-
Feature Request :Multilayer Timeline and XML is a must
-
I don’t really need real-time playback of 4 or more layers at the same time.
What I need is an interactive proxy or cache system that allows us to bake those blends and fades and picture superimpose into one DPX or EXR container in the background.
As soon as one is grading on one of those layered clips, Resolve should just use the native media, show the clip.
but as soon as one flips to the composite layer, Resolve could offer to either cache to RAM during the first playback and at the same time write it to disk.
This is how Flame, Smoke or Filmmaster maintain their real-time functions.
A clever cheat, but my clients are used to that way.
Play slow once, play fast from that point on.A slice of color…
DaVinci 7.1 OSX 10.6.6
Dual Xeon 2,4 RAM 24 GB
RAID0 8TB eSata 6TB
GTX 285 / GT 120
Extreme 3D+ WAVE -
I’m looking into the future on this.. but I’ve met quite a few colorists who are doing projects in flame these days because of the amount of 3D work being done in car commercials. They are able to color grade each composited layer (the grill, rims, head lights etc). It’s a lot of control.
That said, if BMD does go as far as XML/multi layer, they may as well add a render feature like Color has to send it back, separate folders and all. 🙂
-
Hello,
I’m agree, a multilayer timeline would be great. The 3 last projects I graded needed 3 layers and I spend to much time to organize that.
About you Sacha, I don’t understand what is your problem when someone on the forum ask for something like that. Who are you to pretend that this request is usefull and this one id not ? (I feel your remark full of arrogance).
All the best
Robin
réalisateur, scénariste, monteur
http://www.robinerard.ch -
I think the confusion here is “what is the difference between a ‘feature’ and the internal system architecture”?
If you want multiple video streams, with compositing migration between streams, all with real-time value remapping (color correction), then we’re probably a generation or so away from that, where the Mac platform is concerned.
This is like buying a bungalow (a ‘single-story house’ where I live), and then complaining that there is no swimming pool on the third floor. Not only is there no third floor, the foundation was never built to accommodate extra stories, let alone the weight of a couple of tons of water way up in the air.
When daVinci EdWin was introduced, the complaint was — only 4 pixels of softness? Well, err, the reply was, we’d have to rebuild the software. And so the ‘feature’ was next to useless, but it did introduce the concept of the User Shape, and Power Windows/ Power Tiers and so on enjoyed success in dV2K+. All well and good.
Originally, daVinci operating systems were predicated on either telecine (single-source) real-time data throughput or tape-to-tape serial stream — in other words, no “layers” whatsoever. And somehow, we made a living with it, and for some reason, clients were prepared to live with the results.
Believe me, if Resolve could do these things, it would be another reason why I would consider rejoining the daVinci grade approach. I just hope Blackmagic can make enough margin on the product that it justifies the development — and we have seen what happens with packages like these where its value gets marginalized. Like “COLOR”, nee Final Touch. But even in that case, although the product was specifically designed from concept to trade sequences via EDL and XML with Final Cut, it did not work until Apple took it on, and it is still not bullet-proof.
I should add that that problem is not just a point-source deficiency. The observed sloppiness and total indifference to core technical requirements seen in contemporary editorial completely defies description. I’m not just referring to the “story-teller” editors who don’t know (and don’t care) the difference between 2398PsF and 5994i or that there may even be a difference; it even goes as far as the software developers themselves who, for example, have no respect whatsoever for even something as intrinsic as SMPTE field cadence.
jPo
You mean “Old Ben”? Ben Kenobi?
-
that is the point projects are starting to get graded in flame because of teh multilayer timeline and the easy to conform (and i mean just rebuild the FCP timeline) feature …
Ola: i will post a picture of the kind of timeline i get all the time (mostly happen in fashion)
to try defend sascha: well he was saying that there is various tool for each job , but his mistake was consider resolve an app that cost 1K ….well actually resolve is a 150K system because the lynux one have the same features , and even mine on mac costed 40K (including the panel) , so i guess is our dusty inform BMD that today 2011 we need multy layer timeline because many jobs are made that way
And about performance : Yes render DPX in a background on temp folder is the way to go : i do this with scratch all the time :each project have a render folder and when i hit render (not render out for delivery) scartch create DPX of the timeline (or just that shot) , so i can play back realtime no matter how many layer , than if i touch the grade again , the flag that show that the shot is rendered disappear and if i hit render it overwrite the previous DPX ….easy and extremely efficient …
Hope BMD is listening …
g
-
-
Jpo took the words from my mouth… It baffles me why people are bashing the very system with which they’re earning their living with. Very soon, if we’re not careful, our clients will get wind of some nonsense chatter, make it into something important and you’ll be lumped with the Final Touch / Color situation, where some productions won’t touch you… even though you’re perfectly able to do the job..
-
Agreed.
On a side note…I don’t want to come out and say “I told you so,” but I’m going to do it anyway. Haha.
https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/223/16925
https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/223/16934
To be fair, my speculation was based on XML support.
twitter.com/illyalaney
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up