Do you conform inside Resolve?

[Pepijn Klijs]

It all depends on how you got in Resolve in the first place. I mean, if you came from fcp for example and you stripped the timeline from any fx, stills and titles, you kinda need to roundtrip to add that back in and have it complete.

On the other hand there could situations where you came in with just a quicktime and you can simply sync the audiomix with the timeline in resolve and export your desired flavor.

So there is no one way that’s good, it all depends…

Editor/Colorist, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
http://www.pepijnklijs.nl

[Michaelmaier]

I normally come in via an AAF.

[Joseph Owens]

[MichaelMaier] “If they export the final output straight from Resolve or not. It seems to me that it would be preferable to do it from Resolve to avoid re-compression.”

Sorry, you lost me there. Resolve creates new media as part of its export process. Any editing or mastering software will point to these new files the same way it would with the original source files, no recompression necessary, as long as the export codec is compatible with the application. Resolve is not necessarily intended to be used as a “finishing” package, as it isn’t generally regarded to be either an editing or compositing tool, both of which would be necessary to integrate the titles, layback, captions/subtitles, versioning and so on and on of a general release.

jPo

“I always pass on free advice — its never of any use to me” Oscar Wilde.

[Michaelmaier]

I explain. For example you bring in an AAF with DNxHD clips, you grade your clips and export them out as DNxHD (1st render). Then they are re-imported in the NLE and rendered out as DPX, H.264 or whatever format is needed (2nd render).

In this process you would have rendered 2 times. From Resolve and from the NLE. If you had done it from Resolve, you would only render one time. Straight to your deliver format. Am I wrong?

Joseph Owens said:
“Resolve is not necessarily intended to be used as a “finishing” package, as it isn’t generally regarded to be either an editing or compositing tool, both of which would be necessary to integrate the titles, layback, captions/subtitles, versioning and so on and on of a general release.”

So you pretty much have to round trip back to the NLE?
Is there a better finishing package than a NLE?

[Juan Salvo]

[MichaelMaier] “I explain. For example you bring in an AAF with DNxHD clips, you grade your clips and export them out as DNxHD (1st render). Then they are re-imported in the NLE and rendered out as DPX, H.264 or whatever format is needed (2nd render).”

It depends on your workflow and what you are trying to accomplish. I generally decide these things on a case by case basis.

Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author

https://JuanSalvo.com

[Joseph Owens]

[MichaelMaier] ”
In this process you would have rendered 2 times. From Resolve and from the NLE. If you had done it from Resolve, you would only render one time. Straight to your deliver format. Am I wrong?”

As Juan put it, it would vary on a case-by-case basis. The vast majority of my workflow dictates a kind of “generic” donor timeline which could not be finalized in any way directly from Resolve. There will always be several versions of the final show; textless elements, seamless versions, different languages, widescreen, letterbox, pillarbox, widescreen with text protected for center extraction, and so on and on and on and on…. So maybe if the show is a very simple one-off with no variations, then sure, pump out the flat single file/project and that will be it… upload to wherever its going and whatever happens to it after that is somebody else’s challenge. Just don’t expect to be able to make any revisions without tearing it apart first, or doing it all over again. Maybe you can charge for that!

jPo

“I always pass on free advice — its never of any use to me” Oscar Wilde.

[Stig Olsen]

Hi Michael,

You are correct, your corrected clips can not be accessed directly from any finishing tool.
But, you can avoid double compression by using an EDL / XML from your editing tool.

Big feature films?
They are often finished in an Autodesk product – Smoke or Flame.
The best way for you is to render back in MXF 185 (Avid) or Prores (Final Cut) for lining up with the audio and titles.

stig

[Michaelmaier]

So Autodesk is pretty much the standard for finishing?
What are other finishing applications besides that? Avid DS maybe? Is Nucoda Film Master or Pablo any more of a finishing tool than Resolve?

Back to re-compression, can you really avoid double compression by using an EDL / XML or AAF?
I mean in the case I gave I was using AAF and it still had to be compressed twice. I think EDLs and the like avoid triple compression. But you would still need to compress at least twice till final output. Unless I’m missing something?

[Stig Olsen]

By using an EDL, Resolve will relink to your original footage.
It recreates your edited timeline.
Then there will be no need to export your footage from your editing software.
You dont need to worry to much about quality loss when rendering from Resolve as long as you choose a proper format.

There are a thousands of threads about different workflows on this forum and others. I will recommend you to use some time to browse the web and read manuals.

About finishing, yes Flame is pretty much the industrial standard. Avid DS is also a proper online tool. Davinci is for grading, only.

Stig

[Michaelmaier]

I have heard Mistika is pretty good and well used as well, and also that Pablo is considered a finishing application too as opposed to grading only. I never knew that.
I guess a poor mans finishing tool is After Effects or just your NLE, if you don’t want to go Smoke on the Mac.

About the whole re-compressing thing, I think you are misunderstanding me.
An EDL will relink to your original footage and there will be no need to export your footage from your editing software. But, you need to export it from Resolve after grading, and then export it again from your NLE after finished. Two re-compressions.