Jump to content


Photo

Changing NLEs from Adobe to Davinci Resolve


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Vital Butinar

Vital Butinar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Student
  • Ljubljana, Slovenija

Posted 31 January 2019 - 01:45 PM

So recently I have placed an order for a new Blackmagic camera and along with that camera I am receiving a licence for Davinci Resolve.

 

Anyway it got me thinking the Adobe subscription is not that expensive but then again at the end of the year it adds up to a substantial sum of money. So when I learned that I would be receiving a license for Davinci Resolve I was thinking that I might start editing in it.

 

Now here's the thing I have no problems with learning to use a new tool but I'm just not sure all the tools. I mean I'm sure the coloring part is fantastic and the audio editor but I'm not sure about Fusion the alternative to After Effects. I'm just not sure about Fusion.

 

And also two other things that I like more about Premiere Pro and don't exist in Davinci that you can't set the resolution and frame rate for each timeline but globally for the whole for the whole project. But I guess it's just something you have to figure out in advance and live with it.

 

So anybody have any experience with Davinci Resolve and if I could just get rid of Adobe and use only it?

 

Thanks and best regards.


  • 0

#2 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5343 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 31 January 2019 - 03:09 PM

When starting to use a new NLE it's best not to use it like another NLE, it just becomes frustrating. Fusion uses nodes, rather than layers, so you do have to  discover how to use that method.  See this article https://www.provideo...resolve-editor/


  • 0

#3 Takoda Porembski

Takoda Porembski

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Student
  • North Florida

Posted 31 January 2019 - 06:21 PM

I dropped adobe. Im a student and it was costing money. Davinci is free and I now can grade with software people take serious. Free version only takes so many codecs...


  • 1

#4 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4463 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 31 January 2019 - 08:19 PM

Honestly, I don't like Premiere at all. I think it's buggy and Adobe appear to be more focused on features rather then stability. As a professional editor, I can't use the tool at all for anything serious. 

 

DaVinci was pretty easy to learn editorial wise. It is missing a bunch of features tho. The major one being a tool which helps select all media on all tracks and slide it back and forward. This is a critical feature when making changes to the timing/length of your timeline and is completely missing in DaVinci. The editor also has some funny quarks that don't exist in any other tool. One that bugs me the most; when grabbing the play head and dragging it left and right in the edges of the visible timeline to show MORE timeline, it tends to get out of hand and skip several minutes instead of seconds. The sensitivity of this control is based on how zoomed in you are, but since the keyboard layout uses the zoom control for the "coloring" panel, you can't use the mouse trackball or the +/- keys for zooming. Ya basically need to build your own command structure for the program, which is annoying. There are dozens of other annoyances from how they deal with keyframes to audio going offline if it's anything else but native codec's. 

 

In the end however, I have found DaVinci to be MUCH MORE STABLE when Premiere. It also doesn't have the horribly annoying "max audio gain of 6db" issue OR the tracks being stuck at mono or stereo. You can change all of those parameters at any time. Plus, the "adjustments" window on each track is open all the time, which makes doing audio editing much smoother/easier. 

 

I use DaVinci most days for editing short form projects and I'm currently cutting a documentary feature in it. Where yes I do cuss and feel like throwing the machine out the window on the feature, on the short form stuff it works so well, it makes up for it. DaVinci feels like a piece of hardware rather than a program running on the machine. It seamlessly functions with the hardware in it's own environment, which keeps you focused on work without distractions. It's multi-user/project tools are also very good and it doesn't suffer from cache issues like premiere does. 

 

Over-all as an video editor only, Premiere has more tools then DaVinci. However, DaVinci is a better written program, it is what the future is going to look like. A program that does 90% of everything at the best level possible, built-in to one program. Where to get full raster video out of Premiere requires checkboxes and long render times, DaVinci does full raster in real-time flawlessly. It doesn't require ANY rendering, it just flat out works no matter how many effect you throw at it. When I go back to Avid and I have to sit and watch a render bar, I always ask myself why I didn't just use DaVinci. So more and more I'm not bothering to open any other program but DaVinci and that tactic so far, has been working great. 

 

If DaVinci stays on it's current path, the Adobe suite (Pr, Ae, Me) won't have any reason to exist. They're an antique workflow that is not part of the future at all.  


  • 1

#5 Vital Butinar

Vital Butinar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Student
  • Ljubljana, Slovenija

Posted 01 February 2019 - 11:11 AM

Honestly, I don't like Premiere at all. I think it's buggy and Adobe appear to be more focused on features rather then stability. As a professional editor, I can't use the tool at all for anything serious. 

 

DaVinci was pretty easy to learn editorial wise. It is missing a bunch of features tho. The major one being a tool which helps select all media on all tracks and slide it back and forward. This is a critical feature when making changes to the timing/length of your timeline and is completely missing in DaVinci. The editor also has some funny quarks that don't exist in any other tool. One that bugs me the most; when grabbing the play head and dragging it left and right in the edges of the visible timeline to show MORE timeline, it tends to get out of hand and skip several minutes instead of seconds. The sensitivity of this control is based on how zoomed in you are, but since the keyboard layout uses the zoom control for the "coloring" panel, you can't use the mouse trackball or the +/- keys for zooming. Ya basically need to build your own command structure for the program, which is annoying. There are dozens of other annoyances from how they deal with keyframes to audio going offline if it's anything else but native codec's. 

 

In the end however, I have found DaVinci to be MUCH MORE STABLE when Premiere. It also doesn't have the horribly annoying "max audio gain of 6db" issue OR the tracks being stuck at mono or stereo. You can change all of those parameters at any time. Plus, the "adjustments" window on each track is open all the time, which makes doing audio editing much smoother/easier. 

 

I use DaVinci most days for editing short form projects and I'm currently cutting a documentary feature in it. Where yes I do cuss and feel like throwing the machine out the window on the feature, on the short form stuff it works so well, it makes up for it. DaVinci feels like a piece of hardware rather than a program running on the machine. It seamlessly functions with the hardware in it's own environment, which keeps you focused on work without distractions. It's multi-user/project tools are also very good and it doesn't suffer from cache issues like premiere does. 

 

Over-all as an video editor only, Premiere has more tools then DaVinci. However, DaVinci is a better written program, it is what the future is going to look like. A program that does 90% of everything at the best level possible, built-in to one program. Where to get full raster video out of Premiere requires checkboxes and long render times, DaVinci does full raster in real-time flawlessly. It doesn't require ANY rendering, it just flat out works no matter how many effect you throw at it. When I go back to Avid and I have to sit and watch a render bar, I always ask myself why I didn't just use DaVinci. So more and more I'm not bothering to open any other program but DaVinci and that tactic so far, has been working great. 

 

If DaVinci stays on it's current path, the Adobe suite (Pr, Ae, Me) won't have any reason to exist. They're an antique workflow that is not part of the future at all.  

 

Thanks I was thinking in the same way. I have no problem working with a different workflow in different types of software. I was just wondering if I could get rid of my Adobe suite and still do the work. 

 

So thank you for your input.

 

As far as Fusion goes I have no problem with working with nodes and any kind of stuff that comes along. 


  • 0

#6 Bruce Greene

Bruce Greene
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 711 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 February 2019 - 11:36 AM

Just be aware that Resolve is a resource hungry application.  I use it for color correction and light editing and it runs well on my HP workstation with a powerful graphics card.  But, if you need to work on a laptop, it might not be the best choice and may require one of the most powerful laptops with a good and expensive graphics card.

 

That said... I'm down to only Photoshop from Adobe now.  I cancelled the rest of the suite about 18 months ago. :)


  • 0

#7 Perry Paolantonio

Perry Paolantonio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 588 posts
  • Other
  • Boston, MA

Posted 01 February 2019 - 11:39 AM

Resolve is far superior to Premiere. Also, if you're familiar with FCP 7, it's about as close as you'll get to that these days. It's a solid editing system and the color correction tools are hard to beat. Fusion and Fairlight are dicey at this point - they're relatively recent integrations into the application, but if you stick primarily to the edit and color windows, it's a good choice. Get yourself a really good GPU (GTX1070 at minimum) and you'll have a good system for color correction. For editing you don't need the GPU power so much. 


  • 0

#8 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4463 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 February 2019 - 11:45 AM

 

Thanks I was thinking in the same way. I have no problem working with a different workflow in different types of software. I was just wondering if I could get rid of my Adobe suite and still do the work. 

 

So thank you for your input.

 

As far as Fusion goes I have no problem with working with nodes and any kind of stuff that comes along. 

 

Photoshop is very useful, so probably can't entirely get rid of Adobe. I don't think Fusion can edit still images as efficiently as Photoshop, it's a bit more complicated to use. 

 

Bruce's comment about computer power is very important tho. DaVinci is a hungry beast and is actually very GPU video memory intensive, rather then CPU intensive. It needs something with as much video memory as you can give it because it buffers literally everything into memory. I suggest a standard GTX1080 8GB as a base card. The TI is very power hungry and your computer's power supply may not be able to handle it. I'm currently running a 980 4gb and it's not enough. 


  • 0

#9 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5343 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 01 February 2019 - 06:46 PM

Serif Affinity is a possible alternative to Photoshop. It really depends on what you use the latter for.. 


  • 0

#10 Vital Butinar

Vital Butinar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Student
  • Ljubljana, Slovenija

Posted 02 February 2019 - 03:12 PM

As far as other software for Photoshoping and vector graphics I'm covered I can use anything else like Gimp or Inkscape or even some other stuff. It's just the video editing and FX stuff.

I guess I'll try to move to Davinci and keep Adobe for now with the intent to move off Adobe gradually. :)

 

Thanks for the input guys.

 

I guess now I have to dive into Fusion :)


  • 0

#11 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 12405 posts
  • Other

Posted 03 February 2019 - 05:14 AM

I just use Photoshop from the last full version I bought, which is getting on for ten years old now but does everything I regularly need.

 

Yes, they're focussed on features not stability or speed, and certainly in some parts of the world it is not a good deal as a rental. Yes, they're getting a lot of trade from young beginners who don't understand the difference between capital and revenue, but the way they seem to have worked it out is that it's exactly as expensive as buying every new version of Creative Suite, which nobody ever did because all those new features were rarely that useful. It is much more expensive outside the US, because of no reason other than greed.

 

It has had very little worthwhile work done on it since the launch of Creative Cloud. This is why After Effects still uses the version of Javascript from 1999 (OK, it theoretically went to final standard in March 2000) as its scripting language, the reason the scripting interpreter is such a horrific memory hog, spawning one interpreter instance per layer, and why there are still such crushing limitations on what can be scripted - and that's just the scripting engine. The whole application is dog slow and still doesn't support large CPU core counts as well as it could and should. It is very expensive software. This is not acceptable.

 

Yes, fixing all that is a lot of work. Yes, it probably involves tearing the whole application down to the bare bones and rebuilding it. It is a vast undertaking, and one that's going to create a lot of compatibility issues with plugins, which are key to many (most?) workflows. After Effects is a very, very large piece of software and it is widely used in a huge variety of circumstances. I like it a lot and have used it a lot. But the complete, ongoing neglect of core problems is not OK.

 

Adobe is a very large, very successful, very powerful company. It is capable of doing that work. It simply doesn't care to, because these are problems that are not obvious to the college kids who have never known anything any different. Why would Adobe spend the money? So AE languishes.

 

So yes, I would like nothing more than to replace everything in Creative Suite with third party apps. Blackmagic have offered us a tantalising option with Resolve plus Fusion (and of course Fairlight, which is often overlooked.) The editing in Resolve is fine, though how can you really get that wrong. I don't know enough about Fairlight to comment. Fusion, however, is not AE, even if only because the conversion training is a 'mare. There is really no worthwhile alternative to AE, at least at the level at which AE operates right now. There is also no sensible alternative to Photoshop.

 

Adobe know this.

 

P


  • 1

#12 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4463 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 03 February 2019 - 03:03 PM

Good point about the Adobe engine and how antique/inefficient it is. Premiere feels like a final cut 7 engine that hasn't been updated. They really need to work on that because DaVinci started from scratch with their media core and it's extremely efficient/effective at managing multi-core/multi-thread operations. It's also far better at using the GPU, where Premiere says it can do certain GPU tasks that DaVinci does much better. 

 

Where Premiere is only getting worse, DaVinci is only getting better. 


  • 1

#13 Vital Butinar

Vital Butinar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Student
  • Ljubljana, Slovenija

Posted 06 February 2019 - 07:59 AM

I agree completely that the Adobe suite feels like a sluggish dinosaur at times and stability is an issue. 

But I still can't seem to completely abandon it for Davinci.

 

I will definitely try to edit more stuff in Davinci.


  • 0


Tai Audio

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Rig Wheels Passport

Serious Gear

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Serious Gear

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine