DaVinci Resolve 7 for Mac now shipping

[Chris Kenny]

New overhauled manual is posted here (http://www.blackmagic-design.com/downloads/davinci/pdf/DaVinciResolveManual.pdf). Silverado is taking orders here (http://silverado.cc/shop/product.php?productid=1473).

[MichaelHalsell]

Good news indeed!

[Jay A. Kelley]

So you know, if you buy the unit at Silverado, I think you get a free copy of RED101 DVD as well!

Check with him.. It's his deal

That's cool!

Jay

[Jason H]

I have to go clean myself up now.....can't fing wait!

cheep buy here at $905.00 what?
http://www.macmall.com/p/6225589?dpno=8198645&source=mwbfroogle

[Rick Turners]

Ah, the Apple Store in Hollywood sold out :( huge line of kids testing the system out there though.

[Mike Prevette]

Is there a download only way to purchase? Is Silverado the fastest way to get my hands on it?

[Peter Chamberlain]

DaVinci Resolve is dongle protected so you will need a DVD and dongle from your BMD reseller.
Peter

[jonnycom]

Peter, Thanks for making it dongle and not node locked. We've been playing with it on a few of our Macs and so far it's awesome.

[Miltos Pilalitos]

Is there a demo version for evaluation somewhere?

[jake blackstone]

Peter, Thanks for making it dongle and not node locked. We've been playing with it on a few of our Macs and so far it's awesome.

Until it gets misplaced or someone swipes it:-)

[Mike Prevette]

DaVinci Resolve is dongle protected so you will need a DVD and dongle from your BMD reseller.
Peter

Awesome Peter, thanks for your reply. Who in the states has the packages in stock?

[Bruce Allen]

Is there a demo version for evaluation somewhere?

Trust me man, you're gonna want it :) I always enjoyed reading your posts about DI etc - and you're going to go nuts with this thing, Miltos.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Mark L. Pederson]

Until it gets misplaced or someone swipes it:-)

It's easy to mount a USB dongle inside a tower. Several ways to do it.

[Gabriele Turchi]

Ah, the Apple Store in Hollywood sold out :( huge line of kids testing the system out there though.

Do they sell it at the apple store????

g

[jake blackstone]

It's easy to mount a USB dongle inside a tower. Several ways to do it.
I would be interested to find how to do it. I'm always worried, that I would break it...

[Jeff Kilgroe]

On the Mac Pro, the easiest way is to intercept the wires going to one of the front USB ports and tie onto them. Depending on which Mac Pro, there are different ways to do it, but it's really just a header/connector on the logic board. I'm not sure on the '09/10 models, but on the '08 model I think it was two standard flat connectors just like most any PC uses.

On a typical PC, this is super simple as most PC motherboards usually have a USB header on the motherboard for attaching to the front or top of the system case.

I keep my USB dongles all connected to their own USB hub. If I need to keep them secure, like on a DIT cart, I would put that hub inside a lockable cabinet - secured into place and run a USB cable to it through a small hole. I actually don't have any dongled apps that I take on my DIT cart anyway...

[jake blackstone]

On the Mac Pro, the easiest way is to intercept the wires going to one of the front USB ports and tie onto them. Depending on which Mac Pro, there are different ways to do it, but it's really just a header/connector on the logic board. I'm not sure on the '09/10 models, but on the '08 model I think it was two standard flat connectors just like most any PC uses.

On a typical PC, this is super simple as most PC motherboards usually have a USB header on the motherboard for attaching to the front or top of the system case.

I keep my USB dongles all connected to their own USB hub. If I need to keep them secure, like on a DIT cart, I would put that hub inside a lockable cabinet - secured into place and run a USB cable to it through a small hole. I actually don't have any dongled apps that I take on my DIT cart anyway...
Thanks Jeff for the info. As you suggested, I may just install the USB hub. Every time I look at the dongle sticking out of USB port of my Mac, I afraid, that I would somehow inadvertently just snap it. I'm not a fan of dongles...

[Ivan G]

Thanks Jeff for the info. As you suggested, I may just install the USB hub. Every time I look at the dongle sticking out of USB port of my Mac, I afraid, that I would somehow inadvertently just snap it. I'm not a fan of dongles...

Such old school security. What happened to online activations?

[Paul Nordin]

Such old school security. What happened to online activations?

I've got to agree with you, there are better ways to deal with license management, especially now that DaVinci Resolve is going after a much larger user base. Draconian hardware license controls seem out of place for software at this price point, and are the cause of user and BMD support headaches.

[Mark L. Pederson]

I've got to agree with you, there are better ways to deal with license management, especially now that DaVinci Resolve is going after a much larger user base. Draconian hardware license controls seem out of place for software at this price point, and are the cause of user and BMD support headaches.

BMD support ..?

LOL!!

[Tom Gough]

Personally I prefer dongles as you can install software on multiple machines and just swap the dongle to whatever machine you are using without having to connect to the Internet to deactivate or reactivate a license before you use it! Valid point on the worry of theft but if you apply some common sense in protecting your dongle (as Jeff mentioned above) then it's not really an issue.

Everyones mileage does vary :-)

[Curran Giddens]

Until it gets misplaced or someone swipes it:-)

http://www.cadlock.tv/

Check out the CADLOCK Dongle Lock.

[jake blackstone]

Personally I prefer dongles as you can install software on multiple machines and just swap the dongle to whatever machine you are using without having to connect to the Internet to deactivate or reactivate a license before you use it! Valid point on the worry of theft but if you apply some common sense in protecting your dongle (as Jeff mentioned above) then it's not really an issue.

Everyones mileage does vary :-)

What happens, when version 8 comes out? Dongle swap? And what about $500 MFX option? Is it another dongle or it's dongle/serial number combination?

[Tom Gough]

What happens, when version 8 comes out? Dongle swap? And what about $500 MFX option? Is it another dongle or it's dongle/serial number combination?

Install software and flash the dongle with an update emailed from your reseller or Avid for example! Quite easy really! Maybe davincis/BMD dongle system is different to Avids so apologies if my example does not apply!

Avids dongle implementation for us has always been great, easy to update and flexible. On one of our suites it's had the same dongle for about 6 or 7 years and has been upgraded quite a few times without a hitch. But again your mileage may vary and maybe we've been lucky with our systems.

Peace

[Gabriele Turchi]

has enyone got it???

thanks
g

[Robert Horwell]

i paid for mine weeks ago so should be receiving it soon...

[Chris Kenny]

It doesn't actually seem to be physically in stock at resellers yet. At least going from the Silverado, B&H and MacMall web sites.

I'd love some more detailed info about availability. We have a feature project that starts grading imminently, and it's sort of hard to plan not knowing whether our copy of Resolve will be showing up Thursday or three weeks from now.

[Robert Horwell]

I think your right chris, if they had been on the shelf i would have had mine by now.

WE have a project sat ready for grade.....

[Peter Chamberlain]

Hi guys, the factory is sending multiple shipments to the regional offices so it's just a matter of working through the backlog. It should not be long now. Sorry for the delay.
Peter

[Chris Kenny]

Thanks, Peter.

[OlaHaldor]

I love the fact that it's a dongle. I almost feel that the dongle is more valuable than the Mac itself. I know, I know.. crazy statement..

If can I bring the dongle home with me, I know it's for no good if others try to start DaVinci and go nuts. Easier for me not to deal with tons of serial numbers, activation and such. I have enough of those numbers on paperes and emails already..


And when it comes to actual use... Guys.. You're in for a treat. I love what I can do and what I have done already. I even sent a quote to do a feature film just a few hours ago. I would never take on such a job if it wasn't for DaVinci.

DaVinci makes me feel confident I can do anything the client asks for.. I'll copy/paste what I wrote on the Cow a few days ago. It was a reply to some guy who's not too happy about DaVinci and the possibility of using sound during grading. The experience I write about below was truly hilarious!

Second client in for a drill now on what Resolve can do for his production. He asked a few questions like "how is it compared to Color?" In return I opened a project with RED RAW and 10 nodes. "Can Color do this?" 25fps playback with sound. Client goes "woooooah!! :willy_nilly: "

I opened another project where I've just come to a scene where I need to track the talents head. New node+CPW, adjust colors on the inside and hit the Track Forward button. Tracking goes blazing fast, and the client is almost doing it in his pants. :drool5:

The client gives me a memory stick with an MP4 file. I convert it to Prores in the blink of an eye and takes him through the Scene cut feature. His smile goes so wide I was afraid his head was falling off. And there I was, grading a proxy of his darling project within 10 minutes after he showed up. WITH SOUND.


Impressed and happy, he quickly gave me the gig and I'm grading on a proxy until he's coming back to give me the full quality commercial.

Could I sell this to him without sound? Absolutely.

Did he appreciate the fact that he could enjoy the sound design he had paid loads for while watching the grading going on? More than words can tell!

[Peace Villow]

Congrats Ola...

BTW, have anyone tested on Mac Mini yet?

[Robert Horwell]

Resolve arrived today, ...

[OlaHaldor]

Congratulations.

Enjoy your time getting into it. It's no doubt anyone who can get their hands on it will be a happy colorist.

[Gabriele Turchi]

Resolve arrived today, ...

Where did you bought it from?
g

[Rick Turners]

So, Can Resolve run (albiet no RT/slow) on an iMac?

Im considering buying an iMac to learn Resolve on before I get all the of the cards/change over my Mac Pro Color machine to Resolve..

[Chris Kenny]

Resolve requires CUDA, which is only available on NVIDIA cards. So it won't run on current iMacs.

By the way, if anyone is waiting on shipping updates, Silverado's twitter feed today says they're expecting to have copies of Resolve in tomorrow.

[Rick Turners]

Hmm, I wonder if my 15" Macbook Pro can run it?

It has the 9400m + 9400 in it.. I believe this is Cuda enabled? Can anyone affirm this?

[OlaHaldor]

It should work.

[Gunleik Groven]

Are LUTs working correct in Resolve?
Can you make your own?
Can you choose wether to burn a lut (and have metering after LUT) or not (and have metering pre LUT)?

Cheers

[Curran Giddens]

Just put my order in last night. Only problem is I only have the GUI card so far. I am not willing to buy a GTX 285 or FX4800 when the FX4000 is right around the corner....

[jake blackstone]

Are LUTs working correct in Resolve?
Can you make your own?
Can you choose wether to burn a lut (and have metering after LUT) or not (and have metering pre LUT)?

Cheers

Yes on all 3 questions.
WFM monitoring can be used with pre or post LUT.

[jake blackstone]

Just put my order in last night. Only problem is I only have the GUI card so far. I am not willing to buy a GTX 285 or FX4800 when the FX4000 is right around the corner....

Then might as well wait to buy the Resolve. Without GTX or FX GPU it's pretty miserable, unless you just want to learn how to use it.

[Robert Horwell]

Where did you bought it from?
g


RCB Logic, at a very good price!!!

[Curran Giddens]

Then might as well wait to buy the Resolve. Without GTX or FX GPU it's pretty miserable, unless you just want to learn how to use it.

Yup. Just to learn for now.

[Gunleik Groven]

Yes on all 3 questions.
WFM monitoring can be used with pre or post LUT.

Sold!

-:)

[Rick Turners]

Wait.. just to learn? without cuda gpus?

This is what confuses me.. will Resolve boot up, so you can operate it, even if it is slow, without a cuda card?

(will it boot up and be operable with an ATI or other card, or will it only open with a cuda card?)

[Curran Giddens]

Wait.. just to learn? without cuda gpus?

This is what confuses me.. will Resolve boot up, so you can operate it, even if it is slow, without a cuda card?

(will it boot up and be operable with an ATI or other card, or will it only open with a cuda card?)

I think you need at least a nVidia GT 120 for the GUI. I bought one on ebay for $61. But the GUI card doesn't help with the realtime operations. Doesn't mean you can't work without realtime support and then just render for playback.

[Evin Grant]

What's the new FX4000 offer? Cheaper price, more CUDA without the 3D stuff?

[Curran Giddens]

What's the new FX4000 offer? Cheaper price, more CUDA without the 3D stuff?

Yup. More CUDA cores and cheaper and is also single-slot width and uses less power.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'll wait and see some reports of the Quadro 4000 with Resolve before I buy. Already have the GTX285 anyway. Which brings up another good thing to know. The GTX285 actually performs better in Resolve and most CUDA apps than the Quadro FX4800. They're the same generation of GPU and very similar overall. The FX4800 has more onboard RAM, but the GTX285 is clocked faster.

[Evin Grant]

So is it even worth waiting for the FX4000? And with a Rocket is it even an issue for Red Footage?

[Bruce Allen]

Resolve with current hardware is AWESOME. It is just stupidly fast compared to everything else within an order of magnitude of its price range. I'm running on a GTX 285 and GT120 combo at the moment.

The thing is though: you get greedy. It's so much fun that you don't want to stop adding nodes :P

With Quadro 4000 you can have even more nodes. The thing is that Resolve is so addicting and powerful that anything that makes it run EVEN FASTER is an instant buy.

My completely objective 2c.

PS - The other thing is that in Resolve it's really simple to add nodes, copy them from shot to shot etc - so adding more nodes is not confusing. It just means you can compartmentalize different aspects of the CC process.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Evin Grant]

So do you expect the FX4000 to outperform the 285? By how much?

[Jim Geduldick]

So do you expect the FX4000 to outperform the 285? By how much?

Evin

Believe me you'll want the new 4000 card when it comes next month .
It will be extremely faster then the gtx 285 which is the cards I am running now.

[jake blackstone]

So is it even worth waiting for the FX4000? And with a Rocket is it even an issue for Red Footage?

Debayer is done with CPU, nodes rendering is GPU. So, Red Rocket has nothing to do with GPU. Getting more powerful GPU will allow for more real time nodes, that's all.

[Evin Grant]

According to the latest firmware the Redrocket is now supported so I'd imaging the debayer is done there.

[jake blackstone]

According to the latest firmware the Redrocket is now supported so I'd imaging the debayer is done there.

Yes and that's why I said, that getting better GPU would only increase number of real time nodes.

[Evin Grant]

Gotcha, so here's the configuration I'm thinking about...

Macpro 2008 3.0 Ghz 8 core 12G ram
8TB Internal raid 5
Red Rocket
ESATA card
Quadro FX 4000

Has anyone thought about a USB option for the GUI monitor? That would free up the entire GPU for nodes, wouldn't it? Here's one I found from Kensington...
http://www.macmall.com/p/Kensington-Adapters-and-Gender-Changers/product~dpno~7927475~pdp.fhhagie

[jonnycom]

Evin, You will still need the GT120 in slot 3.

We are running a new 12 core with
GTX285 in 1
Rocket in 2
GT120 in 3
Decklink 3d in 4

Getting ready to put in some SSD's
Also waiting for 4000 in about a week I'm told
The GTX285's for Mac are sold out.

[mikeburton]

Can anyone comment on this...I heard from a source I trust that 10.6.4 screws up Cuda acceleration basically crippling any apps that utilize Cuda such as Adobe products and or Resolve for example. Anyone having this issue? I don't usually spread rumors that are unconfirmed but just wondering if anyone has run into this as a potential road block?

[jonnycom]

They just had a cuda update the other day. All of our Cuda stuff including Resolve screams on our set up.

[Evin Grant]

Nobody thinks the USB monitor out would work?

[mikeburton]

They just had a cuda update the other day. All of our Cuda stuff including Resolve screams on our set up.

Good to know. From what I heard it wasn't an NVidia issue, it was an Apple driver issue.

[Tim Whitcomb]

Evin, You will still need the GT120 in slot 3.

We are running a new 12 core with
GTX285 in 1
Rocket in 2
GT120 in 3
Decklink 3d in 4

Getting ready to put in some SSD's
Also waiting for 4000 in about a week I'm told
The GTX285's for Mac are sold out.

John is this top to bottom or bottom to top?

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Can anyone comment on this...I heard from a source I trust that 10.6.4 screws up Cuda acceleration basically crippling any apps that utilize Cuda such as Adobe products and or Resolve for example. Anyone having this issue? I don't usually spread rumors that are unconfirmed but just wondering if anyone has run into this as a potential road block?

That was 10.6.3 ;)

10.6.4 with the latest CUDA drivers seems to work very well. However, I don't have Resolve at the moment, but it seems that everyone is running 10.6.4 with it and that is what's being recommended.

The Quadro 4000 should be a nice upgrade over the GTX285. However, if we see Mac versions of the nVidia 460, 480 or 490, then I don't think there would be a real incentive to buy the Quadro for Resolve or other CUDA apps. The 480 is slightly faster in many benchmarks and the 490 smokes it. Personally, if I were going to spend Quadro money, I would prefer they made the 5000 available for the Mac.


John is this top to bottom or bottom to top?

That's a bottom to top list -- Slot 4 is on the top in a Mac Pro.

[jonnycom]

Thats top to bottom in the new 12 cores and they are labeled that way. Only slots 1 and 2 are 16 lane and the Rocket and main Cuda card need to be in them. It' strange that you don't even plug anything into the main graphics card.

EDIT you may be right Jeff I might have been looking at it upside down but regardless they are labeled 1,2,3, and 4

[jake blackstone]

Gotcha, so here's the configuration I'm thinking about...

Macpro 2008 3.0 Ghz 8 core 12G ram
8TB Internal raid 5
Red Rocket
ESATA card
Quadro FX 4000

Has anyone thought about a USB option for the GUI monitor? That would free up the entire GPU for nodes, wouldn't it? Here's one I found from Kensington...
http://www.macmall.com/p/Kensington-Adapters-and-Gender-Changers/product~dpno~7927475~pdp.fhhagie

You need to drive the display with GT 120. If you try to drive the display with USB, which I don't necessarily believe will even work, you'll impact the performance of both real time playback and the colorist display. I believe, neither one will be real time. Also, I think you may have a problem with 2008 model. Resolve will run, but not necessarily in real time. Initially I had the same computer, but I was unable to play faster than 17 FPS at HD resolution, even with DPX, which makes me to believe, that you may will have the same problem even with RRocket installed. It's kind of shame to install Resolve and not be able to use it as a real time device...
Regardless, at this time Mac version doesn't allow to use more than one GPU for real time rendering. So, installing the second FX4000 or GTX 285 will not do you any good. GT 120 is used strictly for colorist display.

[jonnycom]

Here's what we ended up doing to get the Red Rocket SDI's and the Black Magic HDMI's out.

[Chris Ratledge]

Here's what we ended up doing to get the Red Rocket SDI's and the Black Magic HDMI's out.

Yikes. :yikes:

But what else can you really do? At least it looks clean, kudos!

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Here's what we ended up doing to get the Red Rocket SDI's and the Black Magic HDMI's out.

LOL. Oh, man... Um, there is a better way for the Rocket SDI, actually a couple. As for the BlackMagic HDMI ports, there really isn't -- gotta run them out either through an optical bay slot or modify a side panel. If you have more than one Mac pro of the same vintage, spare a side panel. That way if you need to take the system in for service, you can at least bring it with a clean side panel and not void your AppleCare.

For the Rocket, the easiest way is to just nip off the large BNC ends of the included cables and run them out through any of the tiny holes on the rear of the case and then re-crimp on new BNC ends made for 23AWG mini-COAX. I've done that on a couple systems for people. On my primary Mac Pro, I just ran the BNC ends out through the slot cover on my ATTO SAS card. It has a small round hole in it for some reason and big enough I can pass the mini-BINC connectors through one at a time.

Do you have any grounding /short issues on those HDMI plugs? It seems like you might the way they're mounted in that side panel...

[Evin Grant]

WOW Apple really needs to release a six slot tower, like yesterday!

So you can't use the Nvidia to drive the GUI monitor at all right? But you can use the Red Rocket to view out the grading image over SDI provided you're working exclusively with R3Ds correct?

[jake blackstone]

But you can use the Red Rocket to view out the grading image over SDI provided you're working exclusively with R3Ds correct?

So far, only Storm is capable of that. Not Resolve.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Yep. Resolve only uses the Rocket for debayer operations. Which does speed everything up a lot. But the only applications using SDI out from the Rocket right now are Redcine-X, Scratch and Storm (if you're lucky enough to have an alpha release). I believe Storm is the only one that is actually showing effects beyond standard LUTs/looks via the Rocket monitor output.

It seems a PCIe expander is in order to really get the most out of Resolve. I'm undecided on the Expander, I think I'm going to get Resolve up and running on an '09 Mac Pro for now using a GTX285, GT120, software RAID-0, Rocket card and a BMD Extreme 3D card. At this point, to spend a whole lot more on the Expander and other hardware may just be too much for me with Epic and SSD modules and other things I need to purchase.

Intel has pushed Sandy Bridge to an OEM release of March, or so it seems, that means first systems on the market toward the end of April 2011. If Apple lags, I think we can expect a new Mac Pro by the end of June, but possibly in April or May. The new platform will support more PCIe lanes, so hopefully that will translate into more slots and a new case design. But if Apple screws us, then I may just buy the expander and flesh out the '09 Mac Pro and probably pick up a 2011 Mac Pro for my new general workstation. I don't know though...

After my two Epics are here and working, and budget permitting, I'm going to build a screening / coloring room with projector. I may just bite the bullet and go for the Linux flavor of Resolve if I can include it within my budget for the new room. A lot depends on what I do for a projector. So far, my projector budget is hovering around $30K, but I'd like to cut that in half and still have a top of the line 2K like the Barco. Don't know if that's possible. The ProjectionDesign units look nice, but I don't know anyone using them that can really comment on them. They sure looked awesome at NAB though and the pricing isn't too bad.

...I think expecting a color-accurate quad-HD or 4K projector, that is also affordable, isn't realistic for another year or three.

[Seth Larney]

Yep. Resolve only uses the Rocket for debayer operations. Which does speed everything up a lot. But the only applications using SDI out from the Rocket right now are Redcine-X, Scratch and Storm (if you're lucky enough to have an alpha release).

Hey Jeff,

Scratch uses Rocket for debayer but outputs signal through the Quadro SDI board.. which is good because otherwise you'd have separate outputs for mixed media projects..
Cheers,
Seth

[Gunleik Groven]

SDI out of the Rocket has been on the public development table, but isn't yet available. and there's no timetable as to when it will be released.

[Evin Grant]

This is really close but it's just not quite there yet. I'll probably wait till Resolve can run with one GPU card and use the Rocket for output, either that or a bigger Mac Pro chassi. Everything else is hammering a square peg in a round hole for me, after all I really don't make any money in DI I just really like to have it for my personal projects.

[Sanjin Jukic]

This is really close but it's just not quite there yet. I'll probably wait till Resolve can run with one GPU card and use the Rocket for output, either that or a bigger Mac Pro chassi. Everything else is hammering a square peg in a round hole for me, after all I really don't make any money in DI I just really like to have it for my personal projects.


Go MacBook Pro.

[Olivier Madar]

Go MacBook Pro.

I am thinking of that possibility too. So i CAN ait for the next Apple génération and nvidia good car
Did someone try it ?

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Hey Jeff,

Scratch uses Rocket for debayer but outputs signal through the Quadro SDI board.. which is good because otherwise you'd have separate outputs for mixed media projects..
Cheers,
Seth

Yep, I knew that about the Quadro SDI board. For some reason, I thought it also used the Rocket SDI if you were exclusively using RED media? Oh well, guess not. :)

Anyone running Resolve on a Macbook Pro? I know it works on the MBP models that have the dual nVidia GPUs, but I was wondering if anyone could comment on performance. Just wondering if it could be useable with a small eSATA RAID and a good monitor via DisplayPort / HDMI.

I don't see this being a very usable solution for any real project (I doubt I would have the patience to work on that set-up if under a deadline). But it may be a workable solution to get the software up and running and play with it while I wait for other hardware offerings to materialize. I don't anticipate actually needing Resolve for a paid project until early next year, after I get my Epic cameras... And even then, I have a couple of internal / personal projects to produce first...

Sanjin? You just mentioned using Macbook Pro... Will you be doing this?

[Chris Ratledge]

WOW Apple really needs to release a six slot tower, like yesterday!

At least. If not a few more.

[Alexander Alexandrov]

so, to confirm, the mac pro must have 2 gpu's to run resolve? there's no way to have only 1?

[Robert Horwell]

You need to drive the display with GT 120. If you try to drive the display with USB, which I don't necessarily believe will even work, you'll impact the performance of both real time playback and the colorist display. I believe, neither one will be real time. Also, I think you may have a problem with 2008 model. Resolve will run, but not necessarily in real time. Initially I had the same computer, but I was unable to play faster than 17 FPS at HD resolution, even with DPX, which makes me to believe, that you may will have the same problem even with RRocket installed. It's kind of shame to install Resolve and not be able to use it as a real time device...
Regardless, at this time Mac version doesn't allow to use more than one GPU for real time rendering. So, installing the second FX4000 or GTX 285 will not do you any good. GT 120 is used strictly for colorist display.


Jake, i'm confused why this would be? There isn't a lot of difference is ther ebetween machines, in architecture?....2008-2009 changes, faster chip? Faster ram?.....i have a2008 8 core 3.2ghz i was hoping would be the machine to run resolve on,...is there any way we can be sure it won't run to speed on this machine?....

[Jeremy Newmark]

so, to confirm, the mac pro must have 2 gpu's to run resolve? there's no way to have only 1?

At the moment, yes.

[jake blackstone]

Jake, i'm confused why this would be? There isn't a lot of difference is ther ebetween machines, in architecture?....2008-2009 changes, faster chip? Faster ram?.....i have a2008 8 core 3.2ghz i was hoping would be the machine to run resolve on,...is there any way we can be sure it won't run to speed on this machine?....

All I can tell you, is that my 2.8 GHz 2008 Mac couldn't do real time. 2.26 GHz 2009 does. Why? I suspect slower system architecture or no hyperthreding or... who knows... May be your faster computer will be able to do it, who knows...

[jake blackstone]

so, to confirm, the mac pro must have 2 gpu's to run resolve? there's no way to have only 1?

Yes, you can run it with just one GPU, but then you will not get real time performance. If that's what you're after, then you may as well stay with Color.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

The 2008 Mac Pro should run it just fine, but there are two major differences between it and the 2009 model. First and foremost, the 2009 Mac Pro is based on the i7 core or "Nehalem" series Xeon CPUs. This brings about a 15% overall speed increase to CPU operations and CPU bus transactions compared to the previous generation at the same clock speed. Additionally, the memory bus and RAM are clocked 25% faster. Virtual cores available through HyperThreading also helps load up the instruction pipelines on the CPUs, for properly multithreaded software, and can further boost performance.

My 2.93GHz '09 8-core is noticeably faster than my 3.2GHz '08 8-core. When rendering in Modo and Maya, the '09 Mac Pro is close to 25% faster overall. Same thing running Premiere Pro with RED clips, the '09 system can handle more and actually runs circles around my '08 system. But it's also not a fair comparison -- the '09 system is equipped with the GTX285, which makes a difference in Premiere. It also has the Rocket, so for overall RED workflow it stomps the older system into the dirt. The '08 box still has an nVidia 7800GT card and no Rocket and has been relegated to mostly CPU-bound tasks, backups, photoshop work, etc...

[Gunleik Groven]

Yes, you can run it with just one GPU, but then you will not get real time performance. If that's what you're after, then you may as well stay with Color.

Really?

I'd thought that LUT implementation alone would be a reason to go with resolve, not mentioning node base, tracking and Rocket support.

But are you implying that one would get Color-like performance when not in realtime?

[jake blackstone]

Really?

I'd thought that LUT implementation alone would be a reason to go with resolve, not mentioning node base, tracking and Rocket support.

But are you implying that one would get Color-like performance when not in realtime?
So in Resolve you can attach LUT to every node. Personally, I don't have much need for it. Some may disagree.
The way Resolve works at 1/4 to 1/2 debayer in real time, so far, I had no need for RR. But it's good to know, that in case I do, it's there.
Yes, Resolve has many high end features, that Color sorely lacks, like proper planar tracker, full editing and conforming package, real time performance, color fidelity, etc. Likewise, I'm not going to bash Resolve for it's shortcomings. It's a first iteration of the product and it's also a personal thing, really.
Said that, if real time grading is not at issue, one would be hard pressed to do something color grading-wise with Resolve, that would be difficult or impossible with Color. I'm talking about it from purely grading-wise point of view and not Import/Export or project management. If anything, right now Color has a distinct advantage in it's ability to be able to reprogram the Wave interface . I find Resolve's Wave interface at this point it's weakest link...
Once Resolve starts supporting CP-200 or Euphonics (I know, it's up to Tangent and Avid to do this) or ability to program the Wave, as well as addition of some, in my opinion, missing nodes (something like film grade, levels, simple six vector hue selector, noise reduction etc.), I'm ready to give it a second look.
I love what BM have done so far and even, if in my opinion, more work is needed, many Resolve users will be pleased.

[mikeburton]

How is versioning handled in Resolve as opposed to Scratch? One thing i love about Scratch is the ability to easily/quickly make layer stacks/versioning of "looks" in a clip and be able to pop through them for clients. Is Resolve similar at all in popping through 5-10 different looks on a clip quickly (minus the time it takes to create the actual look of course).

[Chris Kenny]

We've got Resolve up and running on a 2008 Mac Pro with Rocket + GTX285 + GT120 + Decklink Extreme 3. That configuration can't quite manage real-time playback in 1080p (using the on-the-fly proxies at 1600x900 works fine).

We're thinking of buying a new tower mostly just for Resolve, and I'm wondering if we should put the Rocket in it, or go for a RAID card instead. Is real-time 1/2 res decoding + 1080p playback solid on current 8 or 12 core machines without a Rocket?

[jake blackstone]

How is versioning handled in Resolve as opposed to Scratch? One thing i love about Scratch is the ability to easily/quickly make layer stacks/versioning of "looks" in a clip and be able to pop through them for clients. Is Resolve similar at all in popping through 5-10 different looks on a clip quickly (minus the time it takes to create the actual look of course).

Right click on the clip in the timeline and select "add version". The clip will show the number of alternative grade versions present. Right click to recall a version. Number of versions is unlimited. Not as slick as Scratch, but very usable nevertheless. Also, there is a way to render all different versions to different folders at once, if needed.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Sanjin? You just mentioned using Macbook Pro... Will you be doing this?

Jeff,

still not and just thinking about one really usable mobile solution with a combo that has Storm (pre-grade with a better white balance pick-up than buggy RCX) and Resolve (fast grade on the road).

In a couple of months should be probably much better situation with Apple/Intel hardware...

[Gunleik Groven]

So in Resolve you can attach LUT to every node. Personally, I don't have much need for it. Some may disagree.

I am not really into attching a LUT ito every node, though that sounds interesting.

Thing is that with a properly working LUT implementation, you can stay log through your grade, and only render into rec 709 at the end, thus giving higher precission through the whole process.

In Color, if you apply a LUT in the beginning, it pretty much defies the purpose of going log in the firstplace, as it works as a pre-grade. In addition to that, all your metering is messed up, in case you want to render without the LUT burned in.

So, to me - if only the LUT implementation works right - it is a biggie - even without realtime.

[Bruce Allen]

We're thinking of buying a new tower mostly just for Resolve, and I'm wondering if we should put the Rocket in it, or go for a RAID card instead. Is real-time 1/2 res decoding + 1080p playback solid on current 8 or 12 core machines without a Rocket?

Running it on a Nehalem 8-core 2.26 it gets close to 24fps for 1/2 res. Have to go to 1/4 for total reliability. Sorry, no info on faster machines yet.

BTW, wow, it is kicking the pants off of RedCine-X for Avid transcodes.

Like what takes DaVinci 8 seconds takes RedCine-X 2 minutes on our system (RedRushes would do it in about 30 seconds). Have to double-check this to make sure so don't quote me on it.

But yeah, I agree - DaVinci is single-handedly making me want to upgrade to the fastest damn 12-core out there.

The guys at my work are really impressed. Fingers crossed they build a DaVinci room with that nice $30k console!

Personally, I will stick it out with the 2009 8-core I have access to there... it's a ton faster and just stupidly more usable and time-saving than RedCine. I'm just gonna save up for a 12-core Sandy Bridge ultra-beast that'll hopefully come out at the end of 2011 with a next-generation Kepler graphics card from nVidia and a stack of SSDs.

Aaaaahhhh gonna be tough to hold out on getting a Quadro 4000 12-core DaVinci ultrastation though. Apple should really be giving Blackmagic a commission... or at least a USB3 port for their devices!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Robert Horwell]

The 2008 Mac Pro should run it just fine, but there are two major differences between it and the 2009 model. First and foremost, the 2009 Mac Pro is based on the i7 core or "Nehalem" series Xeon CPUs. This brings about a 15% overall speed increase to CPU operations and CPU bus transactions compared to the previous generation at the same clock speed. Additionally, the memory bus and RAM are clocked 25% faster. Virtual cores available through HyperThreading also helps load up the instruction pipelines on the CPUs, for properly multithreaded software, and can further boost performance.

My 2.93GHz '09 8-core is noticeably faster than my 3.2GHz '08 8-core. When rendering in Modo and Maya, the '09 Mac Pro is close to 25% faster overall. Same thing running Premiere Pro with RED clips, the '09 system can handle more and actually runs circles around my '08 system. But it's also not a fair comparison -- the '09 system is equipped with the GTX285, which makes a difference in Premiere. It also has the Rocket, so for overall RED workflow it stomps the older system into the dirt. The '08 box still has an nVidia 7800GT card and no Rocket and has been relegated to mostly CPU-bound tasks, backups, photoshop work, etc...

Thank Jeff,

I'll hang on to my 08 mac and give it a try when my GTX 285 gets here. If it's not cutting the mustard looks like i'll have to upgrade.....was hoping to wait until next year to do that though, hoping Apple finally get their finger out and builds a system that we have all been asking for for a long time now. It would be a shame not to use resolve to it's capacity....without breaking the bank that is!

[Chris Kenny]

Personally, I will stick it out with the 2009 8-core I have access to there... it's a ton faster and just stupidly more usable and time-saving than RedCine. I'm just gonna save up for a 12-core Sandy Bridge ultra-beast that'll hopefully come out at the end of 2011 with a next-generation Kepler graphics card from nVidia and a stack of SSDs.[/url]

Hmm, yeah, if buying a current 12-core isn't going to get us real-time 1/2 res decoding without a Rocket (thus freeing up a slot for a RAID card), we'll probably just keep the current setup until next year. Next year's systems should solve this problem one way or another, via faster on-board external storage (USB 3 or Light Peak), enough CPU power to do software-based real-time decoding, or perhaps more slots.

Next issue is... I'm seeing a pretty major performance hit when the scopes are open. Disabling scope updates during playback would be fine, but there doesn't seem to be an option for this (just "Don't update interface icons in playback", which doesn't disable scope updates), and constantly opening and closing scopes gets old fast. Is there some workable solution to this problem, or should I plan on buying hardware scopes soonish?

[M Most]

Thing is that with a properly working LUT implementation, you can stay log through your grade, and only render into rec 709 at the end, thus giving higher precission through the whole process.

In Color, if you apply a LUT in the beginning, it pretty much defies the purpose of going log in the firstplace, as it works as a pre-grade. In addition to that, all your metering is messed up, in case you want to render without the LUT burned in.

That's not really the case, but one needs to understand the reason for log encoding in the first place.

If you're working from a Log encoded image, the chances are that you're working from some kind of file format, and further, that the file format is likely to be of lower precision than the original image. For instance, Cineon log files are 10 bits, but most scanners scan and do their math at a higher precision than that, often 16 bits. The same is true with R3d files, which essentially contain 12 bits of information directly from the sensor. In Red's demosaic process, this is expanded to 16 bits for better mathematical precision, and then reformatted based on the output format selected. Using log encoding allows for reduced precision in the areas of the image that will be relatively unaffected by that perceptually, say, the highest values. So by using log encoding, you can effectively fit 16 bits of information into a 10 bit container without seriously affecting the image integrity. When you take that into a color grading environment, the bit depth is promoted again, usually to 32 or 64 bits in most high end grading software, so that your manipulations can be carried out in a high bit depth environment, allowing very fine control. At the end of the process, you render and in almost all cases put the images into a lower bit depth environment again, often Cineon log for film recording, but in the future into a floating point file format like Open EXR that will maintain a lot of that precision. The use of an input LUT is no different than what the software is doing internally, which in many cases is putting the image into linear light values, doing the math to implement your corrections, and reformatting again for output. A proper input LUT will generally do the same thing, taking your 10 bit log values and expanding them to an equivalent 16 bit image.

I think you're looking at a logarithmic format in the wrong way. You seem to see it as a way to fit more information in the file, information which will somehow be "lost" if the file is then expanded. That would be true if the image was being converted into either an equivalent or lower bit death format. But in almost all cases with properly written color grading software, that is not the case. You seem to be looking at an input LUT as a "pre grade," but that is not really its purpose. In most grading software, its real purpose is to convert all sources that are in a different format than the primary project expects into a common format so that the grading software will see all of those images the same way, allowing the program to operate in one primary format and the colorist to "feel" all of those images in a similar way. If the software has a specific mode for dealing with log images, it's probably based on film scans, which in some high end correctors can be manipulated using specific controls that are designed to mimic film timing and yield a more film-like result. This is the case in both Baselight and Lustre, which have different types of controls for video and film images, with the video controls based on lift, gamma, and gain, and the film controls based primarily around exposure, contrast, and offset. In both cases, though, any image can be corrected using either type of control, it's just that the film controls are more tailored for images that are film sourced and film targeted.

[Gunleik Groven]

Michael, as allways: Thank you!

So it is more a matter of perception, then...

Because I really think it's much easier (for lack of better words) to grade from a log image than a rec, and have thought that the higher precission in the input image was the reason for that, and it has felt "lost" with an input LUT - in Color, that is...

When Color is set to recognize the files as log, float works like it's supposed to (which it doesn't with RED RAW, for example. Thus I don't like grading from RAW in color).

When I use an input LUT in Color, it seems to just do a conversion which maps the image back to "lin/rec" and the files feels a lot less flexible and gradeable.

This might be a matter of perception.

I am currently going to play a bit with an eQ with redlogFILM DPXs. Again, a matter of perception, but from my initial session with it, it does feel "right" when applying an output LUT to that software. The resulting files seems to reflect that. But again - this is maybe just a perception with a "backward logic" applied. Allways risky... -:)

I will have some time with Nucoda and resolve too this fall, as it looks. Haven't yet. Baselight and lustres... I dunno who have them here. But I hope to sit in on a Scratch/dpx session soonly...

Yes you are right, I do think of log as a datacontainer in part. I'll try to stop doing that, though it has had a side-effect of being quite helpfull, so even if the rationale has been wrong, with redlog it has been rather effective...

I would think that "log as a datacontainer" would give the advantages for grading I do see in Color, but I have also figured your dislike for it.

Looking at how redlogFilm works - and resonating along the lines that redlogFilm is more "right/standard" I start to maybe see why you have expressed some dislike for redlog. RedlogFilm seems to handle the latitude in the files in a much "smarter" way, for one...

BTW. I don't look at an input LUT in general as a pre-grade. But the way Color handles input LUTS seems to work like a pre-grade, and I have that confirmed from other sources than my own observations. Without the LUT the grades feels a lot more stretchable, than with it.

If i am wrong about this, I'll accept that. I'm a bit more confused, but that's fine... -:)

I was specific about mentioning Color when I did the pre-grade remark.

Thanks again!

Cheers.
G

[jake blackstone]

If the log grading you're after, Resolve doesn't have "Log grade" or in Baselight parlance "Film grade". Only Video grade.
Don't confuse this statement with Log LUT support.

[M Most]

I am currently going to play a bit with an eQ with redlogFILM DPXs. Again, a matter of perception, but from my initial session with it, it does feel "right" when applying an output LUT to that software. The resulting files seems to reflect that. But again - this is maybe just a perception with a "backward logic" applied.

Most colorists doing film targeted DI work set up in that manner, using the log images as input with no input LUT, but observing the result through a print preview LUT. There are a number of reasons for this, but one of the main ones is convenience. DI's are expected to produce multiple deliverables, only one of which is a film negative. Most color management systems (Truelight, Cinespace, etc.) are based on using a Cineon format as an input, with the target being whatever display you're looking at, and the processing being a film printing process. So by supplying a Cineon image to the output LUT, and having that LUT targeted to, say, a DLP Cinema projector but incorporating the characteristics of your chosen film recorder, intermediate stock, print stock, and lab process for the image processing, you get a very accurate preview of the film print. When you remove that LUT - in other words, render without baking it in - you get a Cineon image that will record correctly and print correctly, just as you previewed it. But you can also use a different targeted LUT - incorporating the same image characteristics, but designed to be displayed on, say, an HDTV monitor - to generate your electronic deliverables. By putting the LUT on the output, you don't have to be concerned with different grading for these different products because the source file is always the same. Since most DI's are still film targeted, this is the way most colorists are used to working. As DI's become more digital cinema centric, that path changes, but the idea of using the LUT on the output rather than the input remains - it's just that the LUT is used for deliverables other than the primary one, which in that case would be the DCDM.

BTW, most of the software systems - with the notable exception of DaVinci's - have scaled their "log" controls to values expected from log originals, and therefore can offer good separation of controls for the desired control ranges, and real-world usefulness and feel for the exposure/contrast controls. If you've ever put data through a DaVinci 2K, you probably found that the "lift" trackball becomes rather useless, and the interaction and crossover range between the "gamma" trackball and the "gain" trackball is wildly different than with a video original. In fact, the gamma trackball becomes your primary control, and only by using additional layers (via PowerWindows) do you regain a usable range for the blacks and whites separately. I don't know if Resolve works the same way, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did since that was the world the original designers came from.



Looking at how redlogFilm works - and resonating along the lines that redlogFilm is more "right/standard" I start to maybe see why you have expressed some dislike for redlog. RedlogFilm seems to handle the latitude in the files in a much "smarter" way, for one...

Graeme could go into a lot more detail on this, but suffice it to say that Redlog was designed purely as a way of getting the 16 bit processed linear light information into a 10 bit container while retaining the best precision in the process. RedlogFilm is designed to represent print density, based on the Cineon format. Graeme has always felt that print density does not represent the best way to retain precision from a linear light original, and mathematically he's probably right. But it does represent a standard way of working in the real world of film targeted DI's, and therefore drops into existing color grading systems in a much more sensible way. I don't know if he's done anything as far as the color matrix goes to accommodate the somewhat different gamut of film (I don't see a new RedFilmColor matrix, at least not yet), so in that sense it's a bit incomplete, but certainly using the print density values will go a long way to making film targeted DI systems work a lot better with Red originals.

[Manuel Wenger]

Just for all the MacBook Pro Users, i´m running Resolve on my MacBook Pro 2,8Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo with the Dual Nvida Card inside (9400 & 9600GT). You´ll need the CUDA Update, but that shows up automatically after Reslove is installed.

I´m not grading on this configuration, but for learning it´s fine.
I connected the Wave panel and it works just fine.

I loaded a applePro Res HQ sequence and it plays back with 7fps
after a primary correction and 2 powerwindows this dropped to 5fps.

Can´t wait for the original Panels and running it on our MacPro next week.

Manuel

[Simon Blackledge]

Well I have Resolve for Mac up and running here.

Spec is 3.1 macpro 3.2ghz
8Gig Ram
Slot 1 GTX285
Slot 2 GT120
Slot 3 ATTO R380
Slot 4 Decklink Extreme Hd (Orig non 3D)

The raids half full and is benching at abour 550MBs

With everything setup for 1080HD 50i output
ProRes4444 bobs between 23>25 fps /gpu Red adding more nodes say 8 seems to make no difference ,then it drops to 17 ish if I go over 8.
dpx 1080 same as above 23>25fps gpu Red adding upto 7 nodes seems to make no difference

When I turn the video output to NONE

Prores 4444 RT 25fps upto 8 nodes
DPX rt 25FPS upto 8nodes.. unless ones sharpen.

Now the thing I'm unsure about is that is it the bandwidth of the 3.1 macpro causing frame drops or is it the old decklink card.

Anyone else seeing fps bob just below and turn external video out to NONE and get RT/Green

I'm curious as adding say 5 nodes and the fps is still just under 25fps. its not like its getting less and less per node.


Also found that rendering Red media out to quicktime is causing issues due to bebayer speed.

ie if you set it to half premium or full when you goto render and your format is QT it will drop frames in the render and start a new QT. Setting the render manager to 1 > 5 fps kinda gets around it but seems a waste as some clips have less nodes and can actually render faster.

Set to DPX and Maximum there is no issue.

Si

[Rohit Gupta]

Now the thing I'm unsure about is that is it the bandwidth of the 3.1 macpro causing frame drops or is it the old decklink card.


It's the bandwidth of the 3,1 Mac Pro. 4,1 Mac Pro is the minimum spec to get RT playback.



Also found that rendering Red media out to quicktime is causing issues due to bebayer speed.

ie if you set it to half premium or full when you goto render and your format is QT it will drop frames in the render and start a new QT. Setting the render manager to 1 > 5 fps kinda gets around it but seems a waste as some clips have less nodes and can actually render faster.


Which QT format are you rendering to, and at what resolution?

[Tony Bacak]

Mac Pro 4,1
Slot1 Nvidia Quadro FX4800
Slot2 RED Rocket
Slot3 Nvidia GeForce GT 120
Slot4 Blackmagic Multibridge ( first generation )

System is running smooth on all gradings and nodes.
Output from Multibridge to HDMI Pioneer Plasma ( Kuro 50" ) perfect for preview.
Rendering to QT near to realtime ( about 18 fps average )

But can't render QT files with 25 Frames - only 24 or 30 fps possible?!?!?
Hope for an upgrade soon

[Simon Blackledge]

It's the bandwidth of the 3,1 Mac Pro. 4,1 Mac Pro is the minimum spec to get RT playback.



Which QT format are you rendering to, and at what resolution?

So its passing to the Decklink thats causing this?

So New macpro required for SDI out ? :-/

ProRes4444 1920x1080 25fps

It's like its passing another frame to the QT encode but encode says whoaaa not ready.. > dropped frame.

[Rohit Gupta]

Mac Pro 4,1
But can't render QT files with 25 Frames - only 24 or 30 fps possible?!?!?
Hope for an upgrade soon

Did you set the frame rate to 25 in the config page under the section "Timeline Conform Options"?

If yes, could you please provide a little bit more detail (which codec, where are you seeing that it is not 25fps, etc.)

[Pattee Mack]

Hey, I don't know if this is the place to start, but I'm the producer of a senior thesis film in the L.A. area and need some advice on shooting on the Red & then, the steps toward digital intermediate to film out. We're shooting our short film in November, so I'm trying to figure out what the budget is going to be for us (of course our student filmmaker budget is slim.) If anyone has advice, I'd appreciate it! I'm a total newbie to the Red & so excited to start using the Red. Thanks!

[OlaHaldor]

But can't render QT files with 25 Frames - only 24 or 30 fps possible?!?!?
Hope for an upgrade soon

If you can't render 25fps even after you change conform/timeline settings in the Config page, you could conform to 25fps in Cinema Tools. It's a quick fix. :)

Open in Cinema Tools, hit the Conform button lower right, select the target frame rate and OK. You're all set.

[Tony Bacak]

timeline conform options was the perfect tip - rohit ( cool name by the way RO and HIT )
learning every day:)
so export is running now with a framerate about 20fps to QT422HQ
getting the original file over net and writing to a local raid with 4 striped disks
love davinci more and more

a direct output from the RED rocket card would be a winner

[Manuel Wenger]

where did you guys get the power cable to split the two outputs in the macpro to the 3 inputs (2x GTX285 1x GT120), seems i need to solder my own cable here in Germany

[Bruce Allen]

where did you guys get the power cable to split the two outputs in the macpro to the 3 inputs (2x GTX285 1x GT120), seems i need to solder my own cable here in Germany

You just need ONE GTX285 (or Quadro), plus a GT120. Not two GTX285s.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[jake blackstone]

where did you guys get the power cable to split the two outputs in the macpro to the 3 inputs (2x GTX285 1x GT120), seems i need to solder my own cable here in Germany

Only GTX 285 requires extra two power cables. GT 120 does not need any, hence the two available power connectors on Mac mother board is all you need.

[albert rudnicki]

I am thinking if I should get the gtx285 now or wait for the 4000, if it comes at all...
Any advise?

[Manuel Wenger]

I was referring to the Power inputs, not to the no. of cards, but thanks for your hint, Allen :)
Found out that the GT120 runs without the connection right after posting.
Runs like a charm.

My config is now
Slot 1 GTX 285
Slot 2 RedRocket
Slot 3 GT 120
Slot 4 Decklink Extreme HD

I couldn´t get DaVinici to it´s limit yet. R3D playback in half res premium works with 25fps and 5-6 nodes without problems, haven´t tested more nodes yet.

Thanks Blackmagic for bringing that software out on Mac and down to a reasonable price and thanks for the Rocket support.

I´ll delete Color from my HDD right away :)

[Cüneyt Kaya]

hi manuel, do you run it on a 3.1 macpro or 4.1 macpro?
I was referring to the Power inputs, not to the no. of cards, but thanks for your hint, Allen :)
Found out that the GT120 runs without the connection right after posting.
Runs like a charm.

My config is now
Slot 1 GTX 285
Slot 2 RedRocket
Slot 3 GT 120
Slot 4 Decklink Extreme HD

I couldn´t get DaVinici to it´s limit yet. R3D playback in half res premium works with 25fps and 5-6 nodes without problems, haven´t tested more nodes yet.

Thanks Blackmagic for bringing that software out on Mac and down to a reasonable price and thanks for the Rocket support.

I´ll delete Color from my HDD right away :)

[Beer Buijsman]

Just ordered DaVinci + a GTX285 for my home-studio :P

I'm a happy man!

(damn, where do I find the cash for a Wave?)

[Manuel Wenger]

Hi Kaya, running on a 2,26Ghz Dual Quad Core from 2009.

[tomspark]

Mac Pro 4,1
Slot1 Nvidia Quadro FX4800
Slot2 RED Rocket
Slot3 Nvidia GeForce GT 120
Slot4 Blackmagic Multibridge ( first generation )

System is running smooth on all gradings and nodes.
Output from Multibridge to HDMI Pioneer Plasma ( Kuro 50" ) perfect for preview.
Rendering to QT near to realtime ( about 18 fps average )

But can't render QT files with 25 Frames - only 24 or 30 fps possible?!?!?
Hope for an upgrade soon

Hey Tony,
I am considering setting up my current MacPro 3,1 to work with Resolve and am trying to work out minimum spec to make my machine work. It is a home studio set-up, that I do use professionally.

I have a BM Multibridge Pro video output configuaration also. I would potentially like to spec it up using my existing hardware if possible, if it can work well enough ... Minimum specs from BM say Blackmagic Extreme HD card is required for Resolve. Does the Multibridge Pro work as as it should for preview via SDI as well as HDMI instead with resolve? Anyone else have any experience using the Multibridge Pro instead of the Decklink Extreme HD or HD 3d?

My system is a MacPro 3,1 2* quad core 2.8GHz machine with:
18GB RAM
4 disc 2TB internal raid
Slot1 - Nvidia GTX285 (not purchased yet but looking to get if Resolve will work adequately with it)
Slot2 - Nvidia GT120
Slot 3 - Newer Tech MaxPower esata 6G card
Slot 4 - BM Multibridge Pro card

Also considering taking the esata card out and installing a red rocket in slot 2 and the GT120 in slot 3.

Any experiences or advice I would love to hear about. I am aware that my machine is also below minimum spec, but the question is, how much performance loss will I receive using my machine and is it going to be acceptable for me. I am not that keen on upgrading the MacPro 3,1 just yet, but would like to potentially make it work with Resolve. I have been using color for a couple of years which has never done real time so this might not be a big issue, as long as I have a clear easily accessible and usuable output path for real-time preview. I have always sent color projects back to FCP for proper preview anyway, as this is usually where I export final projects from anyways.
Cheers

[Chris Kenny]

Any experiences or advice I would love to hear about. I am aware that my machine is also below minimum spec, but the question is, how much performance loss will I receive using my machine and is it going to be acceptable for me. I am not that keen on upgrading the MacPro 3,1 just yet, but would like to potentially make it work with Resolve. I have been using color for a couple of years which has never done real time so this might not be a big issue, as long as I have a clear easily accessible and usuable output path for real-time preview. I have always sent color projects back to FCP for proper preview anyway, as this is usually where I export final projects from anyways.
Cheers

We have the same machine, with the same GPUs, a Decklink Extreme 3, and a Rocket. Resolve won't quite manage 24 fps playback at 1920x1080, but it's close -- 21-22 fps. Flipping on on-the-fly proxies at 1600x900 (and switching to bilinear scaling so the scaled output looks decent) gets it to real-time, at least up to five or six nodes (I haven't tested more).

I'll probably get a chance to test the new 8-bit output mode in 7.0.2 today. The release notes imply that should enable real-time at 1920x1080.

Either way, I think performance is more than solid enough to hold us over until next year's Mac Pros (which based on what Intel is up to, should be a lot more interesting that this year's).

Update: Need to do more testing to see just how reliable it is, but so far the new 8-bit output mode seems to be getting us real-time 1920x1080 playback.

(Incidentally, it's comical how much louder the tower gets when Resolve is running an the fan on the GTX 285 spins up....)

[mikeburton]

So, I have the RedRocket installed in the system I'm testing Resolve on but it doesn't seem to be accelerating playback? I verified it works in REdcine. Is there something I have to enable in Resolve?

[Costelloe Michael]

Is the GTX 285 still available? I can't seem to get hold of one in the UK.

MC

[Jeff Kilgroe]

GTX285 Mac Edition has been discontinued. You would have to find a vendor that still has one. They pop up on eBay here and there too.

I'm curious if anyone has tried a non-Mac Edition GTX285??? With some cards, that don't have the Mac EFI, they can't be used for system-level graphics, boot menus, etc.. But often will still allow drivers to load once in OSX. It worked with the older non-Mac Quadro FX4500 cards. Once booted into OSX, the drivers would load and the card was usable.

[Robert Horwell]

Is the GTX 285 still available? I can't seem to get hold of one in the UK.

MC

i just bought one off ebay from the states.

[albert rudnicki]

GTX285 Mac Edition has been discontinued. You would have to find a vendor that still has one. They pop up on eBay here and there too.

I'm curious if anyone has tried a non-Mac Edition GTX285??? With some cards, that don't have the Mac EFI, they can't be used for system-level graphics, boot menus, etc.. But often will still allow drivers to load once in OSX. It worked with the older non-Mac Quadro FX4500 cards. Once booted into OSX, the drivers would load and the card was usable.

I am getting one with flashed mac firmware.
I'll report as soon as I get it.

[Chris Kenny]

We picked up a GTX285 on eBay from this seller (http://myworld.ebay.com/macvidcards/), who seems to sell a lot of them. It looks like a flashed unit. Works fine with Resolve.

[albert rudnicki]

thanks
It's the same guy I am getting it from. Looks like a good source.
He also trades the old cards for a reasonable price.

I'll be running it on 8core 2010 Mac pro 5.1
Did anyone had any trouble with those cards on the new macs?

[CJ Roy]

Just got my rom flashed 285 card yesterday. Works great so far, recognized no problem and don't seem to have any heat or power issues.

I should get my BM 3D & Resolve in a couple days. Should be fun.

[Robert Horwell]

I have a nvidia GeForce 8800 GT which uses 2 of the power sockets any one know of a source for splitters so i can run power to my GTX 285?

[CJ Roy]

All you need are those two sockets for the GTX 285. Using the 120 in addition doesn't require a socket.

[Florian Stadler]

I'm getting great realtime playback from a 12-core, 24GB Ram with QuadroFX in slot 1, GT120 in slot 2, Redrocket in 3 and Decklink extreme 3D in 4 with 3 internal 2GB's software Raid 0ed...
This thing is smokin!
Now I just have to save up for that Cinetal...

[Peter Chamberlain]

You will not be able to use the Geforce 8800GT. Try and find a GT120 or for slower than real time playback just use the GXT285 or FX4800 without the GT120.
Peter

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I have a nvidia GeForce 8800 GT which uses 2 of the power sockets any one know of a source for splitters so i can run power to my GTX 285?

Can't use splitters, you can over-draw voltage by doing that. You will want a couple of these (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16812200106&cm_re=video_power_adapter-_-12-200-106-_-Product). Not sure of a source outside the USA...

The 8800GT should work just fine for your primary display with the 285 as your extra GPU. Just need to solve that power problem and probably pull the power from your secondary optical bay.

[paul engstrom]

Slightly off topic, but sort of related. We're building a RAID and are curious about this: will a card like Atto R680, with 6Gb/s drives like Barracuda XT drives, in a 6Gb/s JBOD enclosure like Sans Digital 8bay (http://www.sansdigital.com/elitestor/es208x6plusb.html) have greater speed than CalDigit, Rorke, etc. 3Gb/s solutions?

Reason I ask is that we are now grading larger/longer projects and wanting to optimize what Davinci is giving us. While I know we can use internal software Raid on the Mac tower...that's too small for longer form projects.

Thanks,
Paul

[Stephen Lovett]

Hi Paul,

You're really asking a multi-faceted question.

The various vendors use differing oem options when building their systems so not all 3Gb/s systems perform at the same level. And other factors like raid level and PCIe speed and motherboard throughput matter as well.

In my limited testing there wasn't a huge difference when moving to 6Gb/s drives on an 6Gb card in a PCIe 2.0 slot on a 8 Drive raid 5 or raid 6 array.

FWIW my testing methodology was basically flawed because I used different drives in the test, but it gave me some idea of what to expect. Basically I just swapped between two enclosures, one with 3Gb/s drives and one with 6Gb/s drives.

More generally, the number of drives really matters, (e.g. 8 is a LOT faster than four) as does the speed of the PCIe slot you allocate to the card, and the speed of the individual drives.

I'd purchase the higher bandwidth card, as the additional cost is minimal.

I don't use raid 0 personally, too scary for me, but if I was heading down that road, I'd stick with drives built for raids like the WD RE series or equivalent.

I've found the WD to be a bit faster than the other vendors but this is going to vary by model.

And again speaking generally the 1TB seem to perform better than the 2TB drives.

Hope that helps a little.

Steve

[paul engstrom]

thanks, that does help. I'm just looking at what Resolve is bringing and want to make sure that our shop takes as much advantage of it as possible.

[Robert Horwell]

Looks like I will have to find a 120.
Is anyone using an pci expander.? If so which?

[Beer Buijsman]

Kinda off-topic but related too, about the performance of a MacPro for DaVinci.

Thinking of buying a new MacPro, but I'm in doubt between the 3,33 ghz 6-core or the 2,4 12-core. Anyone got some advice on that?
In most apps the 3,33 got the edge now, but what about DaVinci, does it use multiple cores well, or does the higher clock speed triumph?

Would love some advice on this.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Thinking of buying a new MacPro, but I'm in doubt between the 3,33 ghz 6-core or the 2,4 12-core. Anyone got some advice on that?

Get the 8-core or 12-core for sure. When buying a Mac Pro, you should avoid buying one that only has one processor. That means no quad-core or 6-core model. Is Apple selling a 6-core system now? I thought they just had 4, 8 and 12. The reason why is because if you only buy a single-CPU model, Apple does not supply the additional cooling components for that second CPU socket and if you decide to add a second CPU later, it will cost you a kidney. In addition to that, the memory controllers are hosted on the CPUs. So having one CPU in there effectively cuts your RAM capacity and throughput in half.

The 8-core will save you some money over the 12-core. I can't comment about how well Resolve scales to multiple CPUs yet... But will say that unless you're doing a lot of scalable or CPU-bound rendering or calculation options, 12 cores won't give you much benefit over 8 cores. I would definitely go with more cores if you have the budget to do so. Not only because you get 4 more processor cores -- that's like another whole computer in there! But you also gain some clock speed across all of them.

IMO, the 2.66GHz 12-Core Mac Pro is probably the one to get right now. If your budget allows. The 2.93 would be slightly, even noticeably, better, but the cost really starts to go and that money could be put toward a PCIe Expander or RAID.

[Beer Buijsman]

What I hadn't seen is that the 6-core has just 4 memory slots too.
And it's not possible to add a second processor later on. So I'll probably go for the 12 core 2,66. The 2,93 is a bit too expensive in comparison, in my opinion at least.
Going for the raid card instead. Think that'll net me a bigger performance gain, combined with 3 small ssd's or fast hdd's.

That mac + the GTX285 I already got should give me reasonable DaVinci performance I hope, at least for smaller jobs.

[Torrey Loomis]

Folks,

Just saw this thread. We shipped a bunch of Resolve's worldwide over the last week (including Florian--thanks!!)

For people looking at the hardware panels, they are available for order and deliver at end of October:

http://silverado.cc/shop/product.php?productid=1493

We're working with Cubix on expander tests for people who need more slots. Should see preliminary posts on Wed. or Thurs. from those tests.

Torrey
-----------------------------------------------
Torrey Loomis
President & CEO - Silverado Systems, Inc.
(916) 760-0032 • FAX (916) 404-5258
torrey@silverado.cc
Web http://www.Silverado.cc
Blog http://silveradosys.blogspot.com
Twitter http://www.twitter.com/silveradosys

Build your own RED Rocket system: http://bit.ly/7F4QA1

[Robert Horwell]

Has anyone tried running resolve in a Hackintosh?

[Aleksandar Colancevski]

I did. Still looking for mobo that supports boot from second PCIe slot.
I got 8.5fps with 285GTX only. If I got realtime RED community will know first.:)

[OlaHaldor]

8.5fps with GTX285 only is really poor performance. I got better performance with my Mac Pro 2008 with the GTX285 only.

What did you test with anyway? RED? Try lowering your quality settings..

[Aleksandar Colancevski]

Tested on Quad core Q9550, mobo Asus P5Q pro, on 3.2Ghz. Yes, I know its poor, but much faster than Color. By the way tested on RED raw 4K material without proxies on.
So this is preliminary, I am building i7 comp, and will make further tests to establish optimal workable realtime setup.
The problem with hackintoshes is that no mobo vendor is documenting or put in the BIOS how to command or configure PCIe slots.
Trying to boot video from slot 2 with different mobos, leaving 285 GTX in slot 1. This is necessary in order to mimic Mac Pro setup.
If anyone have some info about this, please post here.

[Robert Horwell]

Keep up the good work alexander.

Does anyone know of any Resolve coarses here in the UK?

[Dwaine Maggart]

Hi Torrey,

Really looking forward to your Cubix test results!

Dwaine Maggart
Blackmagic Design DaVinci Support

[Nicos Ambatzis]

Hi Torrey,

We are also looking forward to your Cubix test results !

[Chris Parker]

add me to those looking forward to Torrey's Cubix tests....

[Jose Lomeña]

Hi, I'm new user of resolve.

My question is, why minimun system is 10.6.4?. I tested with 10.6.2 without problems.

I have a hackintosh... and a lot of problem with 10.6.4, near half fps with 10.6.4 than 10.6.2.

My second question is, I have 3 cards, 2x gtx285 + 1x 8800GT. I have monitor system conected to 8800gt. I get same fps with one gtx285 than with two gtx285. Is this normal?. Is not possible to add extra cuda cores from the second card?.


I want to say thank you to DaVinci team, this software is awesome. I'm really happy with the realtime output quality. Two month ago i was decided to buy rocket, but now, I'm not sure.


saludos,

Jose.

[Curran Giddens]

My second question is, I have 3 cards, 2x gtx285 + 1x 8800GT. I have monitor system conected to 8800gt. I get same fps with one gtx285 than with two gtx285. Is this normal?. Is not possible to add extra cuda cores from the second card?.

Pretty sure the Mac OsX license for DaVinci only supports 1 GPU. That is why it is important to get the fastest one available.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

10.6.4 is required because it's the current release and has some graphics fixes for both CUDA and general video card support. 10.6.3 is very problematic with certain GPUs and CUDA apps. 10.6.2 would be fine, but it's over 6 months old now.

Resolve for Mac only supports the display video card and one additional GPU for processing. If you want more GPUs, you need to buy the Linux version, which doesn't limit you.

[Jose Lomeña]

10.6.4 is required because it's the current release and has some graphics fixes for both CUDA and general video card support. 10.6.3 is very problematic with certain GPUs and CUDA apps. 10.6.2 would be fine, but it's over 6 months old now.

Resolve for Mac only supports the display video card and one additional GPU for processing. If you want more GPUs, you need to buy the Linux version, which doesn't limit you.

Thanks Jeff.

[Aleksandar Colancevski]

i am happy to report that I got realtime performance on hackintosh, Red 4K , quater debayer without proxies on.

[Rick Turners]

i am happy to report that I got realtime performance on hackintosh, Red 4K , quater debayer without proxies on.

Psystar or self built?

What parts?

congrats!

[Aleksandar Colancevski]

Self built. Gigabyte x58 mobo, i7 930 overclocked on 4GHz, 285 GTX, 4 disk soft raid.
I am still working on second vga. OS needs little tweaking. I found the solution but don't have time to implement it. When I do it I'll post here.

[Aleksandar Colancevski]

It is a half hour job to build it when you know what to do. You are all welcome to PM me for details.

[Jose Lomeña]

Self built. Gigabyte x58 mobo, i7 930 overclocked on 4GHz, 285 GTX, 4 disk soft raid.
I am still working on second vga. OS needs little tweaking. I found the solution but don't have time to implement it. When I do it I'll post here.

Do you use 10.6.4?.

[Aleksandar Colancevski]

I didn't try to install DaVinci on anything less than 10.6.4.