DaVinci Resolve vs Magic Bullet Looks

[lightcameraction]

So basically for everything ,including my short film which i'll finish soon im using the inbuild features + magic bullet looks to color correct and color grade .


Somebody actually told me about DaVinci Resolve Lite (sorry if im wrong about the name ) and I saw couple of demos, it looked really nice,but as I see there is a version that is free and one which is 1000 dollars and they actually say that they are the same ,but it doesn't have 2k , 4k etc . SO I guess if you're using Red for instance you have to get the 1k version ,but for someone like me ,who is using DSLR is it a good choice ?And is it better than color grading with Magic Bullet Looks for instance ?

I know the question is kinda silly but I have never used DaVinci Resolve Lite before and I think if I can improve the color grading for my short somehow it would be awesome..

So is anyone using it and what do you think ?

[PaulGriffith]

Resolve has a learning curve for sure, but it's incredibly more powerful than magic bullet. A lot of pros use resolve with the $29k control interface in Hollywood features and network TV.

The lite version is pretty powerful too. If you have the time and, well, resolve to learn it it's great.

Magic Bullet doesn't do anything after effects can't do on it's own AND takes a ludicrous amount of time to render. I'd avoid it.

[WalterB]

I read the Da Vinci needs to encode (most/a lot/some?) of the footage first to a larger filetype.
If that's the case and you have the time and diskspace: I see no problem.

I suggest to go test it.

I still have to go try it for myself.

[Danielassault]

Magic Bullet is a toy compared to DaVinci Resolve.

Magic Bullet:
-Very easy to use
-Even without proper CC knowledge you can give your videos a great boost

-You can't stack other effects on looks and see them in the looks-builder
-Slow render times
-Handles poorly compared to DaVinci

DaVinci:
-Amazing tools, such as mask-tracking and stabilizers
-More control over your image than Looks
-Control surface

-Takes time to learn how to properly use it
-If you're on PC, it still has some workflow issues with almost every codec.
-Expensive if you want anyone of the control surfaces

[lightcameraction]

I see that but why such an amazing software will be free ? That's something I don't understand.

[lightcameraction]

Also I saw some comments about the film resolution , and that If i want to improve it , i need to get the full version .


It is absolutely fine to render my footage out at 1080p full HD for Youtube in the free version right ?

[PaulGriffith]

Originally Posted by lightcameraction

I see that but why such an amazing software will be free ? That's something I don't understand.

Oh yeah, unless you're mastering for film transfer or theater distribution 1080p is great.

The reason it's free is sort of brilliant. It used to be such high end software that they didn't sell very many copies, and more importantly they didn't sell very many control surfaces. Considering hardware is their main business, making the software free encourages many, many more people to learn and adapt it to their workflow. That many more users means (hopefully) more hardware sales.

It works without the special control interface, but a practiced professional with the hardware will drastically increase his turnaround time.

[Danielassault]

Also, there is no grain-removal feature in the free version.

[jax_rox]

Originally Posted by lightcameraction

I see that but why such an amazing software will be free ? That's something I don't understand.

Avid used to offer a free version of the now discontinued Xpress Pro. It's kinda like a more feature filled demo. You build brand recognition, and loyalty as well as drive sales of your hardware surfaces.

Not only that but Blackmagic only bought out DaVinci in '09, and when you have most 16 transfers running through older DaVinci 2K's, and other high end films running through either Lustre or Baselight systems, offering a free version allows those professionals who are invested in Lustre and Baselight to sample and try DaVinci without the up-front costs. Then, if they liek it enough they can consider switching over