Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - hateom

#1
Fair point @JADURCA. I didn't see noticeable difference in 1080p upload when adding unsharp mask and eventually I didn't use it in that version.
But for the sake of the test I probably should have.
I will try to re-upload 1080p videos with unsharp mask applied when I have a moment.
#2
I can't find the reference now, but I read somewhere that when the timeline is set to 4K the RAW material is debayered to 4K directly which results in slightly better quality than debayering in 1080p and upscaling for the render. There's not gonna be more details magically, but perhaps some sort of sharpening is added in the process or something like that. But sadly I haven't seen any samples or comparisons. Gotta test it out. Wasn't aware that the latest Resolve allows 4K timeline and render in free version!
#3
I think it's enough to set up the project to 4K in Resolve.
RAW footage will be debayered directly to 4K and non-RAW footage will be upscaled.
I cannot demonstrate it as I am using free version of Resolve (supports only 1080p).
#4
Upscaling 1080p to 4K vs uploading original 1080p. The former looks way better.
#5
Yes, h.264 compression will be applied only one in this case.
I didn't compare h.264 vs prores in 4K - I guess there will be a difference, but probably not that significant (will try to test it sometime soon).
#6
I know this topic comes back over and over but I decided to test it out once again as the compression algorithms on YouTube and Vimeo change from time to time.
Even the videos that are already uploaded get re-compressed occasionally.
In this post I present the current state of the compression results and I try to show if it's worth to upscale 1080p video to 4K (even just for 1080p playback).


Because the 4K video was rendered using 50bmps bitrate I wanted to see if there is any difference between 10bmps and 50mpbs of the 1080p video.
Here's 100% crop of the face details (click to zoom in):



The difference between 1080p in both YouTube and Vimeo is very small. Both services compress the image quite a bit and we can see a lot of artifacts in the background. Increasing the bitrate doesn't change anything – the video is re-encoded on the server anyway so there is no point in uploading a bigger file.
The last column with the 4K clips looks way better than 1080p versions. Let's have a closer look.

1080p playback

Below is the comparison of 1080p clip and 4K clip both played at 1080p at youtube:





We can clearly see that even for playback at 1080p the difference in quality and sharpness is huge. This is true for both Vimeo and YouTube.

You can read a bit more about the topic and the workflow on my blog here:
timeinpixels.com/2016/07/upscaling-1080p-videos-youtube-vimeo/

Hope this helps someone! Let me know what you think.
#7
One thing to note that I missed in my original post is that this will work so fast only when you have a GPU that works with Resolve (CUDA or OpenCL).
#8
Raw Video / Re: Dead pixel shows only in Resolve
September 02, 2015, 01:39:03 PM
I noticed that ACR/Lightroom fixes some deadpixels by itself, so maybe some dng libraries do fix them automatically while DaVinci Resolve renders them directly. Just guessing.
#9
@Danne - it's supported in the free version too :) Now they changed naming convention "Davinci Resolve" is FREE, and paid version is called "Davinci Resolve Studio".

@mothaibaphoto - highlights were clipped in the camera, not caused by Resolve. They were clipped the same way in ACR, so this is not relevant.
#10
Hello guys,

I would like to share with you what I found out recently - DaVinci Resolve 12 supports CR2 (Canon RAW) natively, which means that you can import CR2 file sequences directly and use as regular media. Even if you are not shooting with Canon you can convert your pictures to DNG using a free tool from Adobe and it will work just fine too.

Whi this might be useful for you? The BIG reason is that Resolve utilizes the GPU heavily. As opposed to for example After Effects.
I ran a few tests in both AE and Resolve with a time-lapse sequence shot using Canon 5D Mark III. Here's what I got in the playback:

1. After Effects: 0.25 FPS
2. Davinci Resolve: 12 FPS!

48 times faster... I checked the CPU & GPU usage, and it's clear that AE is using only CPU for the playback and rendering, while Resolve uses GPU 100% of the time.
The difference is huge. If we apply smart caching in Resolve, after a few minutes of waiting we can get real-time playback and grade the footage smoothly having the RAW underneath all the time (in case we want to make some adjustments).



You can check my video and post about the above experiments here:
http://timeinpixels.com/2015/08/processing-time-lapses-with-resolve-12/

Let me know what you think and if this would be a useful workflow for you.
One last remark - Resolve is FREE!

#11
Hi guys, with the yesterday's premiere of DaVinci Resolve I have updated my article about caching, now with the latest version in mind:

All you need to know about Caching in DaVinci Resolve 12

#12
Thanks @dmilligan, that would be great!
#13
That's exactly what I did in order to remove AE from the equation. It's quite expensive, but at least makes my workflow a lot faster and smoother.
#14
The space is not a big issue - I can generate PROXY in ProRes Proxy format which is quite small, and after the roundtrip I can delete the files (they can be always rendered out of resolve again).
The big advantage of Resolve for me is speed. Rendering dng files from AE is sooo much slower. I used to generate proxy for dng files in AE, but when I discovered how fast it is in Resolve I never looked back. Also, I link to AE only when I really need to. I really try to keep my edit as light as possible, and doing that with small proxy files (that look much better than DNG opened directly in Premiere) works well for me.

Unfortunately editing in Resolve is not ideal, I would rather do everything there. Maybe in the future DaVinci releases it will be possible.
#15
If I understand correctly, when you have a 5min clip and you only need 3 seconds of it in the edit, you color correct & grade the whole clip and then you export it all to 4444. My point is that it adds processing, time and size to keep this media.

I wonder if there's an easy way to quickly replace proxies with graded clips without exporting the whole clips from Resolve but only the chunks from the edit.
#16
Thanks for your comment @andresharambour. Well, for me it wouldn't work because I grade quite extensively using masks, power windows, tracks etc. and I would need to do it to the whole clips before cutting. So the only way for me is to either cut directly in Resolve, or cut in Premiere and go back to Resolve to do the grading. And of course it's the best to grade using source (RAW) clips for the best quality possible.

But if all you do in Resolve is some exposure correction, LUT and general adjustments with no special "per clip" operations, your workflow is good enough.
#17
Hi guys,

I have just published a new post on my site describing how to properly do the roundtrip from Resolve to Premiere and back to Resolve using MLV files.
There are a few problems that we should be aware of and they can make the roundtrip a real mess.
I myself lost a few hours trying to fix a broken project - hopefully this article will help you avoid these :)

http://timeinpixels.com/2015/02/common-resolve-and-premiere-roundtrip-issues/



Steps described in the article:

1. Process MLV files with MLVFS
2. Generate Proxies with DaVinci Resolve (ISSUE #1)
3. Import proxies into Premiere
4. Do the EDIT (ISSUE #2)
5. Export the timeline to XML
6. Import the XML into Resolve, relink the footage to the RAW clips
7. Do the final grading
8. Export the graded clip
#18
Just wanted to let you know that I described the caching feature in DaVinci Resolve a bit more in a new post, so in case you are interested in getting the most out of it, here's the link:

http://tomasz.cc/2015/01/caching-secrets-davinci-resolve/

#19
There is a problem with Premiere Pro CC, but you can try Avid AAF export from Resolve, Premiere Pro CC is able to import this project type. Not the most convenient workflow though...
#20
I'm using Resolve more and more to colour correct and grade my ML RAW footage, and the more features I discover, the better the workflow gets for me.
I wrote small article describing how to improve the performance of Resolve allowing you to get realtime playback even with no proxy and OpenFX plugins applied (Neat Video, Film Convert, etc).

http://tomasz.cc/2014/12/improve-davinci-resolve-performance-3-steps/

It's nothing new, but when I have found these features it was a drastic change in my workflow.
Hope this helps you guys!
#21
Raw Video / Re: ML RAW reflections 5D3
November 12, 2014, 10:24:03 AM
Quote from: rainless on November 03, 2014, 12:47:20 AM
What are your plans for the future? Waiting on the 5D4 or are you going to go with one of these other options?

That's a good question. I was lucky to get the discounted BMPCC and giving up RAW now would be hard.
The perfect option would be Sony FS7, but it's just too expensive to me.
I don't see the future in the canon gear for the video work unfortunately.
For now I will wait and stick to my 5d3 and bmpcc. I have RAW on both if I want the quality, I have relatively good ISO on 5d and ProRes on pocket.
Buying GH4 or A7s wouldn't solve all my problems so I think I'm better off with renting whatever is needed for a specific project for now.

Quote from: DeafEyeJedi on November 04, 2014, 08:15:11 PM
Great work & read @hateom -- looking forward to your 3rd article on your blog!

Thanks man! Glad it was helpful for you. Hope to publish part 3 very soon.
#22
Raw Video / Re: ML RAW reflections 5D3
October 26, 2014, 10:08:42 PM
And for anyone interested, part II is here:
http://blog.tomasz.cc/2014/10/shooting-music-video-ml-raw-part-2/
#23
My issues (tested on Mavericks OS X, iMac & MacBook Pro):

1. Mouse cursor disappearing in the window region (fullscreen on and then off fixes the problem)
2. Open File Dialog opens in the background, and I need to move the main window to see it
3. Destination directory dialog opens in background as well, plus all the key actions go the the main window instead of the save dialog (cannot create new directory in it, etc)

Other than that I love this app. I use it extensively. Thanks for your efforts!
#24
Hey guys,

I've just posted a small test shot with 5D and bmpcc at the same time. Then I was trying to match them together as much as possible.
The end result isn't bad in my opinion.
I will post step by step guide soon with more examples soon.



Let me know what you think guys!

Cheers,
Tom
#25
Raw Video / Re: ML RAW reflections 5D3
September 26, 2014, 07:00:08 PM
I've just posted some more details on my blog: http://blog.tomasz.cc/2014/09/shooting-music-video-ml-raw-5d-mark-iii/