while obviously not raw, will give you 90% of the benefits of raw for those who don't want to deal with the storage and extra workflow requirements. But the raw workflow is a pretty standard workflow except perhaps being able to load raw videos directly into the NLE at a decent playback speed (RED in Premiere being one example).

laco
05-29-2012, 02:21 AM
The whole thing seems a bit "clunky" You need to open the DNG in Resolve & render the entire footage first to Pro res.... Do the edit in FCP & then open the saved xml in Resolve to CC the selected footage....But then sadly you need to render it yet again to get the CC fixes back to FCP to render to a final product using a proxi file rather then the wonderful RAW DNG? Seems bit like rendering a Jpeg from a Tiff & then using the Jpeg to render another Jpeg.... If Resolve could add a few popular options for a final product (ability to add codecs such as Mpeg2,4 Xvid wmv etc etc) you could use FCP for editing & use the original RAW footage for you final render, this would possibly improve the quality of the final product & also save you waiting to render out a finished CC'ed pro res proxi.

The question I guess is ....is there a visible difference in High Detail moving action scenes between a video thats been rendered from a compressed ProRes file against that of a DNG Raw file?

So:
1.Capturing CinemaDNG RAW with LOG option.
2. Open davinci creating a master timeline, apply a lut, maybe you can set up some text overlays (file name, or timecode if it will be implemented), check source render, and render it out in prores.
3. Edit in Final Cut, export XML
4.Open in Davinci, link back to original cinemaDNG files,
5. Color Grading
6. Exporting Prores, or uncompressed.

Davinci is not a finishing software, but trust me, If you want your end file to be wmv, xvid, or mpeg2, It is good if you export graded prores.
Prores is a better codec then any of them.

Of course you can always make a test like:
Davinci graded footage -> Prores4444 -> WMV
Davinci graded footage -> Ucompressed image sequence -> WMV

But I don't think there will be a visible difference:)
Anyway, if the camera gets out, I'm planning to do some Davinci tutorials!

Phil
05-29-2012, 03:14 AM
Only if the ProRes encoding on the camera itself isn't close to or as good as what you can do with Resolve. Word on the street is that ProRes, while obviously not raw, will give you 90% of the benefits of raw for those who don't want to deal with the storage and extra workflow requirements. But the raw workflow is a pretty standard workflow except perhaps being able to load raw videos directly into the NLE at a decent playback speed (RED in Premiere being one example).

If you could remove the final "extra" render & render directly to final after you have done your CC from Resolve would you use it?

For me its the time issue, If I have 5hrs of footage, then I need to wait 5hrs before I can start to edit (on a fast PC), then 5hrs again (if there are not many big cuts) before I can start to render a product......take a step outside the box & ask "does this have to be this way?" Is there any reason for not adding some more extra codec options to resolve.....maybe a special BM card that can render out really fast to a range of popular formats?

I guess Rendering = time to go for a drink, do the grass off, sleep...:)

I wonder if they plan to make Resolve into a NLE also? With a huge new user base of BMC users getting into the Resolve way of working...if the time line is there in version 9 & they got sound in there....its not that far away is it!

nickjbedford
05-29-2012, 04:04 AM
If you could remove the final "extra" render & render directly to final after you have done your CC from Resolve would you use it?

For me its the time issue, If I have 5hrs of footage, then I need to wait 5hrs before I can start to edit (on a fast PC), then 5hrs again (if there are not many big cuts) before I can start to render a product......take a step outside the box & ask "does this have to be this way?" Is there any reason for not adding some more extra codec options to resolve.....maybe a special BM card that can render out really fast to a range of popular formats?

I guess Rendering = time to go for a drink, do the grass off, sleep...:)

Well, I'm personally not in a rush when it comes to that, and rendering the final video into a ProRes 422 HQ file for further conversion to multiple formats will be the way I'll do it. If you're in such a rush, I wouldn't even bother shooting in RAW. Shoot in ProRes or DNxHD, cut your clip straight in your NLE, send it to Resolve for a quick grade, export to an intermediate format, then convert with Compressor or something to your distribution file. Or even just do a quick grade in your NLE, export directly to a deliverable format. That cuts out two steps.

If the workflow is such a burden, maybe this camera isn't what you should be looking to use? To me, the whole point of this camera is entirely about the quality of the footage for grading, which ultimately means I'll be doing all these steps (except if I'm not shooting raw, which will be most of the time).

Phil
05-29-2012, 05:20 AM
Well, I'm personally not in a rush when it comes to that, and rendering the final video into a ProRes 422 HQ file for further conversion to multiple formats will be the way I'll do it. If you're in such a rush, I wouldn't even bother shooting in RAW. Shoot in ProRes or DNxHD, cut your clip straight in your NLE, send it to Resolve for a quick grade, export to an intermediate format, then convert with Compressor or something to your distribution file. Or even just do a quick grade in your NLE, export directly to a deliverable format. That cuts out two steps.

If the workflow is such a burden, maybe this camera isn't what you should be looking to use? To me, the whole point of this camera is entirely about the quality of the footage for grading, which ultimately means I'll be doing all these steps (except if I'm not shooting raw, which will be most of the time).

For me the idea is to try to get the best possible image quality, it was this or Red, I use now a SI2K with cineform, my aim with the purchase of the BMC was to get a better image (I can see a better image with Johns samples), the tools in Resolve are simply incredible....but to get them I have to spend 2x the recording time waiting for the pre edit & post edit video....hmm no as I write this I could CC direct in Davinci all the footage & render out the parts I want for final... It would be much faster with a long time line then waiting 5hrs for the pre edit Pro res file to render..

Im just trying to find ways to save some time thats all ;-). Obviously doing everything in Davinci if it becomes a fall blown NLE would be the max, imagine what a cool NLE these programers could produce...

laco
05-29-2012, 05:50 AM
For me the idea is to try to get the best possible image quality, it was this or Red, I use now a SI2K with cineform, my aim with the purchase of the BMC was to get a better image (I can see a better image with Johns samples), the tools in Resolve are simply incredible....but to get them I have to spend 2x the recording time waiting for the pre edit & post edit video....hmm no as I write this I could CC direct in Davinci all the footage & render out the parts I want for final... It would be much faster with a long time line then waiting 5hrs for the pre edit Pro res file to render..

Im just trying to find ways to save some time thats all ;-). Obviously doing everything in Davinci if it becomes a fall blown NLE would be the max, imagine what a cool NLE these programers could produce...

If you want RAW and fast, why don't you record CinemaDNG RAW in camera, and prores from HD-SDI?
If they get timecode implemented you can simply edit your prores, and then change the source files to CinemaDNG in post.

Phil
05-29-2012, 06:40 AM
If you want RAW and fast, why don't you record CinemaDNG RAW in camera, and prores from HD-SDI?
If they get timecode implemented you can simply edit your prores, and then change the source files to CinemaDNG in post.

Yes I have that right now, I think with a raid it will be even fast enough in the timeline to use the DNG stream but I want to use Davinci, its the main reason for the camera I guess, being able select parts of the film to effectively gain more latitude is the tool I like the most. Its not a deal breaker having to render out, heck anyone thats used to working with video for a few years will know about waiting days for things to finish rendering....its just adding a few extra codec options to Davinci would for "me" end a lot of wasted time. Obviously not for everyone, perhaps Im the only person here that does not do a lot more then CC & cuts....its like Davinci is "almost" the perfect NLE for me... I can do the CC stabilize sharpen & de-noise, cut .....I need a NLE for just rendering....Hmm or Virtualdub or my old Vegas....

Im sounding like a right moaner! ;-)

Phil
05-29-2012, 07:04 AM
Of course you can always make a test like:
Davinci graded footage -> Prores4444 -> WMV
Davinci graded footage -> Ucompressed image sequence -> WMV

But I don't think there will be a visible difference:)


This will be interesting to see such a test on highly detailed moving video...Pixel peepers ahoy ;-)

laco
05-29-2012, 08:06 AM
This will be interesting to see such a test on highly detailed moving video...Pixel peepers ahoy ;-)
well.. I saw some users on reduser - when they need to do things fast - , who convert redraw to Prores4444 for editing, and grading, and they export the final version from Prores.

Brad Ferrell
05-29-2012, 08:16 AM
So is DPX the only way to get 32bpc files out of Resolve? I'm kind of disapointed I've got to render and then go back to the NLE to output my deliverables.

Phil
05-29-2012, 10:22 AM
So is DPX the only way to get 32bpc files out of Resolve? I'm kind of disapointed I've got to render and then go back to the NLE to output my deliverables.

there is also dnxhd I guess.. http://whipping-post.com/davinci_resolve_8.2_supported_codec_list.pdf

Brad Ferrell
05-29-2012, 10:41 AM
I was wrong about DPX, it's openEXR I meant. This is something AfterEffects can read. Not sure about Premiere Pro.

laco
05-29-2012, 11:43 AM
So is DPX the only way to get 32bpc files out of Resolve? I'm kind of disapointed I've got to render and then go back to the NLE to output my deliverables.

why do you need 32bpc?
Cinema DNG files will be 12bit, Prores will be 10bit.

Peter Chamberlain
05-31-2012, 09:33 PM
There is a list of all the Codecs natively supported by Resolve here
http://www.blackmagic-design.com/support/detail/supportnotes/?sid=3948&pid=11735&os=mac

Resolve processes internally in RGB at 32 bit floating point and you can render to a large number of formats and codecs including 16 bit float DPX and EXR and to ProRes and DNxHD when on a Mac OS X system. (No ProRes on Windows or Linux)

With the appropriate hardware, Resolve can render four times faster than real time even with grading applied so its not usually seen as the bottleneck but usually the fastest system in the workflow with the highest quality. This is one of the reasons its used in Hollywood on major films.
Peter

vealti
06-04-2012, 11:16 AM
For us PC users let's hope Resolve 9 expands our codec options. I downloaded the lite version for testing. None of the codecs I routinely use could be opened. Cineform avi, psd, jpeg, mts, and plain old DV. The only thing on my machine it recognized was some mp4 videos I used for sending approvals.

laco
06-04-2012, 12:53 PM
For us PC users let's hope Resolve 9 expands our codec options. I downloaded the lite version for testing. None of the codecs I routinely use could be opened. Cineform avi, psd, jpeg, mts, and plain old DV. The only thing on my machine it recognized was some mp4 videos I used for sending approvals.

Well, Davinci has the codec support of the main formats for professional grading, from DNxHD, prores, to uncompressed sequences, and so on.
Doubt that they will work on codecs like psd, avi, xvid, etc.

Phil
06-04-2012, 01:37 PM
Well, Davinci has the codec support of the main formats for professional grading, from DNxHD, prores, to uncompressed sequences, and so on.
Doubt that they will work on codecs like psd, avi, xvid, etc.

They dont need to work on the actual the codecs, just link the software to them or allow the software to see any installed codecs.

There is a h264 codec but when I looked I could not find any bitrate options..even just adding an option for a lower bitrate would at least mean you can pump out a mov file for hosting on the net or sticking a film on a BD or DVD direct from your raw footage so you can send a sample out quick. rendering direct from the original raw could possibly result in a better looking final? rendering a small Jpeg from a Raw normally looks a bit better then doing the same from a visually perfect Jpeg...

aha I can tell your a mac owner.. avi is just a container like mov

Im probably going to have to join the borg & hand over my visa card to Apple....the little voice in my head keeps reminding me how cool they look...

vealti
06-04-2012, 08:03 PM
Well, Davinci has the codec support of the main formats for professional grading, from DNxHD, prores, to uncompressed sequences, and so on.
Doubt that they will work on codecs like psd, avi, xvid, etc.

Maybe not mts or dv, but Cineform is a professional format for grading, not to mention the raw version of it. The mac version of Resolve can read and write Cineform. And according to the list by Black Magic, the mac version also will Read and Write many less professional grading codecs that come with Final Cut such as HDV, DVCPro, XDCam, and even DV. And how professional are my mp4 files for YouTube? They are the only format I have that Resolve is reading! If you look at the mac codec listing it's several pages long. The PC codecs is half a page with none in avi containers. I think if you are going to support PC you should enable the codecs used in the PC NLEs such as Premiere just as they have with Final Cut. And for PC that means avi. So I'm still hoping Resolve 9 expands PC codec options.

Dwight
06-05-2012, 01:37 AM
Maybe not mts or dv, but Cineform is a professional format for grading, not to mention the raw version of it. The mac version of Resolve can read and write Cineform. And according to the list by Black Magic, the mac version also will Read and Write many less professional grading codecs that come with Final Cut such as HDV, DVCPro, XDCam, and even DV. And how professional are my mp4 files for YouTube? They are the only format I have that Resolve is reading! If you look at the mac codec listing it's several pages long. The PC codecs is half a page with none in avi containers. I think if you are going to support PC you should enable the codecs used in the PC NLEs such as Premiere just as they have with Final Cut. And for PC that means avi. So I'm still hoping Resolve 9 expands PC codec options.

+1

Phil
06-06-2012, 10:56 AM
I just discovered this thing! http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/h264prorecorder/techspecs/ looks like just the ticket for me, I guess I need a HD SDI out card also?

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/media/362471/h264prorecorder.jpg

I will read the manual to find out if it supports some none standard frame sizes