Open question to BM: How would you feel if you just bought Resolve?

[Rob Ruffo]

And, like most users, never did 3D or 4K finishes. Would you be upset? Be honest now.

Also, what is your thinking? Please explain.

As a last question, can you see how your moves will inevitably bring down the income of most pro colorists (I am not one, I am a director/DP primarily but many colorists are good friends)? We can say it's all about the art, but the reality is if producers have copies of DaVinci on their desktops for free, they are going to try and get their daughters to do it. This will not kill the high-end jobs, but it will reduce the total number of paying jobs by wiping out a huge chunk of the middle to low end, which will bring down even high-end rates, with so many colorists out of work, to the point where making a living at grading will become impossible for all but a select few. Do you think this is "wonderful democratization?"

[Dave Blackham]

Its a great product. No regrets and Id buy another licence.

[Alan Gordon]

I'm just really hoping BM has some tricks up their sleeves for paying customers.

I'm not so sure that I regret it, because I have made the money I spent back, but at this middle-low end, it does kind of hurt.

But for now, until I have a 4K job, I'm keeping Lite installed because I don't need to bring my valuble dongle on-set for DIT looks.

[jake blackstone]

Its a great product. No regrets and Id buy another licence.

I'm sure Rob would gladly sell you his:-)

[Rob Ruffo]

Yes I would. PM me with an offer or tomorrow I am phoning B&H to try and get a refund. In the few weeks I've had it, I've obviously made no R.O.I. yet, and upcoming paying jobs can be done 100% with free version. Neat Video is better for noise reduction, so that feature is a bit useless.

I rant about this for similar reasons to why I ranted about DSLRs - (although DaVinci is admittedly great, I have no complaints about functionality at all - whereas DSLRs are sub-par). "Democratization" is sometimes great, but taken too far it is simply a race to the bottom where no one can make a living and standards are non-existent.

[jake blackstone]

When original iPhone was sold for $699, I bought one. I think, 6 weeks later they dropped the price to $299 and Apple refunded the price drop to the original purchasers. I got mine. Love Apple:-)
But I'm sure, users of original Final Touch don't share my affection for Apple:-)

[Tom.Wong]

I think I've made my money on my resolve license over 10x over already in under a year. The price of the license i negligible in my opinion. The price of one of my GPU's alone is only 200 dollar less than the license. My rocket card cost 4x more, and tower cost 6x more. hell, even the control surface costs more than the license. You buy these thing so you can work, you work and make your money back, and than it's profit. It's a pretty standard business practice in this industry, just because the software is free doesn't mean they don't have to spend all that money in equipment either. Being locked down to 1 gpu alone, I'd lose half my clients, they want to see the performance. Being locked into 1080p resolution output only, hurts me too because I'm asked for 4k quicktimes and dpx all the time because they want the resolution to be able to pan and scan and punch in with the color already baked.

I really don't so see the big deal, that thousand dollars you're saving for sticking with the lite version can only go back to the color suite in a very minor way, and you're still limited in what you can do. and finally, I'm sure Jake can attest. If people are coming to you simply cause you have a Resolve, and not because they love your work, and want you to work for them and give them a great looking piece... well I think I've said enough.

[Rob Ruffo]

The fact that others have done it does not make it right. Other people are mugging tourists right now - does that mean I can do that too and it's fine? Besides, Apple Color at least cost SOMETHING.

[Rob Ruffo]

I think I've made my money on my resolve license over 10x over already in under a year. The price of the license i negligible in my opinion. The price of one of my GPU's alone is only 200 dollar less than the license. My rocket card cost 4x more, and tower cost 6x more. hell, even the control surface costs more than the license. You buy these thing so you can work, you work and make your money back, and than it's profit. It's a pretty standard business practice in this industry, just because the software is free doesn't mean they don't have to spend all that money in equipment either. Being locked down to 1 gpu alone, I'd lose half my clients, they want to see the performance. Being locked into 1080p resolution output only, hurts me too because I'm asked for 4k quicktimes and dpx all the time because they want the resolution to be able to pan and scan and punch in with the color already baked.

I really don't so see the big deal, that thousand dollars you're saving for sticking with the lite version can only go back to the color suite in a very minor way, and you're still limited in what you can do. and finally, I'm sure Jake can attest. If people are coming to you simply cause you have a Resolve, and not because they love your work, and want you to work for them and give them a great looking piece... well I think I've said enough.

I'm not talking about me - CC for me was merely a holistic add-on to my DP skills - but I can't see how this will not hurt the little guy - who, as as I specifically said, RECENTLY bought Resolve, or is already struggling. Some of those little guys are good friends.

[Alexis Vanier]

Please everyone realize that there is a huge psychological impact to taking something from a nearly negligible cost to making it free. How am I supposed to explain to a producer that I'm working on his stuff with something that's actually free... and I'm charging him for it.

Free is still a F word. It should be used sparingly.

I'm personally outraged by BlackMagic's move. I believe it's simply irresponsible towards the business as a whole.

If anyone starts a class action, I'm in.

[jake blackstone]

There are no basis for a lawsuit, based on $0 price alone. BM includes plenty of free software with their hardware products.
On the other hand, if they are trying to dump their product and as a result to kill off all competition, that's different.
But then again, all BM would have to do is to keep $1k price in place, even if nobody would pay and they are in the clear.

[Rob Ruffo]

Alexis, I think in Canada we could demand our money back. So says our lawyer neighbor. No court, just straight-up consumer protection law here. European owners of Davinci could probably do the same, even easier, but not sure. Same for Autralia. The 1K price for features we don't use, or it could be shown almost no one uses would not hold water. I will be getting my money back from B&H. I hope BM loses TONS of money from this irresponsible move - it is what they deserve for such terrible treatment of their paying user base.

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Alexis, I think in Canada we could demand our money back. So says our lawyer neighbor. No court, just straight-up consumer protection law here. European owners of Davinci could probably do the same, even easier, but not sure. Same for Autralia. The 1K price for features we don't use, or it could be shown almost no one uses would not hold water. I will be getting my money back from B&H. I hope BM loses TONS of money from this irresponsible move - it is what they deserve for such terrible treatment of their paying user base.

B&H is an American company, and you have to abide by our laws.

That said ... I plain old just don't get your outrage. It simply doesn't make sense to me.

I trade on my skills, not on my gear.

I've already been competing with Color users and Colorista users and people using Final Touch in pirated versions of AE.

This doesn't change that.

Resolve is actually a pretty difficult piece of software to use. I think its harder than Color for example. Once you get rolling, you still have the huge problem of a skill set to build.

I think any producer worth a damn will get that. The ones who don't get it ... do you really want to work for them anyway?

[Martin Widerberg]

The possibility of this producing more talented colorists is a good thing, I think. The technology we work with are changing rapidly. Switching from one editing system to another, and now coloring tools. Frustrating? Maybe. I think roll with the punches is a more creative approach.

[Ramesh Jai]

I really don't know what the problem is. It's BM's call to decide what they want to do. You are welcome to ditch Resolve and move on to other alternatives out there, more expensive ones if that's what you like. Perhaps BM wants to bank on the indie generation who are many many more than the corporate, established post production houses types. I even think PP houses will have a bigger talent pool to choose from when hiring just because more people would have become proficient in the software. In my opinion, nay I know, it's a step in the right direction.

Food for thought - Imagine Sony was the company that developed and sold the RED One. Guess how much it would cost? Anyone? Anyone?

PS. I have the paid full version of Resolve.

[Dan Kanes]

Many producers I know still have @aol.com email addresses - so that should give you an idea of what they know about technology.

I might buy a resolve license when I need to use it. For now, I still charge clients for any work I do with the free software. Just because it cost me $0 doesn't mean I shouldn't charge a client for my time learning how to use it, and then using it on a set.

[Chris Adler]

This is the silliest post I've ever read. Using the same line of logic it should be illegal for anything to come out that allows people to compete with seasoned industry professionals. Resolve is a tool set that does nothing on its own. A colorist either has skills or they don't. The price of the tools they use should be irrelevant. If you can be replaced by Bob from down the street because he has the free version of Resolve then he's marketing better than you, or he's a better colorist. That's business.

I'm hoping that since the product is free a lot of those crappy HDSLR movies that go without any attention to color will now get some.

[Rob Ruffo]

B&H is an American company, and you have to abide by our laws.

That said ... I plain old just don't get your outrage. It simply doesn't make sense to me.

I trade on my skills, not on my gear.

I've already been competing with Color users and Colorista users and people using Final Touch in pirated versions of AE.

This doesn't change that.

Resolve is actually a pretty difficult piece of software to use. I think its harder than Color for example. Once you get rolling, you still have the huge problem of a skill set to build.

I think any producer worth a damn will get that. The ones who don't get it ... do you really want to work for them anyway?

I have the luxury of picking and choosing clients - but to answer the question for many struggling individuals I know personally - good people working hard and doing the best they can - they would work for them because they need to pay the rent.

Buying equipment should be an investment with an R.O.I. - it's, again, not about art or skills or any of that, buying gear is all about business. Red has given us an amazing R.O.I. on our camera. Our lenses, too, continue to be a fabulous investment. We have Joker Bugs here that have paid for themselves many times over, and we plan to get more. This is not, at all, what I talk about to clients (I could rent those same Joker Bugs for a job, and charge the client the same thing (so to the client it makes no difference what we own) , but I don't have to so I put this money into our cash flow) - this is only what I talk about to our accountant. My accountant would say BM screwed us over, plain and simple. I will do everything I can to never buy anything from BM again - they have lost my respect, and I'm sure I am not alone.

As for laws, if you openly sell to Canada or Europe, you must abide by our consumer laws or you will be barred from doing so, and I'm sure BH does so - BH is a great company in my experience.

[Rob Ruffo]

This is the silliest post I've ever read. Using the same line of logic it should be illegal for anything to come out that allows people to compete with seasoned industry professionals. Resolve is a tool set that does nothing on its own. A colorist either has skills or they don't. The price of the tools they use should be irrelevant. If you can be replaced by Bob from down the street because he has the free version of Resolve then he's marketing better than you, or he's a better colorist. That's business.

I'm hoping that since the product is free a lot of those crappy HDSLR movies that go without any attention to color will now get some.

No Chris, you completely miss the point. That is not at all what I am saying. People here sometimes don't understand that what they call "open democratization" which in it's true form I applaud, in some cases is really a race to the bottom where no one can make a living except those doing top-end budgets with top-end representation in Hollywood or for mainstream commercials. I have both the aforementioned, so this is not about me, this is about taking care of the business as a whole with respect, rather than having a scorched earth policy that hurts many people, most especially your own customers, to make a few quick bucks and sell a few more video cards.

You don't see Jim burning his Epic owners by releasing a Scarlet that is almost the same except for a few trivial, unlikely to be used by most, features, because he is smart enough to realize that would be burning his own customers, and because he, unlike BM, is worthy of my respect.

[Mark Wilkinson]

4k finish is easily worth $1k, it seems to me.

I'd guess BM is watching the clock tic down towards Adobe's release of CS6 with IRIDAS. They have a limited amount of time to get people committed to their product before it becomes very difficult to sell as a software stand alone pkg.

Unless, of course, Adobe does something stupid (like Apple) and roll the technology into Premiere as a plug-in. Or implements it in AE like Color Finesse.

[Hans von Sonntag]

Unless, of course, Adobe does something stupid (like Apple) and roll the technology into Premiere as a plug-in. Or implements it in AE like Color Finesse.

I'm a long time SpeedGrade user. And I can tell you the best thing for the user would be to implement Iridas' superior technology in an NLE, in a Adobe's case Premier Pro. Roundtripping, conforming, re-conforming is not fun. The longer, the complexer the project, the more demanding the client, or yourself, the more tedious and creativity hindering is a stand-alone CC application. IMHO, the times of grading software are over. IMHO, BM is late at the party.

Hans

[Hans von Sonntag]

I'm hoping that since the product is free a lot of those crappy HDSLR movies that go without any attention to color will now get some.

Only a few FCP users ever bothered to open the free-of-charge Color once, let alone to use it for a project. Most people/clients don't care really. Is great if it looks okay. Any NLE is able to make a video look okay. For a more fancy look a a plugin with a template will do it just fine. The fact that Resolve is now for free won't change anything to the better in this regard.


Hans

[Mark Wilkinson]

Ok, fair enough. But the implementation needs to be very robust. Not just a 3 wheel plug-in.

But what about memorized grades? What about stills libraries and all the other time-saving and workflow issues that grading apps are good at? If all that is in Premiere, then fine.

If the roundtrip felt more like a different interface layout in Premiere - that would be great. Who cares if it is called a different app or not. If it works, it works.

My issue is professional workflow tools in a color corrector - not just the color correcting.

[Shane Betts]

I had to deal with this kind of nonsense when I worked at BM 8 years back. There are some very simple principles here.

First, is the licence you bought still worth the money you paid for it? Pretty hard to argue that one. A year before you paid out your precious $1,000 it was selling for $850,000. You poor dear, you've been ripped off. Horrible, mean old BMD. :crying:

Second principle. Just because the producer's daughter gets the free licence doesn't mean she has any idea or talent for the job at hand. It's the oldest, tiredest old industry whinge that "soon anyone will have the gear I have and I'll never get a job". True - if you're a no talent, unprofessional bum - but if you are actually a talented, professional operator, charge for you and you'll get work. (not suggesting you are a no talent unprofessional bum ,merely saying relax, you'll still get work). The same old cry of the sky is falling went up when Final Cut Pro was released, when Mini DV came out, when Red entered the market. The only people to suffer are those who hide behind their lack of something real to offer by having the most gear. Flawed, elitist business model and glad to see the back of it.

Three, how can you complain that BM's decisions have destroyed the industry and will put people out of work when, as has been pointed out, hacked and pirated software costs nothing either. Most producers I know have Macs and PCs full of hacked and pirated software. Whilst they lack the will to spend money on software and gear, they also lack the will to learn how to use it or the time to actually complete the job. Sure, there are those that will elect to become one man bands and do it all themselves. This forum is full of such types (of which I am one) but most of us actually have a background as DP's or editors etc.

Don't trade on the gear you own or what you paid for it. Trade on your talent, professionalism and experience. The moment you start putting the price you paid for your gear on your rate card you open yourself up to getting slammed by the big post houses, who will always have more than you.

And, lets' do the math here. One percent of purchase price per day. So you paid $1,000 for a Resolve license. That's worth, let me see - $10 a day in rental. Over a 10 hour day thats... My hourly rate is $70. If I offer Resolve Lite I can only charge $69? Come on. Gimme a break.

[Hans von Sonntag]

Ok, fair enough. But the implementation needs to be very robust. Not just a 3 wheel plug-in.

But what about memorized grades? What about stills libraries and all the other time-saving and workflow issues that grading apps are good at? If all that is in Premiere, then fine.

If the roundtrip felt more like a different interface layout in Premiere - that would be great. Who cares if it is called a different app or not. If it works, it works.

My issue is professional workflow tools in a color corrector - not just the color correcting.

Fully agreed!

Hans

[Jay A. Kelley]

People that work in color correction are artists. Their job is hard, the nessesary skill set it massive. Not only is it about talent, it's about speed. A good colorist demands a LOT of money per hour, but they still have to deliver VALUE for that time, so they need to be quick. There is a reason the work surface for these programs costs so much.

I do not believe for one second that lowering the cost of the software will hurt the industry. Sure more idiots will come in to try it out, but that has always been the case. The cream rises to the top.

Jay

[Rob Ruffo]

The possibility of this producing more talented colorists is a good thing, I think. The technology we work with are changing rapidly. Switching from one editing system to another, and now coloring tools. Frustrating? Maybe. I think roll with the punches is a more creative approach.

But a business having descended into super-low wages will not produce more colorists. It will, in the end, produce none.

[Rob Ruffo]

I had to deal with this kind of nonsense when I worked at BM 8 years back. There are some very simple principles here.

First, is the licence you bought still worth the money you paid for it? Pretty hard to argue that one. A year before you paid out your precious $1,000 it was selling for $850,000. You poor dear, you've been ripped off. Horrible, mean old BMD. :crying:

Second principle. Just because the producer's daughter gets the free licence doesn't mean she has any idea or talent for the job at hand. It's the oldest, tiredest old industry whinge that "soon anyone will have the gear I have and I'll never get a job". True - if you're a no talent, unprofessional bum - but if you are actually a talented, professional operator, charge for you and you'll get work. (not suggesting you are a no talent unprofessional bum ,merely saying relax, you'll still get work). The same old cry of the sky is falling went up when Final Cut Pro was released, when Mini DV came out, when Red entered the market. The only people to suffer are those who hide behind their lack of something real to offer by having the most gear. Flawed, elitist business model and glad to see the back of it.

Three, how can you complain that BM's decisions have destroyed the industry and will put people out of work when, as has been pointed out, hacked and pirated software costs nothing either. Most producers I know have Macs and PCs full of hacked and pirated software. Whilst they lack the will to spend money on software and gear, they also lack the will to learn how to use it or the time to actually complete the job. Sure, there are those that will elect to become one man bands and do it all themselves. This forum is full of such types (of which I am one) but most of us actually have a background as DP's or editors etc.

Don't trade on the gear you own or what you paid for it. Trade on your talent, professionalism and experience. The moment you start putting the price you paid for your gear on your rate card you open yourself up to getting slammed by the big post houses, who will always have more than you.

And, lets' do the math here. One percent of purchase price per day. So you paid $1,000 for a Resolve license. That's worth, let me see - $10 a day in rental. Over a 10 hour day thats... My hourly rate is $70. If I offer Resolve Lite I can only charge $69? Come on. Gimme a break.

That's a good post. However, I don't hide behind my gear with clients - I don't even mention it, except, again, to my accountant. Gear should be an investment in your bottom line, so that you rent less, rent to others, and come out further ahead at the end of the year, not a sales tactic for when you offer yourself as a creative professional. But that said, I think I, and even more so (850 times more) the 850K buyers from 2 years ago have a right to our low opinion of BM. 1000 is not a lot to me, but it is a lot to a percentage of those who bought it., especially those who bought it very recently. They screwed us, as we did not buy the set of differences from what anyone could get for free that we thought we were buying, and I would not have paid $1000 for two weeks of access, as I purchased two weeks ago. We will no longer be able to buy gear if depreciation is sometimes 100% in two weeks. Gear is supposed to be a resellable asset with a somewhat predictable depreciation, at least within reason, and software is a form of gear. If we can no longer buy software, and no one can, then I don't see how new tools will be developed.Luckily, most companies have less complete, callous disregard for their paying clientele than BM. The 850K guys have even more of a right to be pissed, for sure - all in all you can see how BM is not making any friends among anyone with any money in the color business.

You all scream elitist and so on, but really if there are no more affluent people in the business, there is no more business.

[Ramesh Jai]

If your livelihood depends solely on the tools you have and not on your talent then you are in the rental business. And even that needs talent. There's a point in there somewhere for Mr. Ruffo.

[jake blackstone]

We're all in the rental business. We rent out our talent and time in exchange for a payday. Not that much different, than renting out shoes in a bowling alley:-)

[Ramesh Jai]

We're all in the rental business. We rent out our talent and time in exchange for a payday. Not that much different, than renting out shoes in a bowling alley:-)

Agreed. If your client comes to you only for your equipment then he can go anywhere else offering a lower rate for the same equipment. I really don't know why this thread has dragged on so long. It's like a telenovela with repeated pans and zooms.

[Dave Blackham]

We will buy another licence but not just yet. I do think BM should have handled this a little more sensitivly though. I remember one camera manafacturer who made a disk cache unit that they sold for about £20,000 UKP then subsiquent to a few local sales included it in part of the camera package effectivly Free, so I think its is regretably just part of the modern world. I still think the price point of the full package is good the the software does result in images that can be outstanding, Davinci its also a well proven CC.

[Shane Betts]

That's a good post. However, I don't hide behind my gear with clients - I don't even mention it, except, again, to my accountant. Gear should be an investment in your bottom line, so that you rent less, rent to others, and come out further ahead at the end of the year, not a sales tactic for when you offer yourself as a creative professional. But that said, I think I, and even more so (850 times more) the 850K buyers from 2 years ago have a right to our low opinion of BM. 1000 is not a lot to me, but it is a lot to a percentage of those who bought it., especially those who bought it very recently. They screwed us, as we did not buy the set of differences from what anyone could get for free that we thought we were buying, and I would not have paid $1000 for two weeks of access, as I purchased two weeks ago. We will no longer be able to buy gear if depreciation is sometimes 100% in two weeks. Gear is supposed to be a resellable asset with a somewhat predictable depreciation, at least within reason, and software is a form of gear. If we can no longer buy software, and no one can, then I don't see how new tools will be developed.Luckily, most companies have less complete, callous disregard for their paying clientele than BM. The 850K guys have even more of a right to be pissed, for sure - all in all you can see how BM is not making any friends among anyone with any money in the color business.

You all scream elitist and so on, but really if there are no more affluent people in the business, there is no more business.

And if those affluent people happen to be producers who are so keen to hang on to their money they employ their kids to take the work of professionals?

Whilst BMD are guilty of making things as cheap as they can, sometimes at the risk of causing this kind of offence, they certainly didn't invent it. It's called the computer industry. Grant's focus has always been to put tools, previously out of the reach of all but the large post houses, into the hands of freelancers - the very freelancers who actually make the rental businesses look good with their talent and effort. Steve Jobs coined the phrase "the democratising of the film industry" and, if the prices charged (or not charged as the case may be) by the BMD's of this world allow a teenager to learn on a high-end grading app, even if that teenager has a producer for a parent, then democratising is exactly what is happening. If that teenager turns out to be a talent then the industry must benefit - no matter who their dad is. If that teenager turns out to be a no-talent schmuck, then at least they won't be able to cling onto their job based purely on owning some bit of kit others can't afford.

I understand you feel the software you bought isn't worth what you paid for it two weeks ago but the number of offers you've had from people willing to buy it from you would seem to indicate you're mistaken. Particularly when the nearest alternative is fifty times the price. Bottom line is what you paid $1,000 for is still worth $1,000 and still does everything it it did when you thought it was a bargain a fortnight ago. It's not like they decided to give away exactly the same thing as you paid a grand for. The Lite version has less features. It's not really BMD's fault, nor could they ever predict, that the things they've stripped out aren't things that you, yourself, don't find useful.

[Danai Chutinaton]

I had to deal with this kind of nonsense when I worked at BM 8 years back. There are some very simple principles here.

First, is the licence you bought still worth the money you paid for it? Pretty hard to argue that one. A year before you paid out your precious $1,000 it was selling for $850,000. You poor dear, you've been ripped off. Horrible, mean old BMD. :crying:

Second principle. Just because the producer's daughter gets the free licence doesn't mean she has any idea or talent for the job at hand. It's the oldest, tiredest old industry whinge that "soon anyone will have the gear I have and I'll never get a job". True - if you're a no talent, unprofessional bum - but if you are actually a talented, professional operator, charge for you and you'll get work. (not suggesting you are a no talent unprofessional bum ,merely saying relax, you'll still get work). The same old cry of the sky is falling went up when Final Cut Pro was released, when Mini DV came out, when Red entered the market. The only people to suffer are those who hide behind their lack of something real to offer by having the most gear. Flawed, elitist business model and glad to see the back of it.

Three, how can you complain that BM's decisions have destroyed the industry and will put people out of work when, as has been pointed out, hacked and pirated software costs nothing either. Most producers I know have Macs and PCs full of hacked and pirated software. Whilst they lack the will to spend money on software and gear, they also lack the will to learn how to use it or the time to actually complete the job. Sure, there are those that will elect to become one man bands and do it all themselves. This forum is full of such types (of which I am one) but most of us actually have a background as DP's or editors etc.

Don't trade on the gear you own or what you paid for it. Trade on your talent, professionalism and experience. The moment you start putting the price you paid for your gear on your rate card you open yourself up to getting slammed by the big post houses, who will always have more than you.

And, lets' do the math here. One percent of purchase price per day. So you paid $1,000 for a Resolve license. That's worth, let me see - $10 a day in rental. Over a 10 hour day thats... My hourly rate is $70. If I offer Resolve Lite I can only charge $69? Come on. Gimme a break.

Well said.

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

What an odd thread!

Customers demanding a company should KEEP ITS PRICES UP because what their Producers want is HIGH COST EQUIPMENT!

And so ironic that its happening in the RED Forums, a company that came in with technology that undercut everyone else on price and overwhelmed them on feature set. I mean, REDCINE X is FREE! Does that make it bad? Do I really want to work with a producer who says - don't use REDCINE X, use FLAME or else...

[Tim Sutherland]

I bought a resolve license just after 8.0 came out. I haven't done much to make money with resolve since then since I've been on a long term job. But I'm not upset at all by the new lite version, ill add that to my laptop to do quick dslr fixes with. And since I invested in an expansion box, ill probably add another GTX 480 before too long. And when the windows version arrives, ill make a windows box with 3 480s and no rocket, which will still work very well with epic footage.

No complaints from me, but it would be nice if the full version would operate without the dongle restricted to the lite features, which would help when switching between workstations wit one license at a time.

Tim

[Neil W. Smith]

Whilst BMD are guilty of making things as cheap as they can, sometimes at the risk of causing this kind of offence, they certainly didn't invent it. It's called the computer industry. Grant's focus has always been to put tools, previously out of the reach of all but the large post houses, into the hands of freelancers - the very freelancers who actually make the rental businesses look good with their talent and effort. Steve Jobs coined the phrase "the democratising of the film industry" and, if the prices charged (or not charged as the case may be) by the BMD's of this world allow a teenager to learn on a high-end grading app, even if that teenager has a producer for a parent, then democratising is exactly what is happening. If that teenager turns out to be a talent then the industry must benefit - no matter who their dad is. If that teenager turns out to be a no-talent schmuck, then at least they won't be able to cling onto their job based purely on owning some bit of kit others can't afford..

Great post, Bettsy .... glad to see that someone here has a grain of common sense between their ears!

We have three fully paid up DaVinci Resolve Systems ... all with the DNxHD plug-in and multiple nVidia GPUs .... have no regrets at all for paying what I did for those systems ... one of the best investments I ever made ... along with a $100,000 DLP projector and a $130,000 tape deck and three talented colorists who know how to squeeze every ounce of goodness out of Resolve.

I had the pleasure of spending some time with Grant Petty (CEO of BMD) at NAB a few years ago when Blackmagic first acquired DaVinci .... we were discussing the pricing strategy of Resolve ... I was complaining then about the low cost of Resolve and how it would turn the color correction business on its head ... blah, blah blah ... I asked him straight up if it was a move to take out the competition? .... he looked at me fair in the eye and said something along the lines of ... "Neil, I never look at what the competition is doing .... I look at what our customers need and give it to them at the best price possible ... I want everyone to have the best tools possible to get the job done ... always." He said it very matter of factly and calmly ... on the plane back to LA I mulled it over ... first time I'd ever heard a CEO say that he didn't focus on what the competition was doing but only on the value he could deliver to his customers.

That encounter on the crowded and bustling floor of NAB changed my attitude and our business model ... Moore's Law is like 'drinking from a fire hose' ... it sweeps aside everything in its digital path ... you either ride the wave or get pushed under ... each year gets tougher, faster, leaner and meaner ... but you can't be like King Canute and hope to keep the waves off the beach.

We were lucky enough to be able to demo Resolve 8.1 and Media Composer 6 at the SMPTE Conference last month running footage shot on an 8k camera .... the SMPTE engineers and Studio people who came to our booth were amazed at the price/performance of what we were showing on a standard MacPro with a PCIe Expansion box ... the Windows version of Resolve 8.2 will soon be here with even better price/performance ... MC6 and DV R8.2 running on Windows box will drive the price/performance curve up another notch ... Resolve Lite 8.2 on a Wintel machine will be hard to beat in terms of value ... better get used to it.


Adapt ... survive ... thrive ... it's the only way in our Moore's Law driven industry.

Neil

[Rob Ruffo]

What an odd thread!

Customers demanding a company should KEEP ITS PRICES UP because what their Producers want is HIGH COST EQUIPMENT!

And so ironic that its happening in the RED Forums, a company that came in with technology that undercut everyone else on price and overwhelmed them on feature set. I mean, REDCINE X is FREE! Does that make it bad? Do I really want to work with a producer who says - don't use REDCINE X, use FLAME or else...

There is a business point here that some of you do not get - but Jake does. In fact, yes, producers want high cost equipment - in my field, soon, I will not be able to sell doing jobs on DaVinci - because soon it will be the "free low-budget 7D skateboard video software". This makes me mad, most of all, about the time I spent learning it.

That's how the advertising field sometimes works, and fashion is even worse. If all producers and agency creatives make reasoned decisions at artistic and technical levels, then why would there have been a market for PL mount adapters for DSLRs? Because the "5D look" was in for a few months back there, and the only way to shoot that "in" look, for some of them, was the expensive way. There are many exceptions - the people who rep me really know their stuff - and I've met brilliant agency creatives who could run circles around many experienced DPs, but these are exceptions. Most fields in production are not indy films where you see at distributor when you're done, and until then it's whatever works. In many fields of production, perception is unfortunately sometimes the only reality, and if you want to pay the rent, the fact that they "should" only care about talent doesn't matter.

This is not a thread about "they only come to us for our equipment" - for many years I made a great living as a DP/director and owned $0 equipment other than my light meter and a stills cam for location scouts. This is about the people who make gear (hardware or software) showing a modicum of respect for those who hand them over their money in the context of a BUSINESS investment. Buying gear is the business side of things, and making that investment has nothing whatsoever to do with how highly valued true art is or should be.

I find when you mention the fact that others, like BM, have been irresponsible in the same way, you are just looking for excuses for their bad behavior, and the fact that others behave badly makes the whole lot guilty, it doesn't excuse any of them.

The software industry does, not, on the whole, depreciate it's value (normally) the way the computer hardware industry does. Software normally goes down in small steps, or not at all. This is the first time I've seen a pro tool go from $250 000 to FREE in less than two years.

I don't expect everyone to be as stellar as Red - they seem to see their buyers a investors and partners in their company. I do expect reasonable behavior.

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

...MC6 and DV R8.2 running on Windows box will drive the price/performance curve up another notch ... Resolve Lite 8.2 on a Wintel machine will be hard to beat in terms of value ...
Neil

Can't wait!

@Rob - I guess all I'm trying to figure out is if there's a solution you or anyone else here can propose that doesn't include asking a manufacturer to NOT drop prices, and infact, RAISE THEM to maintain an aura of mystique (Tiffany's model perhaps?). If that's the only solution to the issue at hand (and I agree there's an issue at hand), then its a pretty odd solution to even consider, let alone pursue. I mean, a class action lawsuit against a manufacturer for DROPPING prices...? How does that even get argued in court?

I guess I just don't get the solution that seems to have been floated here (if I'm understanding the thread correctly). I get that there's a problem (perception, downward pressure on pricing, disappearing business models, image-driven and/or if-its-expensive-no-one-can-fire-us-for-choosing-it CYA producers etc). But the (seemingly) proposed solution baffles me.

EDIT: you have to understand my perspective is that of someone who saw the Hollywood Studios go from using expensive SGI boxes to clusters of inexpensive Windows NT workstations without batting an eyelid and delivered more and more stunning VFX work. No one ever mentioned wanting to pay SGI prices for the Win NT boxes.

[Doug Beatty]

There is a business point here that some of you do not get - but Jake does. In fact, yes, producers want high cost equipment - in my field, soon, I will not be able to sell doing jobs on DaVinci - because soon it will be the "free low-budget 7D skateboard video software". This makes me mad, most of all, about the time I spent learning it.


Maybe you could teach me? I am new to Resolve and would pay for tutoring sessions. Or better yet, maybe one of your friends that is being hurt the most by BMs decision could do it?

[Dave Blackham]

I had to deal with this kind of nonsense when I worked at BM 8 years back. There are some very simple principles here.

First, is the licence you bought still worth the money you paid for it? Pretty hard to argue that one. A year before you paid out your precious $1,000 it was selling for $850,000. You poor dear, you've been ripped off. Horrible, mean old BMD. :crying:

Second principle. Just because the producer's daughter gets the free licence doesn't mean she has any idea or talent for the job at hand. It's the oldest, tiredest old industry whinge that "soon anyone will have the gear I have and I'll never get a job". True - if you're a no talent, unprofessional bum - but if you are actually a talented, professional operator, charge for you and you'll get work. (not suggesting you are a no talent unprofessional bum ,merely saying relax, you'll still get work). The same old cry of the sky is falling went up when Final Cut Pro was released, when Mini DV came out, when Red entered the market. The only people to suffer are those who hide behind their lack of something real to offer by having the most gear. Flawed, elitist business model and glad to see the back of it.

Three, how can you complain that BM's decisions have destroyed the industry and will put people out of work when, as has been pointed out, hacked and pirated software costs nothing either. Most producers I know have Macs and PCs full of hacked and pirated software. Whilst they lack the will to spend money on software and gear, they also lack the will to learn how to use it or the time to actually complete the job. Sure, there are those that will elect to become one man bands and do it all themselves. This forum is full of such types (of which I am one) but most of us actually have a background as DP's or editors etc.

Don't trade on the gear you own or what you paid for it. Trade on your talent, professionalism and experience. The moment you start putting the price you paid for your gear on your rate card you open yourself up to getting slammed by the big post houses, who will always have more than you.

And, lets' do the math here. One percent of purchase price per day. So you paid $1,000 for a Resolve license. That's worth, let me see - $10 a day in rental. Over a 10 hour day thats... My hourly rate is $70. If I offer Resolve Lite I can only charge $69? Come on. Gimme a break.

Well said.

Some years ago in the world of Sd we purchased an odd ball color corrector, wasnt expensive but not cheap either, actually it had very good signal processing but it wasnt at that time a name in our city. The colorists were very good and before long we have cornered the local color correction market and other clients began to come to us from further afield. The point is we made it on skills not expensive named kit. Now you can make it on your skills, named kit whilst its also inexpensive. $950 is not expensive for the software in any ones book. The other components of the suite, monitoring computor and so on may cost a somewhat more but not the $850,000 than it once used to. Id like to think we get repeat work because we are good at what we do, not because we have expensive kit.

[Rob Ruffo]

If your livelihood depends solely on the tools you have and not on your talent then you are in the rental business. And even that needs talent. There's a point in there somewhere for Mr. Ruffo.

There is no point at all in that for me. Just because I invest money in gear, and expect some kind of reasonable ROI on that gear, does not mean I EVER talk about that to clients. Did you read my other posts? If you bought an Epic-M for 58K last week and this week they were free, would you say "That's cool, it's all about talent?" If you would, I'm glad I'm not your bank manager. this is 1K, not 58K (although it was 250K for many 2 years ago) but it's the same principle, and it's the principle that bothers me. Did any of you ever take any management courses!?

[Rob Ruffo]

Well said.

Some years ago in the world of Sd we purchased an odd ball color corrector, wasnt expensive but not cheap either, actually it had very good signal processing but it wasnt at that time a name in our city. The colorists were very good and before long we have cornered the local color correction market and other clients began to come to us from further afield. The point is we made it on skills not expensive named kit. Now you can make it on your skills, named kit whilst its also inexpensive. $950 is not expensive for the software in any ones book. The other components of the suite, monitoring computor and so on may cost a somewhat more but not the $850,000 than it once used to. Id like to think we get repeat work because we are good at what we do, not because we have expensive kit.

In New York, L.A., Montreal or Toronto, I can guarantee that would not have worked, not in the advertising world at any rate. Jake and I (and many BM users) work in a different world with different players than some of you guys.

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

Rob, the business model of giving something away for free is not new. Consider facebook. Consider google. If you think they are simply advertising driven, consider twitter. These companies are in it for the long term, and what they give away today for free, they are reaping benefits in many other ways - whether its data, patents, consumer base, distribution platform and on and on. Giving hardware away for free is not the same situation as software. Once built, software bits can be replicated at close to zero cost (disk space and download bandwidth may be the biggest cost). Can't say the same for hardware (such as the EPIC M).

[Rob Ruffo]

Can't wait!

@Rob - I guess all I'm trying to figure out is if there's a solution you or anyone else here can propose that doesn't include asking a manufacturer to NOT drop prices, and infact, RAISE THEM to maintain an aura of mystique (Tiffany's model perhaps?). If that's the only solution to the issue at hand (and I agree there's an issue at hand), then its a pretty odd solution to even consider, let alone pursue. I mean, a class action lawsuit against a manufacturer for DROPPING prices...? How does that even get argued in court?

I guess I just don't get the solution that seems to have been floated here (if I'm understanding the thread correctly). I get that there's a problem (perception, downward pressure on pricing, disappearing business models, image-driven and/or if-its-expensive-no-one-can-fire-us-for-choosing-it CYA producers etc). But the (seemingly) proposed solution baffles me.

EDIT: you have to understand my perspective is that of someone who saw the Hollywood Studios go from using expensive SGI boxes to clusters of inexpensive Windows NT workstations without batting an eyelid and delivered more and more stunning VFX work. No one ever mentioned wanting to pay SGI prices for the Win NT boxes.

Yeah, but those NT boxes were not running FREE software, they were (and are) running generally expensive apps - hardware is not software and does NOT usually follow Moore's law. I would have said nothing if they would have dropped their price by an incremental percentage. I think a solution is that BM refund those who want a refund and who bought recently.

[Rob Ruffo]

Rob, the business model of giving something away for free is not new. Consider facebook. Consider google. If you think they are simply advertising driven, consider twitter. These companies are in it for the long term, and what they give away today for free, they are reaping benefits in many other ways - whether its data, patents, consumer base, distribution platform and on and on. Giving hardware away for free is not the same situation as software. Once built, software bits can be replicated at close to zero cost (disk space and download bandwidth may be the biggest cost). Can't say the same for hardware (such as the EPIC M).

Facebook did not charge $1000 one day, and then nothing the next. I am mad because I feel BM burned people in many ways, including those developing for-pay apps. They hurt the business. I do not respect scrorched-earth business practices.

[Rob Ruffo]

Maybe you could teach me? I am new to Resolve and would pay for tutoring sessions. Or better yet, maybe one of your friends that is being hurt the most by BMs decision could do it?

PM me, I will refer you to them.

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

Relatively speaking, they were. Prices were slashed across the board even back then. In any case, today, free versions of softimage and (I believe) Maya are available.

Here's my guess as to why companies are doing this. Including RED with REDCINE X.

All these software packages require IMMENSE amount of time and effort investment by their operators to gain any degree of expertise in it. So even when BM gives DVR away for 'free', its not really free to the end operator who invests time and energy and training dollars into it. There is always a cost associated with it. Frankly, from 250K to 1K, it might as well have gone from 250K to 0K. No difference at all in my mind.

All of which is to say, I believe BM may be doing the RIGHT thing, and not the wrong thing as some folks seem to believe.

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

Facebook did not charge $1000 one day, and then nothing the next. I am mad because I feel BM burned people in many ways, including those developing for-pay apps. They hurt the business. I do not respect scrorched-earth business practices.

I appreciate the fact that this hurts a variety of parties. Just to state this, all of the companies I mentioned were highly disruptive and uprooted entire industries. Someone more knowledgeable can speak to the variety of businesses wiped out, but as always, like the phoenix rising, they also gave rise to a crop of NEW businesses and business models. I mean, I just purchased a 15K (RED) product over the web, never having even seen or touched it. They have enabled a huge pyschological mind shift in the consumer. I'm personally trying to decide if I invest my time and effort into Davinci, RCX, Smoke on the Mac, AE etc etc. The fact that Davinci has shown foresight, and aggressive resolve in being a survivor and a player, endears me to their software solution.

[paulherrin]

Immature, emotionally-biased complaining is not only extremely counter-productive, it's also (with all due respect) terribly aggravating, as you've already found that most people don't even want to try to understand what you're feeling. I understand you're upset. Any number of people would probably be at least a little peeved in your situation, and I'm not saying you shouldn't look into Resolving it. But seriously man, please check yourself and clear your mind. Getting a refund is not going to make you feel better. If it's not this it will be something else. Broaden your gaze to understand a world of different people and ideas and motivations, then you may perhaps realize, maybe it's not about feeling better. I'm right there with you, I get upset about the silliest of things. And I wish someone would set me straight from time to time. So that's what I'm doing, take it or leave it, but it's time to grow up. It's always time to grow up.

Now, if you want to make a legitimate plea... take a deep breath, and go look outside your window. There are millions of people out there working and struggling through extreme hardship, literally just barely saving themselves and their loved ones from starvation as the result of oppression. Look at this world for just a moment, and if you still think that you should spend more energy fighting this terrible wrong than what we'll call actual injustice, I'd only personally ask that you do so privately and respectfully with the company. You may find that more successful than rallying defiance. In any case, I advise you spend less energy on things that will profit you little, and invest more energy in those things of greater value.

[Peter Moretti]

...
The software industry does, not, on the whole, depreciate it's value (normally) the way the computer hardware industry does. Software normally goes down in small steps, or not at all. This is the first time I've seen a pro tool go from $250 000 to FREE in less than two years.

...

Rob, I understand that you're upset and that two weeks is very little time to be with Resolve before the Lite version comes out. If I were BMD, I'd give some type of coupon or giftcard to those who had just purchased the full version. But really, you have to admit that you are one of the last guys to arrive at the station and start screaming about the train having left. With DaVinci it left two years ago. That initial price drop to $1K is much more significant than going from $1K to $0.

And this is not only with Resolve. Look at Color Finesse being included free in CS5. As a pulgin, it costs $575 and as a standalone app $2K. But of course the most extreme example is with Avid. Media Composer, Symphony and DS have all plummeted in price. How would you like to be sitting on $100'sK of dedicated Avid hardware running DS and Symphony knowing that someone can plop down $2K on a computer and get better performance. Does this bode well for the future? IDK.

But this is not a new development and it's certainly not one that the software industry has immune to.

[Rob Ruffo]

Rob, I understand that you're upset and that two weeks is very little time to be with Resolve before the Lite version comes out. If I were BMD, I'd give some type of coupon or giftcard to those who had just purchased the full version. But really, you have to admit that you are one of the last guys to arrive at the station and start screaming about the train having left. With DaVinci it left two years ago. That initial price drop to $1K is much more significant than going from $1K to $0.

And this is not only with Resolve. Look at Color Finesse being included free in CS5. As a pulgin, it costs $575 and as a standalone app $2K. But of course the most extreme example is with Avid. Media Composer, Symphony and DS have all plummeted in price. How would you like to be sitting on $100'sK of dedicated Avid hardware running DS and Symphony knowing that someone can plop down $2K on a computer and get better performance. Does this bode well for the future? IDK.

But this is not a new development and it's certainly not one that the software industry has immune to.

Good points. I wasn't really complaining on my own behalf - we've spent more or many dooodads that proved less useful than hoped, and life goes on. I just hope people start realizing that there are counter-effects that hurt people (again, these people not really being me) when these things happen. A free-for-all where everything costs nothing has many serious, negative consequences. Some people who bought that Avid system and have children to feed and mortgages to pay, and maybe that is as important a consideration as skateboarding and wedding videomakers having access to the latest tech at no cost. That's all I'm saying.

[Rob Ruffo]

Immature, emotionally-biased complaining is not only extremely counter-productive, it's also (with all due respect) terribly aggravating, as you've already found that most people don't even want to try to understand what you're feeling. I understand you're upset. Any number of people would probably be at least a little peeved in your situation, and I'm not saying you shouldn't look into Resolving it. But seriously man, please check yourself and clear your mind. Getting a refund is not going to make you feel better. If it's not this it will be something else. Broaden your gaze to understand a world of different people and ideas and motivations, then you may perhaps realize, maybe it's not about feeling better. I'm right there with you, I get upset about the silliest of things. And I wish someone would set me straight from time to time. So that's what I'm doing, take it or leave it, but it's time to grow up. It's always time to grow up.

Now, if you want to make a legitimate plea... take a deep breath, and go look outside your window. There are millions of people out there working and struggling through extreme hardship, literally just barely saving themselves and their loved ones from starvation as the result of oppression. Look at this world for just a moment, and if you still think that you should spend more energy fighting this terrible wrong than what we'll call actual injustice, I'd only personally ask that you do so privately and respectfully with the company. You may find that more successful than rallying defiance. In any case, I advise you spend less energy on things that will profit you little, and invest more energy in those things of greater value.

I am not a foreign aid worker. I work in THIS business, and I try to speak out on behalf of my sisters and brothers in this business. There are many non-obvious motivations here n my part, including thanking Red for NOT being that way, and maybe not joining the herd in the current group think where everything should be as cheap as possible, non-obvious consequences be damned. Buying gear and software has to remain a good investment or else no one will do so anymore, and tech innovation will stop. I really don't want that to happen. It's not about my puny $1000, it's about stopping that from happening. I would gladly throw another $10 000 down the tubes to stop that from happening.

Red has put fire under the asses of other camera makers, and that's a great thing, but they didn't come out and try to destroy the entire high-end camera business as a viable business model. A healthy amount of fire is not a scorched earth amount - there's a difference. There is also a HUGE perceptual difference to clients between $1000 and free. If you don't understand that difference in markets like ads and high-end music video in major production cities then you simply do not have experience in that world. This is fine, but don't claim to know what it's like to work in that world, and many BM users do work in that world.

I speak up, also, because I find FinalCut X to be a horrible indication of a possible future, a future where there would be no high-end, nothing for those struggling at the bottom to hope for, just poverty and prosumer crap all around. I'm not a Marxist. I think everyone needs a top echelon to hope for, whether they reach it or not.

I'm not whining here. I'm trying to stand up for what I feel to be right.

[paulherrin]

Rob, I get where you are coming from. And a lot of ways I agree with you. What I don't agree with is the doomsday pity-party attitude and the slippery-slope logic. Adapt, change, evolve. The world does so despite our attempts otherwise. If you try to hold on to what you learned about business however long ago, you have not learned very much. And if you think I'm telling you that to belittle you, you've learned even less. For your benefit, and for the benefit of the friends you worry about, you would do well to listen to the wisdom of some of these guys, and seek a fair portion for yourself.

[Rob Ruffo]

Rob, I get where you are coming from. And a lot of ways I agree with you. What I don't agree with is the doomsday pity-party attitude and the slippery-slope logic. Adapt, change, evolve. The world does so despite our attempts otherwise. If you try to hold on to what you learned about business however long ago, you have not learned very much. And if you think I'm telling you that to belittle you, you've learned even less. For your benefit, and for the benefit of the friends you worry about, you would do well to listen to the wisdom of some of these guys, and seek a fair portion for yourself.

It won't be doomsday if we all speak up, only if we do nothing at all. I have found what I say on some forums to have had a trickle effect on certain things, surprisingly significant. I've started memes, and they have grown, they have improved certain situations. I don't see where I am asking for pity when I come out and say that $1000 means almost nothing to me. I know my business and my clients well, I make a really, really great living, but learn new things every day. There is much wisdom on this forum, but people talking about a fictional, wishful world where all that matters is art, or guys claiming that my and Jake's business environment should be just like theirs are not wise, they are simply naive (I'm not implying you here).

I also don't agree with a passive attitude. None of my heroes had a passive attitude. No one really admires a leaf in the wind. There is a fine line between "adapt, change evolve" and "bend over and take it".

[Shane Betts]

Rob, this whole discussion is bollocks. Instead of this crazy ranting about class actions to stop vendors from reducing prices (on the Red forum, no less) why don't you simply take a straw poll of your friends to see who wants to sell their Resolve dongles and offer them up here for sale on Reduser. I guarantee you you'll get a fair portion of your investment back (a lot of 4k shooters around here) - and will have lost less than the income not earned while you were on here complaining. Then download Lite and go back to work. Earn some money. Use the tools you have bought. Then come back and complain that Lite doesn't do all the things that the dongled version does and that, somehow, you've been ripped off. Again. Then go and buy an F35 and feel good about how much you've spent... Sheesh.

[paulherrin]

Not sure we're communicating well here because I pretty much agree with everything you're saying, though you're manner is coming across as arrogance.

Passive attitude is the one that sits and complains about a situation, rather than proactively seeking a mutually beneficial solution. Adapting, changing, and evolving require work. Real, active work that accepts and overcomes challenges. Passivity says "If (someone else) doesn't do (some thing), I ______." Sound familiar? Now go contribute to your own destiny, there's no reason for fuss about this stuff.

[Rob Ruffo]

Not sure we're communicating well here because I pretty much agree with everything you're saying, though you're manner is coming across as arrogance.

Passive attitude is the one that sits and complains about a situation, rather than proactively seeking a mutually beneficial solution. Adapting, changing, and evolving require work. Real, active work that accepts and overcomes challenges. Passivity says "If (someone else) doesn't do (some thing), I ______." Sound familiar? Now go contribute to your own destiny, there's no reason for fuss about this stuff.

Paul, I agree with what you say here - I didn't mean to sound arrogant, sorry about that. As for Shane, I have said many times my displeasure is not at all over me and my measly $1000. You really don't understand what I am trying to say at all, it's like you're responding to someone who is not me, but at this point I give up. I have to get back to work and will no longer respond to this forum, but it's been a fun debate abdgot people thinking - those are both good things, aren't they?

[Peter Moretti]

Good points. I wasn't really complaining on my own behalf - we've spent more or many dooodads that proved less useful than hoped, and life goes on. I just hope people start realizing that there are counter-effects that hurt people (again, these people not really being me) when these things happen. A free-for-all where everything costs nothing has many serious, negative consequences. Some people who bought that Avid system and have children to feed and mortgages to pay, and maybe that is as important a consideration as skateboarding and wedding videomakers having access to the latest tech at no cost. That's all I'm saying.

And I don't think that these points are insignificant either. There are repercussions not only to post houses but also people who work as developers and engineers. FWIU, the majority of Red Giant (makes Magic Bullet and Colorista) coding is now done in Asia. I believe Avid has also outsourced a lot of its development and has essentially stopped designing new hardware b/c it's just too darn expensive to design and make domestically.

Avid may have won a Pyhrric victory against FCP, as it cost them over $200 million in cash on hand, the company is still not turning a profit and they have laid off a lot of workers... most recently our own Michael Phillips.

If people think free doesn't have real some costs associated with it, they are drinking Kool-Aid. Do these costs outweigh the benefits, perhaps not, but they can't be brushed aside either--or made to seem like they don't exist.


Peace to all ;).

[paulherrin]

Paul, I agree with what you say here - I didn't mean to sound arrogant, sorry about that. As for Shane, I have said many times my displeasure is not at all over me and my measly $1000. You really don't understand what I am trying to say at all, it's like you're responding to someone who is not me, but at this point I give up. I have to get back to work and will no longer respond to this forum, but it's been a fun debate abdgot people thinking - those are both good things, aren't they?

good stuff, rob. no worries.

[Shane Betts]

Passive attitude is the one that sits and complains about a situation, rather than proactively seeking a mutually beneficial solution. Adapting, changing, and evolving require work. Real, active work that accepts and overcomes challenges. Passivity says "If (someone else) doesn't do (some thing), I ______." Sound familiar? Now go contribute to your own destiny, there's no reason for fuss about this stuff.

Nicely said Paul. Exactly.

Rob, I mean you no ill but, what Paul said.

[Rob Ruffo]

And I don't think that these points are insignificant either. There are repercussions not only to post houses but also people who work as developers and engineers. FWIU, the majority of Red Giant (makes Magic Bullet and Colorista) coding is now done in Asia. I believe Avid has also outsourced a lot of its development and has essentially stopped designing new hardware b/c it's just too darn expensive to design and make domestically.

Avid may have won a Pyhrric victory against FCP, as it cost them over $200 million in cash on hand, the company is still not turning a profit and they have laid off a lot of workers... most recently our own Michael Phillips.

If people think free doesn't have real some costs associated with it, they are drinking Kool-Aid. Do these costs outweigh the benefits, perhaps not, but they can't be brushed aside either--or made to seem like they don't exist.


Peace to all ;).

Exactly. And exactly why I am upset and started this thread. If you treat software buyers like idiots and chumps, there will be none as people will feel justified in piracy, , and more jobs will be lost.

To Paul: Someone like me who stirs the pot and brings up what nobody else much mentions has a purpose in society. I told banking friends that maybe lending McMansion buying cash to janitors was not such a good idea in 2008 and... Of course they all yelled at me at the time and told me I didn't get "the new way of doing business", that I had to adapt, that I too should buy some McMansions as investments or be left behind...

OK, now back to my deadline....

[Justin Barham]

As an aside to this whole debate, when you guys sell your BM hardware, can you let us know? Thanks!

(fyi, I'm not a colorist, aspiring or otherwise, so no threat there).

[Rob Ruffo]

As an aside to this whole debate, when you guys sell your BM hardware, can you let us know? Thanks!

(fyi, I'm not a colorist, aspiring or otherwise, so no threat there).

I'm not a colorist either - I am a DP/director learning more about color, with lots of colorist friends. I don't see other other DPs and directors as threats, I see them as respected colleagues. I only see as threats those who undermine all of our gear investments, and discourage tech innovation, through ludicrous devaluation.

[Marc Wielage]

We can say it's all about the art, but the reality is if producers have copies of DaVinci on their desktops for free, they are going to try and get their daughters to do it. This will not kill the high-end jobs, but it will reduce the total number of paying jobs by wiping out a huge chunk of the middle to low end, which will bring down even high-end rates, with so many colorists out of work, to the point where making a living at grading will become impossible for all but a select few.
Buying Final Cut Pro for $500 doesn't instantly make the client's daughter an editor. Buying Pro Tools Native won't make them a mixer, either.

The generally-accepted rule of thumb is that you need at least 5000 hours of experience to be an expert at anything (certainly anything as technical or complex as color-correction, editing, or mixing). To me, the free version of Resolve is no different than Apple cutting the price of Color from $5000 to free when they bundled it with FCP -- and there were quite a few people who had paid $5000 for it. Same thing with Shake.

Look at it this way: think of the big-time post houses out there who paid $700,000 for the Linux version of Resolve with the control surface, and then DaVinci went under and was absorbed into Blackmagic. And then Blackmagic cut the price to about 1/5th of that. It wasn't that long ago that the HD-only DaVinci 2K was about $700K, and you can't give those away today. And I can think of four or five companies that spent millions of dollars on them.

It's easy to say that the software does the work, but in reality, it's all about the person who does the job. Nothing can beat experience and knowledge. I also think that Blackmagic's control surface for Resolve makes a huge difference in terms of speed and efficiency. I suspect the real reason why they cut the price was mainly as a preemptive strike against rivals like Speedgrade (now owned by Adobe), not to hurt existing users. Strictly my theory. I like and use Blackmagic's products, but have no connection to them at all except as a user.

[jake blackstone]

I suspect the real reason why they cut the price was mainly as a preemptive strike against rivals like Scratch (now owned by Adobe),

I'm sure this news will be a big surprise to unsuspecting Assimilate, that now they are own by Adobe:-)

[Marc Wielage]

Whoops! Make that Speedgrade now owned by Adobe -- my bad.

[Thomas Mathai]

I am not a foreign aid worker. I work in THIS business, and I try to speak out on behalf of my sisters and brothers in this business. There are many non-obvious motivations here n my part, including thanking Red for NOT being that way, and maybe not joining the herd in the current group think where everything should be as cheap as possible, non-obvious consequences be damned. Buying gear and software has to remain a good investment or else no one will do so anymore, and tech innovation will stop. I really don't want that to happen. It's not about my puny $1000, it's about stopping that from happening. I would gladly throw another $10 000 down the tubes to stop that from happening.

Red has put fire under the asses of other camera makers, and that's a great thing, but they didn't come out and try to destroy the entire high-end camera business as a viable business model. A healthy amount of fire is not a scorched earth amount - there's a difference. There is also a HUGE perceptual difference to clients between $1000 and free. If you don't understand that difference in markets like ads and high-end music video in major production cities then you simply do not have experience in that world. This is fine, but don't claim to know what it's like to work in that world, and many BM users do work in that world.

I speak up, also, because I find FinalCut X to be a horrible indication of a possible future, a future where there would be no high-end, nothing for those struggling at the bottom to hope for, just poverty and prosumer crap all around. I'm not a Marxist. I think everyone needs a top echelon to hope for, whether they reach it or not.

I'm not whining here. I'm trying to stand up for what I feel to be right.


The true cost of a color grading system is more than $1,000.

It requires fast powerful hardware, reliable and fast storage, control surface, very good monitoring and calibration system, backup system in case of emergencies. I'm sure the colorists here can all add more to this.

Sure you may have the hardware and storage, and think you can work around some of the other requirements, but eventually if you take color grading seriously, you'll realize it's important to do it right, especially if clients are paying for it to be right.

Would you rather have no Resolve instead of free Resolve? BM saw a reason to buy DaVinci, and it's to help them sell more hardware, just like Apple. I find it to be more tragic when products die that should have lived on, like Shake, Commotion, Elastic Reality to name a few.

Look into the history of post, and you'll realize how much has changed, and had to change. Prices have been dropping for a long time. At the same time, it hasn't stopped people from buying hardware or stopped innovation. In fact check out the Adobe Max 2011 videos so you can see what new tech is coming our way in the future.

Price drops happen and you can't change that. At the same time some companies raise prices because they feel it's worth it.

[John Tissavary]

Black Magic Design is (mainly) a hardware company. The way I see it, they are selling a $30k set of panels with free, excellent software.

To get maximum (i.e. truly professional) functionality from Resolve, you need the panels. Color grading on a professional level is about a lot of different things, some of which were mentioned in this thread, but one major factor is speed. Without a fully functional set of panels, Resolve is not exactly the fastest & most intuitive interface. True, the Wave or MC Artist panels work with Resolve, but until you've used the dedicated panel set, you've not truly experienced what Resolve is about.

Add to that the $20-40k worth of workstation (3x-4x gpu, 600MB/s + Raid) you really need to be competitive on a broad level, you're talking $70k in just hardware. Now add furniture, professional monitoring, calibration equipment, etc..., and you're easily at $85k. That's a great deal better than it used to be, but the cost of software, in this context, is the least significant.

This is completely ignoring the fact that no matter how much a 'race to the bottom' we may be seeing right now, there is no substitute for competent, talented colorists who can provide a good client experience and finish their project within the creative, time, & budget constraints set forth. There are not a ton of people who can do this consistently, those that can will remain in demand.

Yes, there will always be downward pricing pressure, and during miserable economic times there will be shops that go out of business and talent that goes hungry, but things have a tendency to balance out in the long run. Clients getting lousy work back from colorists will eventually move on, no matter how cheap the crap work was done for. And there are quite a few jobs simply not worth taking, sometimes because the budget is too low, and other times because the people bringing the work are just not worth putting up with.

But let's face it: the industry, as a whole, is changing radically - there's no stopping it. The same disruptive spirit that brought us Illustrator, Photoshop (remember pre-press in the 70s & 80s, anyone?), FCP, Red, Scratch, DaVinci, etc... will continue to wreak havoc on old business models, and those that can 'ride the lightning' will benefit.

[Rob Ruffo]

Buying Final Cut Pro for $500 doesn't instantly make the client's daughter an editor. Buying Pro Tools Native won't make them a mixer, either.

The generally-accepted rule of thumb is that you need at least 5000 hours of experience to be an expert at anything (certainly anything as technical or complex as color-correction, editing, or mixing). To me, the free version of Resolve is no different than Apple cutting the price of Color from $5000 to free when they bundled it with FCP -- and there were quite a few people who had paid $5000 for it. Same thing with Shake.

Look at it this way: think of the big-time post houses out there who paid $700,000 for the Linux version of Resolve with the control surface, and then DaVinci went under and was absorbed into Blackmagic. And then Blackmagic cut the price to about 1/5th of that. It wasn't that long ago that the HD-only DaVinci 2K was about $700K, and you can't give those away today. And I can think of four or five companies that spent millions of dollars on them.

It's easy to say that the software does the work, but in reality, it's all about the person who does the job. Nothing can beat experience and knowledge. I also think that Blackmagic's control surface for Resolve makes a huge difference in terms of speed and efficiency. I suspect the real reason why they cut the price was mainly as a preemptive strike against rivals like Speedgrade (now owned by Adobe), not to hurt existing users. Strictly my theory. I like and use Blackmagic's products, but have no connection to them at all except as a user.

OK fine, I couldn't agree more, as I have said many times here. But, again, where;s my incentive to buy anything and support SOFTWARE innovation when the market is so chaotic, without rhyme or reason. Moore's law is one thing, but this is downright lawlessness, and in lawless places no one prospers or builds a business. I don't see why this has become an art vs equipment thread. I never said equipment was more important than the people using it. I agree, you agree, we get that,. Still doesn't justify Resolve flushing the perceived value of their software down to $0, and thus burning anyone who bought it recently (I said RECENTLY - so those saying they bought it last year and paid it off, well that's a different story) and destroying their competitors in a scorched earth, ungentlemanly way. It also still doesn't change the fact that, regardless of how you think producers should think, they DO NOT all agree, and they sign the checks.

[M Most]

OK fine, I couldn't agree more, as I have said many times here. But, again, where;s my incentive to buy anything and support SOFTWARE innovation when the market is so chaotic, without rhyme or reason...

I would think having work to do that might require the features of that software product would be a pretty good incentive. But that's just me.....

[Rob Ruffo]

I would think having work to do that might require the features of that software product would be a pretty good incentive. But that's just me.....

Of course, but often one job cannot cover expenses (in this case, at $1000 yes, when it was $250K no), so you try to plan for the future. There is also the more frequent situation that you buy something like software to learn it (or to try to). I would not buy software and use it right away on a deadline. Buying software is always a longer range plan.

[Martin Weiss]

While I can understand your frustration, this has really not a lot to do with RED and would be a better discussion at a more generic forum.