DaVinci Resolve 12.5 Studio. DaVinci Resolve 12.5 video editor combines all the features of the free version plus tens of Resolve FX filters including advanced facial recognition and enhancement application, 4K and higher output at frame rates up to 120fps, motion blur effects, multi-user collaboration, temporal and spatial noise reduction.
Hey!So I gave DaVinci Resolve Lite a shot. I have to say the following:This is an incredibly ineffective piece of software. My laptop specs are down below-I know, it's getting a bit dated, but it's still a hell of a lot faster than an average PC. But I couldn't even play back an HD clip without frame skipping, let alone do something more interesting with it.Also, the user interface sucks big time.LW is.so.
much more intuitive, less resource-hungry. I guess the old saying holds. Know one tool really well.Sorry for that rant, I had to put it somewhere =).- Josely. RazzDigital Bolex 2k Cinema DNG raw cameraCanon GL2 DV camcorderiPAD Mini 3 Iographer rigWorkstation: Intel i7-4770k, Asrock Z87 Thunderbolt 2 MB, 16GB 1866 DDR3 ram,2TB Seagate Hybrid system drive, 2TB Seagate NAS media drive, E-sata III hot swap drive bay, Nvidia GTX760 2GB GPULightworks kybrd.
Davinci Resolve 16 System Requirements Mac
Shuttlepro v2Win10 Pro 64bit, Lightworks 14.0 64bitMobile Workstation: MSI GTX72 DominatorIntel i7-6700HQ 2.7GHz Win10 64bit16GB DDR4 ram, 500GB M.2 SSDNvidia GTX970 3GB GPUUSB3, USB3.1-C, Thunderbolt 3 portsShuttlepro2 Win10 64bit LW 14.0 64 bit. With all respect, knowing something about GPU programming myself-this is just madness. Processing 1080p60 footage with decently complex filters (of which color grading is none) should be easily doable on my graphics card. Even very nonlocal filters, such as a high radius Gaussian blur, should be doable, if they write their shaders effectively.Just saying. This is what I don't like about a lot of programs. People write shit code and put a big price tag on it. Give me the money they make by selling 100 copies of this and I'll rewrite their core to run effectively on my laptop.This is how LW does it!
How can one program play back this footage with not even 5% CPU usage, and another one flakes, computer fans running so fast that my entire apartment shakes?? And without even doing anything the program sucks up FREAKING 7 GBs of RAM???o.O. There are more than 60 direct interactive filters applied to every pixel of every frame of video at 32 bits per pixel in Resolve Lite whether they are adjusted or not, not including frame modifiers like masks, crops, power windows, preprogrammed luts etc. In my case, raw processing algorithms make use of GPU processing power in ways not directly related to pixel shading routines. Mathematical conversion algorithms between different camera input vs display output resolutions and color spaces for instance. RazzDigital Bolex 2k Cinema DNG raw cameraCanon GL2 DV camcorderiPAD Mini 3 Iographer rigWorkstation: Intel i7-4770k, Asrock Z87 Thunderbolt 2 MB, 16GB 1866 DDR3 ram,2TB Seagate Hybrid system drive, 2TB Seagate NAS media drive, E-sata III hot swap drive bay, Nvidia GTX760 2GB GPULightworks kybrd.
Shuttlepro v2Win10 Pro 64bit, Lightworks 14.0 64bitMobile Workstation: MSI GTX72 DominatorIntel i7-6700HQ 2.7GHz Win10 64bit16GB DDR4 ram, 500GB M.2 SSDNvidia GTX970 3GB GPUUSB3, USB3.1-C, Thunderbolt 3 portsShuttlepro2 Win10 64bit LW 14.0 64 bit. Hi joselyDaVinci Resolve Lite is available for free if I remember correctly? And to be honest - a mobile laptop computer is the worst if it comes to video proccessing. It's just not designed for it, no matter how much you pay for it. A mobile computer is always a compromise between cooling system, power consumption and computing power.
Think about the bandwith of transporting Full-HD at a given framerate with a lot of filters and color grading applied. A mobile computer does not have that bandwith.Resolve Lite runs just fine on my machine. LW runs even better due to a more efficient programming (I assume, I'm no programmer) core. So I stick to it and try to do as much work inside LW as possible.Have a nice dayDieter. So they apply every filter, even if I don't select them? That's inefficient.Rescaling is trivial for GPUs, even if you use some more complicated interpolation algorithms, and color space conversions are very simple functions, that only need one texture lookup.Lookup-tables are similarly easy, two texture lookups.
1.37 GB1404.37 GB0107.94 GB901.37 GB93699.19 MB12502.21 GB5402.04 GB2301.37 GB547377.89 MB101.19 GB3363.28 GB23805.46 GB1490979.62 MB1190710.09 MB77553348.42 MB00347.06 MB00347.48 MB00128.1 Mo77699.2 Mo552.9 Go511.1 Go65695.7 Mo66699.8 MB180700.52 MB572700.09 MB601.37 GB77316.08 MB1850103.32 MB9817702.64 MB138699.98 MB230699.82 MB187701.75 MB6801.4 GB120700.23 MB570700.58 MB3071.37 GB1815703.81 MB45271.37 GB31910702.36 MB277690.62 MB330699.91 MB110695.13 MB1618703.11 MB590694.26 MB200914.31 MB2601.37 GB86101.35 GB754698.69 MB11314.37 GB587.95 GB64. French saison recipe.
Masks, crops-all just two texture lookups.I'm just not particularly impressed by its performance. Sorry for my harsh words earlier.It is a real time high end interactive grading environment, not a video game.
Pixel shading is only one step in the process. Real time interactive work efficiency in high level professional workstation environments is more important than taking short cuts.They give us the whole program, minus noise reduction routines, 3D support and 4k digital cinema support for free.I've played with it a bit in earlier versions, but the raw DNG debayer quality and image recovery tools before v11 weren't up to par with the stills processors that I still prefer for highest quality uncompressed raw conversion. It still isn't as good as the stills processors for raw, but good enough that the speed and efficiency working with motion image sequences is worth the sacrifice.My high end stills processors require 200 times the power of Resolve and run in seconds per frame rather than frames per second, so by comparison it is extremely efficient. RazzDigital Bolex 2k Cinema DNG raw cameraCanon GL2 DV camcorderiPAD Mini 3 Iographer rigWorkstation: Intel i7-4770k, Asrock Z87 Thunderbolt 2 MB, 16GB 1866 DDR3 ram,2TB Seagate Hybrid system drive, 2TB Seagate NAS media drive, E-sata III hot swap drive bay, Nvidia GTX760 2GB GPULightworks kybrd. Shuttlepro v2Win10 Pro 64bit, Lightworks 14.0 64bitMobile Workstation: MSI GTX72 DominatorIntel i7-6700HQ 2.7GHz Win10 64bit16GB DDR4 ram, 500GB M.2 SSDNvidia GTX970 3GB GPUUSB3, USB3.1-C, Thunderbolt 3 portsShuttlepro2 Win10 64bit LW 14.0 64 bit.
I just don't see why it should struggle playing back a video file. If you apply unnecessary filters, even if you don't use them, it's inefficient. Imagine opening GIMP or Photoshop, and every layer you have has every possible layer effect pre-applied to it, just in case you want to use it.I'm not complaining about the features per se, just that they're not doing a good job writing efficient code. Even.if. I had a 12 core, dual GPU industrial vacuum machine standing around, I'd get a ridiculous speedup if they knew how to write performant code.(and for the record: a Bayer filter is highly local, and likely also a pixel shader. If not, they're doing it wrong. Image 'recovery', whatever that implies, is something else, of course.
And noise reduction is not local, because it requires doing statistics on the entire image, so I could understand if that took some time.)edit: re: 'not a video game': (some) video games are the most technically sophisticated pieces of software out there. GPU processing is lightyears ahead there. You don't understand that most of the work the GPU is doing in these apps has nothing to do with pixel shader functions. This is true of many high end graphics and engineering apps. They are used to run complex physics based mathematical algorithms before input to the pixel shaders is even determined. In some apps designed to run multiple GPU's only one of them is actually mapping graphic outputs to the display stream. The rest are used as RISC processors.A game only has to play predefined RGB pixels using highly optimized driver routines for that function only.In raw processing, color grading, creative fx work and decoding of long GOP compressed video streams, those pixels don't exist.
They have to mathematically defined before pixel shaders even enter the picture. Pixel shaders just write the defined pixel to the screen or to an output file.Expecting stellar performance out of a relatively low end laptop that costs less than the typical GPU used in professional studio workstations is asking a lot.
RazzDigital Bolex 2k Cinema DNG raw cameraCanon GL2 DV camcorderiPAD Mini 3 Iographer rigWorkstation: Intel i7-4770k, Asrock Z87 Thunderbolt 2 MB, 16GB 1866 DDR3 ram,2TB Seagate Hybrid system drive, 2TB Seagate NAS media drive, E-sata III hot swap drive bay, Nvidia GTX760 2GB GPULightworks kybrd. Shuttlepro v2Win10 Pro 64bit, Lightworks 14.0 64bitMobile Workstation: MSI GTX72 DominatorIntel i7-6700HQ 2.7GHz Win10 64bit16GB DDR4 ram, 500GB M.2 SSDNvidia GTX970 3GB GPUUSB3, USB3.1-C, Thunderbolt 3 portsShuttlepro2 Win10 64bit LW 14.0 64 bit. Well call it a unified pipeline, or GPU computing, or whatever. It doesn't matter if it's done in a shader or via CUDA or openCL-what it is is 2d arrays getting processed. Of course a video has to be decoded first. But I don't understand why that should be difficult for one application, when it is so easy for another (LW). Or are you telling me that under the hood Resolve processes a standard prores file in such a sophisticated matter that it may well take hundreds of times as long for that simple task?
Now I'm curious-what exactly is Resolve doing with my file that warrants such a poor performance? For starters your YUV encoded prores gets decoded to 32bit float YRGB color space and the default state of all filters is applied to each frame in YRGB color space after the application of whatever default 3D lut is called for in project color space input settings. 3D in this case refers to how luminance and color values are separately defined mathematically in YRGB space. Then the project defined output resolution, color depth and monitor color space settings are written to the pixel shaders applied to the preview window video at whatever scale it is displayed along with whatever filter adjustments that have been added in one or more grading nodes. If it is decoding lower end Prores compressed video, then it is also having to extract the full resolution full color depth data for every frame from the compressed file too along with buffering multiple decoded frames up to the limits of available ram.It is not just playing video. RazzDigital Bolex 2k Cinema DNG raw cameraCanon GL2 DV camcorderiPAD Mini 3 Iographer rigWorkstation: Intel i7-4770k, Asrock Z87 Thunderbolt 2 MB, 16GB 1866 DDR3 ram,2TB Seagate Hybrid system drive, 2TB Seagate NAS media drive, E-sata III hot swap drive bay, Nvidia GTX760 2GB GPULightworks kybrd. Shuttlepro v2Win10 Pro 64bit, Lightworks 14.0 64bitMobile Workstation: MSI GTX72 DominatorIntel i7-6700HQ 2.7GHz Win10 64bit16GB DDR4 ram, 500GB M.2 SSDNvidia GTX970 3GB GPUUSB3, USB3.1-C, Thunderbolt 3 portsShuttlepro2 Win10 64bit LW 14.0 64 bit.
Not impressed. YUV-YRGB is a trivial function (few multiplications and additions). Lookup tables are even faster than functions-usually lookup tables are only efficient if the function maps three or fewer parameters to some value, hence 3D lut make sense, if the function is really difficult to calculate on-the-fly or not even given analytically (question though: what lut would it want to apply if I simply want to play back a video file??). Writing parameters to shaders is basically instant. Downscaling for preview? That just makes the shader faster.so far a mediocre graphics card should be able to process thousands of such frames per second, probably bottlenecked by the bus.Processing full color depth data for a 1080p video? My cell phone could do that in realtime.
Davinci Resolve Lite Torrent
Buffering multiple decoded frames? Again, what's so special about this?It's clear it's not just playing video.
But what is it doing? Calculating Bitcoins in the background?? It's clear it's not just playing video.
But what is it doing? Calculating Bitcoins in the background??You are in the wrong forum for such questions. Only the programmer at Blackmagic could answer this.
But I have a feeling they will not go into much detail about itLet's put it this way: Forget DaVinci, use LightworksAnyhow - would you both (especially David with his large signature) please put your technical specs from your signatures into your profiles Technical tab instead? That's actually the place where it belongs.This would be very nice and would make threads like these more readable and shorter - it's enough to post your system specs once and not every time you write a posting. Thank you in advance.