[Jay Moffat]

Wondering if anyone has been able to build a Micro-Atx spec ultrascope…? I have one of those ProEdit desks where a flat micro-atx case would slip in nicely into a free slot I have… I understand that Black Magic had one running at NAB off a Shuttle PC, but I can’t find a spec in their barebones models which matches the Ultrascope spec, also wondered how they fit the graphics card into one of those small enclosures?

You can tell I know nothing very little windows PCs..

J

[Jay Moffat]

I think I’ll be supported in stating that a difficult correction is not a software ability but a more a user skill ;o)

There seems to be really only one tested configuration for the Mac version at this time, so I see no reason for no official performance chart this close to release. The Resolve website states “as GPUs on Mac get faster, your DaVinci Resolve will get faster.” which is patently unhelpful when you’re trying ascertain the actual performance you will get out of a system before you invest in it, it either is or it isn’t RealTime, or it is up until you have x number of secondaries at the current Machine spec, etc…

At the moment it seems to be a brand upgrade for many people, well in my case it would be anyway. I don’t get RealTime in Apple Color, there are certainly some technical advantages to Resolve, but if I can’t work with 2k with a decent amount of flexibility (like 5 or 6 secondaries, LUT support etc) it’s all but useless to me, end of story.

In terms of 2k support, what I’m really getting at is a 2k film workflow.

So, Blackmagic, can we have an official spec so we can stop speculating and get on with our lives, thanks!

J

[Jay Moffat]

Is there an official document comparing the Linux and MAC performance? I’m seeing conflicting reports on 2k support on the mac version. In considering the switch in my situation it would need to be supported otherwise the mac version investment would make no sense…it’s possible this info does exist, but not on the BM website…

J

[Jay Moffat]

Yep, something along the lines of a comparison table would be ideal. I fear that going down the route of Resolve for Mac might be a cosmetic upgrade rather than an actually workflow improvement. I currently work predominantly with 2k DPX and uncompressed streams in Apple Color, granted it’s not real-time playback, but that has never been a real issue for me. What HAS been an issue is the reputation of Apple Color in the UK for film work, it’s has a tendency to appear lowend to many filmmakers, especially in the higher budget productions.

So my wonder in short is, will the extra investment into a Resolve for Mac actually deliver what Apple Color currently does, or are we just buying into a brand? I think this is especially pertinent, as I suspect that the core purchases will come from users/companies who have currently already invested into Apple Color/Final Touch.

J

[Jay Moffat]

Great stuff…

[Jay Moffat]

Hi, it’s not whether it’s interlaced or not, I was wondering if there is a quality loss of what we call progressive shooting, where there are two identical frames in 50i, then rendered out to 25p..?

J

[Jay Moffat]

I have been asked recently, but could not give a definitive answer: Is there a quality loss rendering 50i footage out from FCP as 25p, and is that actually what should be supplied as a digital master?

I’ve tried a couple of tests but not been able to see a discernible difference, if any…The footage I was working with was shot progressive but presumably enclosed in a 50i wrapper..

J

[Jay Moffat]

Great stuff, thanks, much clearer now..for reference in case it helps, the Kona LHi scales the full frame in Apple Color, presumably because the computer doesn’t need to do it real-time and has time to do the job…

[Jay Moffat]

Thanks Russell, something which I noticed which I hadn’t before as I’d only just finished watching The ProRes version of the file: FCP scales the ProRes version to fit the screen, but not the Uncompressed version.

So does this means the LHi can play ProRes 2k but not uncompressed, or is FCP doing this in RealTime?

In Apple Color the uncompressed version is scaled to fit the screen like the ProRes version, so theoretically I suppose I can grade the 2k version.

J

[Jay Moffat]

Hi Russell.

Just dropping the original file into the 2048×858 sequence setup, it stretches the vertical resolution.

If I drop in the 2048×858 rendered sequence back into itself, the pause frame is stretched, but playing the sequence displays letterboxed, but at the top of the screen.

My basic wonder is if I should re-render the sequence as 1080 and grade, or just grade and render out as 2048×1152 and supply back to the client.

J