7 ms·

For all the potshots about AI, this update is huge even if you take away the AI features. They basically added lightroom to this release. There's some polish be

by bbatha 4mo ago

For all the potshots about AI, this update is huge even if you take away the AI features. They basically added lightroom to this release. There's some polish before you'd want to change your subscription, but its really tempting. It may be the best photo management/editor on linux. Yes, I know about darktable and rawtherapee and I stand by what I said. They also added a ton of motion graphics stuff which from the beta seem to be enough to undercut a lot of basic uses of after effects out. The later two features are in the free release as well!

cjonas 4mo ago
I made the switch from premier to resolve a few years ago and it feels like such a breath of fresh air. Being able to do the same with Lightroom would be amazing so can't wait to check this out. I've been using the free version and honestly never needed the pro features but I think I'll make the one time purchase today just to support a non-subscription based product of this caliber
deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
echelon 4mo ago
[flagged]
- VladVladikoff 4mo ago
  God I hope not. That’s depressing.
- CyberDildonics 4mo ago
  "AI makes real world obsolete." I think that's enough hacker news for today.
- Geezus_42 4mo ago
  Even more reason to check out.
- 13hunteo 4mo ago
  Why do you believe this? Are you expecting all media to become fully AI - sports, TV, movies, youtube?
  - add-sub-mul-div 4mo ago
    They've been spamming slop project submissions the last few months. But then again, who isn't?
- echoangle 4mo ago
  Aren’t the cameras they are making aimed at professional productions? Those are probably going to replaced last, the first thing will be (or are) TikTok clips shot on smartphones. I don’t think they’ll see a decline in cinema camera sales due to AI soon.
  - Forgeties79 4mo ago
    Yeah they don't make a single consumer grade product. Prosumer at its lowest, and even then they're way too technical for the uninitiated. No one is picking up a BMPCC and just shooting/posting online.
  - echelon 4mo ago
    > I don’t think they’ll see a decline in cinema camera sales due to AI soon. Happy to bet on this! Expensive glass and all of the processes around it takes more time, money, and resources than Seedance 2.0. And these models are only a few years old at this point.
    - echoangle 4mo ago
      > Expensive glass and all of the processes around it takes more time, money, and resources than Seedance 2.0. Sure, but the results will also seem better to a cinematographer. When do you expect the first movie with fully 3D-generated imagery (which would mean that a camera was actually replaced by AI) will be released? I can imagine it will happen at some point, but I don't see it soon.
- swatcoder 4mo ago
  > Most video is going to be AI in the near future That's like saying all fine art would be photography, all film would be CGI, or all music would be synthesized electronica. That's not how aesthetics seem to work. Artists will make more or less good use of generative AI in their work, and it will probably seep into most media in some way or another, effecting them, but arts mostly don't get replaced and AI doesn't really offer an exception to that history.
  - darkwater 4mo ago
    There will also be a longer or shorter period of time in which such technology will be abused by artists (because it's new) and at some point it will stabilize.
  - criddell 4mo ago
    > That's like saying all fine art would be photography Or is it like saying most portraits will be photographs rather than paintings? There are still a lot of portraits painted (maybe even as many as the pre-camera days), but by raw numbers most portraits are created by photographers.
  - echelon 4mo ago
    It's saying most art will be created with AI. Like saying most pictures will be made with digital cameras. Like saying most music will be captured and edited digitally. You guys have an anti-AI bug and it's eating you alive and blinding you to the future that is unfolding. It's toxic and you're all 100% wrong. Your hate makes it impossible to see all of the improvements. I've been a filmmaker for decades. This tech is the most amazing thing I've ever witnessed. And it's just getting started. Stop being old men yelling at clouds. If you don't like it, you can continue doing things the way you're used to.
    - vile_wretch 4mo ago
      It isn't like saying any of those things because they are referring to recording media and not to a pipe dream invented by tech bros to attract investors so that their deeply-in-the-red company can stay afloat a little while longer. AI can't create anything.
- BoredPositron 4mo ago
  You are only looking at your own consumption at the moment. There are a lot of problems that still need to be fixed especially with rope artifacting. The 4k most models taunt isn't equivalent to a real 4k image or video as well at the moment you need a quality factor of two to get the equivalent result of a shot image or video. Resolution does not indicate quality.
- AngryData 4mo ago
  I doubt it because I wouldn't waste my time watching it and I can't imagine all that many people today that don't already watch AI videos are going to suddenly change their mind and decide they like AI produced Hallmark movies.
- Sohcahtoa82 4mo ago
  No way. Even the frontier models running on insanely powerful hardware could only generate 15 second clips in low resolutions. And yeah, I saw some demos from Seedance 2.0, and they were awful. It's ridiculous how much people on Xitter were like "You can't even tell it's AI!" and I was like "It's trivial to tell it's AI" and could easily pick out all the markers. An individual screenshot could look good, but every time the camera angle changed, there would be a glaring inconsistency. You people are either blind, delusional, or outright insane. AI might be used for a quick clip, or used to enhance something recorded by a camera, but "most video" is definitely wrong.
- Forgeties79 4mo ago
  So live A/V is just dead now? Movies are dead? I really don't get where this take is coming from.
  - echelon 4mo ago
    > So live A/V is just dead now? I'm an indie filmmaker and I do community theater. We use gaussian splats for 3D filmmaking, and we're already using AI for background plates and VFX shots. Where this is going - your local community theater will be able to have Lord of the Rings / Gollum-style facial/body rigs that eventually work in real time, and actors will markerless mocap into super high fidelity fantasy and science fiction scenes. > Movies are dead? I really don't get where this take is coming from. Movies will never be more real and more personal. The folks at A24 are going to have Marvel powers with way better stories. Stop being so bearish. These are tools, and creative people will abuse the hell out of them to do wildly cool things.
    - Forgeties79 4mo ago
      I’m not bearish. I’m incredulous at their statements and agree with you. Take a second look at it. Good luck on your journey as a filmmaker (truly not being sarcastic), I’ve been in the industry for 15 years so we are colleagues here who can have a dialogue.
- t0bia_s 4mo ago
  For commercial use maybe. Not for documentary or personal use. Actually what ruins camera businesses are smartphones, not AI.
jackofalltrades 4mo ago
I was not aware that we could edit photos in DaVinci Resolve in Linux. Thank you for this info, I'll certainly give it a try!
- Hobadee 4mo ago
  You couldn't until this release. :-P
- dofm 4mo ago
  Output size is limited to 4K in the free version, I think. Which is not nothing (8MP or something, good for a reasonably large print) but it might make you question how much editing belongs inside Resolve.
  - Melatonic 4mo ago
    Seems odd to limit photo output also to "4K" resolution. Although I suppose if they did not someone could probably do workarounds like outputting an EXR sequence of an edited video file.
well_ackshually 4mo ago
Also, nobody would have complained about "content aware face fill", "AI" image edition tools have been standard for ten years in Photoshop
- embedding-shape 4mo ago
  I remember CS2 making big news with the "healing brush", that's like 20 years ago or something like that.
  - dofm 4mo ago
    That wasn’t an AI tool at all, though. Neither is pre-2023 content-aware fill, AFAIK. They are both PatchMatch (well the healing brush certainly is), which is a heroic bit of code. Entirely deterministic statistical algorithm. Not AI by really any definition (including back then)
    - embedding-shape 4mo ago
      In my mind, it's as much "AI" as "AI Slate ID" introduced in this release, which I guess was kind of the point of what GP said.
    - nandomrumber 4mo ago
      Probably not you, but on this very forum there are plenty who will argue that LLMs / AI are entirely deterministic and that given enough time, a chisel, and sufficient clay tablets, any AI output can be calculated by hand. I don’t know enough about anything to determine which opinion is correct. Is AI output not just matrix multiplication and a random seed?
      - dofm 4mo ago
        I don't disagree necessarily on the fundamentals; I am slowly catching up on what LLMs do and don't do but that sounds right to me. But what I would observe is that the healing brush does not have a random seed. It will always do the same thing if applied at the same pixel. (I am actually less sure if content-aware fill randomises; I always got the impression it did not) This makes it both incredibly powerful and occasionally frustrating. Because on the one hand, you can learn to apply your judgement to precisely control what it will do, and change the radius or position if you learn it is likely to fail, which becomes instinctive. I absolutely love using it to fix scratches in film scans; it's a quick, precise, controllable tool that can be used in a way that is amazingly convincing, and it ends up quite a "zen gardening" thing as a result. It'll sell you on the cheapest wacom pen once you know how efficient it can be. On the other hand there are situations where it simply cannot work the way you want because it will always find a pattern you don't want it to. (You can sometimes use the clone brush tool first, to manually break up the pattern that patchmatch will find)
altairprime 4mo ago
Is the Lightroom stuff the same as was discussed on HN a couple months ago? If so, then, see also 296 comments about the new photo mode: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47760529 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47760529
- bbatha 4mo ago
  It is. That was for the beta
thewebguyd 4mo ago
I run a photography biz on the side, and this is huge tbh. I already used Davinci to make a custom LUT, blended it with the Adobe camera standard profile to use in lightroom as a base for all my edits as Davinci's color tools are much better, and doing it this way just lets you get tones that you couldn't other wise get with Lighroom/ACR alone. This basically removes the need to have lightroom in there as a finishing step. The only downside is by now I've got a really solid ImagenAI profile based on the 30k photos I've fed it over time, and that obviously relies on a lightroom catalog, and is also capable of applying my LUT since I've made it a slider in LR. I hate adobe, but I'm not sure I could go back to not using Imagen as now I can turn around a full wedding gallery in about 2 days.
Forgeties79 4mo ago
>They also added a ton of motion graphics stuff which from the beta seem to be enough to undercut a lot of basic uses of after effects out. I moved my team to Resolve about 2.5 years ago and I can say with absolute confidence Fusion > AE. Resolve Studio is all you need, period. Lightroom is clearly better right now than their Photo editor but like all their other offerings (ehhh except fairlight lol still mediocre), it's only a matter of time
- httpsterio 4mo ago
  This has not been my experience. I have frequent crashes with Fusion that seem to be related to specific nodes. Checking my computers usage it doesn't seem like I'm running out of juice either. When it works, it's really nice and I'm sold on the node based workflows, but it's not all entirely roses. Resolve itself is excellent, Fairlight works just Ok and is still heaps better than Audition ever was. But Fusion I feel like hasn't seen enough love in the past few years. The whole Reactor setup for installing Fuses feels really broken and for the free users they disabled those entirely in version 19.1.
  - Forgeties79 4mo ago
    That’s interesting, our experience with fusion has been fantastic. But maybe you’re doing certain kind of work or more advanced work than we are
dheera 4mo ago
Is there any RAW processing software for Linux that works for DJI drone photos? I have a bunch of photos from a Mini 3 Pro and Mini 4 Pro -- 4 years' worth -- that I haven't published because I don't have a way to process them. No tools on Linux (RawTherapee, Darktable, RapidRAW) render their colors correctly no matter how you mess with the sliders, and all of the Github issue pages are dismissive of the problem. There is something fundamentally wrong about how Linux RAW libraries are reading DJI photos. Lightroom on a Mac tested on another computer renders them all correctly, but I don't own a Mac nor Lightroom.
- __mharrison__ 4mo ago
  Resolve runs on Linux. What am I missing?
  - bbatha 4mo ago
    Resolve unfortunately only supports a few brands of raw. Om systems is not supported for instance.
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
gglanzani 4mo ago
Laat time I checked, deleting an image on DaVinci didn’t delete on disk. That’s something I’m really missing
- alfirous 4mo ago
  If I remember correctly, Davinci is Non-linear editing which doesn't affect the original file. Unless you mean there's copy of original file somewhere on disk?
  - gglanzani 4mo ago
    I know, but what I miss is be able to delete in Davinci, and have the file disappear from disk :)
storus 4mo ago
Can you run batch processing with the same settings over a large sequence of images like in Lightroom as well? And/or make slight changes to some parameters at certain points of time like correcting light intensity during sunsets the transitions smooths when your hardware made a step change when capturing it?
- embedding-shape 4mo ago
  I haven't tried these new image features at all, nor do I know how well exposed it is in the scripting API in the new version, but Resolve does have a Scripting API I've used for batch processing (of videos) in the past, I'm guessing this gist will soon be updated for version 21 then you can take a peek there: https://gist.github.com/X-Raym/2f2bf453fc481b9cca624d7ca0e19de8 https://gist.github.com/X-Raym/2f2bf453fc481b9cca624d7ca0e19...
- bbatha 4mo ago
  You can. Davinci is more powerful for this too because you can copy the parts of the node tree. So you can have a base edit for exposure, white balance etc then apply your look as a copy paste on top of the clean part. In Lightroom and most photocentric workflows you get one prebaked pipeline.
sbarre 4mo ago
I haven't had a chance to look at the non-beta version but in the 21 Beta, the Photo page didn't support Lumix or Olympus raw formats, and I own two cameras: a Lumix and an Olympus. :-( I assumed they would add them later, I hope I'm right! edit: nope, still only supports Canon, Fuji, Nikon, Sony and iPhone ProRAW.
- omnimus 4mo ago
  They mentioned in notes the support will come. They support lumix videos.
  - sbarre 4mo ago
    Oh I missed that, thank you! That's good to know.. Yeah I've used previous Studio versions to edit videos from my camera without any trouble. I'm just excited to finally ditch my Adobe subscription ASAP. :-)
    - Melatonic 4mo ago
      Hope they add the Lumix support soon too!
      - sbarre 4mo ago
        So it seems RW2 support is in the non-beta version of 21, I spoke too soon. The docs page is incorrect, I was able to load my Lumix RAW files in no problem.
      - jackofalltrades 4mo ago
        RAW files from my Lumix S9 are working without problems with the latest free beta in Linux.
omnimus 4mo ago
It might be best editor on linux but running it on linux is not easy. You basically need pick correct hardware pick right distro. It might be pretty easy on the oficial rocky linux but on other distros good luck. Also no AMD support. I am pretty experienced linux user and i would have to buy new NVIDIA card and pray things work out. Sadly i found out it will be much cheaper to buy refurb mac mini. So now i have dedicated machine for editing video.
- omnimus 4mo ago
  I suspect main reason resolve supports linux is render farms with purposefully bought hw.
- riidom 4mo ago
  There install script is quite aggressive as well. Well at least around ~v16 it was.
BuildTheRobots 4mo ago
> ...before you'd want to change your subscription... For anyone not in the know, Resolve has an exceptionally capable and feature rich free version. A lot of the AI features (and >4k editing) are locked to the Studio licence which is a one-time payment, but works simultaneously on two computers (including different OS's) and allows upgrades across major versions. I spent less than $300 on it a decade ago and my licence works fine on new v21 released this week. My least-regretted software purchase in 3 decades.
- switchbak 4mo ago
  I was a lightroom user for almost 20 years, and their licensing ridiculousness was enough for me to: - change up my workflow, avoiding raw so I can use simpler editing processes - do way less editing - take way fewer photos It sucks, but I just can't justify their insane pricing scheme. I've been looking for Linux-capable tools for a while, and Darktable / Rawtherapee are a long way from what I'm after. What you describe sounds like a dream.
  - lofaszvanitt 4mo ago
    Lightroom is terrible, was terrible. Use Capture One.
  - qmr 4mo ago
    Absurd to let them affect you so. There are powerful alternatives many of them open source.
    - lofaszvanitt 4mo ago
      All of the open source alternatives are a mountain of shit. Hard to use, shit ui/ux experience. End of story.
      - switchbak 4mo ago
        This is what I've found, sadly. But there's always folks like Arainach in the sibling thread that'll chew you up if you dare complain about the usability of anything OSS. This is the new version of "GIMP is better than Photoshop", it seems.
andrei_says_ 4mo ago
I have both the latest Lightroom and Davinci Resolve. Recently I edited a few images requiring removing extra people from the frame and I was able to do all editing in Lightroom, in seconds. As much as I dislike Adobe, Lightroom’s shortcuts and flow are now habits. I will likely continue using both.
- vjvjvjvjghv 4mo ago
  I have tried most RAW editors and as a total package Lightroom always came out on top for me. The AI masking is a huge improvement.
  - Daub 4mo ago
    I believe that DaVinci’s edge is the excellent masking and node based editing it offers (via the color page) and the insanely powerful hue tools. Neither Lightroom nor Potatoshop has effective hue tools - e.g. selectively change the hue or the saturation of a color except in the most primitive way.
    - Auracle 4mo ago
      Capture One, however, does.
      - Daub 4mo ago
        Thanks for pointing that out. You are indeed correct. However, from what I can see DaVinci's tools still have the edge. With Capture One the feedback on what hues have been selected is far vaguer than I would like. Moreover, the node-based workflow is far more suitable for complex adjustments. Repeating a point I made in another comment: in DV it is possible to edit hue to hue, hue to saturation, hue to luminesce, luminesce to saturation, saturation to saturation and saturation to luminesce. There is also the amazing chroma warp, using which near arbitrary color adjustments can be made. Nothing out there comes even close to that capability. No wonder most Hollywood movies are color graded in DV.
mistic92 4mo ago
Unfortunately they are far from Lightroom, maybe next year they'll be closer. I really would like to ditch Lightroom but there is no alternative
- qmr 4mo ago
  Ridiculous. Darktable and rawtherapee off the top of my head. There are many others.
  - vjvjvjvjghv 4mo ago
    I tried to like Darktable but even after more than a year I couldn’t get the hang of it. It almost killed the hobby for me. Lightroom just works for me.
    - patrakov 4mo ago
      I suggest that you try https://artraweditor.github.io/ https://artraweditor.github.io/ as an alternative.
  - t0bia_s 4mo ago
    None of those have reliable selective tool. Unpractical to use professionally.
    - patrakov 4mo ago
      Darktable 5.6 will have AI masks. Anyway, I tried them, and found that, after you master the "a few rough brush strokes + adjust feathering and mask opacity until it snaps" and "overzealous brush + parametric mask" techniques taught in any Darktable course, for wildlife photo editing, AI doesn't bring much. And yes, this does require a course to break the "perfect mask is required" mindset. Yes, Lightroom courses will brainwash you that AI "select subject, select sky, select object" workflow is the only modern way to do selective editing, but this is the Lightroom workflow. For Lightroom, it is a natural workflow, because it is, in Lightroom, the best strategy that can create a mask that aligns well with the object edges - until it doesn't. Other editors (such as ART and Darktable) have other idiomatic workflows for masking, and they work, because they have other tools than Lightroom for snapping the mask or refining it. Bird feathers spread out on the tips of their wings are one particularly bad example where AI struggles, but non-AI tools don't.
Daub 4mo ago
Agreed that the photo editing features are killer. AFAIK no other photo editing app allows the user to selectively desaturate a hue and its ability to adjust scoring to restricted lightness range is world class.
- larusso 4mo ago
  Lightroom maps support color range and luminance range. Can you explain what the difference is?
  - Daub 4mo ago
    Are you referring to Lightroom's masking capability? Indeed, even in Photoshop it is possible to select a color and perform a masked adjustment. Lightroom's selection/masking tools are pretty good and for basic tasks it is fine, but the masking workflow is (IMHO) fundamentally limited. DaVinci's nodes can be stacked on top of each other and the per-hue adjustments are live. Also... I gotta say that the visualization the DV's tools offer is far superior. At a glance I can see the range of hue that have been selected as well as the degree of change they are being subject to. FYI, In DV it is possible to edit hue to hue, hue to saturation, hue to luminesce, luminesce to saturation, saturation to saturation and saturation to luminesce. There is also the amazing chroma warp, using which near arbitrary color adjustments can be made. Nothing out there comes even close to that capability. No wonder most Hollywood movies are color graded in DV.
    - larusso 4mo ago
      Stacked you mean each node works on the input from another nodes output? So I could add a node to make green blue and another node to make blue green again? Because Lightroom mask only work on the base adjustment. Sounds good if I got this right. I wanted to play around with it anyways.
      - BOOSTERHIDROGEN 4mo ago
        Yes it work like that.
RobotToaster 4mo ago
At least some of the motion graphics stuff (Krokodove) was part of reactor, an open source community plugin that BMD added a paywall to use. https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1hf5lk6/reactor_is_hidden_beehhind_paywall_after_updating/ https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1hf5lk6/rea...

by bbatha 4mo ago

cjonas 4mo ago

I made the switch from premier to resolve a few years ago and it feels like such a breath of fresh air. Being able to do the same with Lightroom would be amazing so can't wait to check this out. I've been using the free version and honestly never needed the pro features but I think I'll make the one time purchase today just to support a non-subscription based product of this caliber

deleted 4mo ago

[deleted]

echelon 4mo ago

[flagged]

VladVladikoff 4mo ago
God I hope not. That’s depressing.
CyberDildonics 4mo ago
"AI makes real world obsolete." I think that's enough hacker news for today.
Geezus_42 4mo ago
Even more reason to check out.
13hunteo 4mo ago
Why do you believe this? Are you expecting all media to become fully AI - sports, TV, movies, youtube?
- add-sub-mul-div 4mo ago
  They've been spamming slop project submissions the last few months. But then again, who isn't?
echoangle 4mo ago
Aren’t the cameras they are making aimed at professional productions? Those are probably going to replaced last, the first thing will be (or are) TikTok clips shot on smartphones. I don’t think they’ll see a decline in cinema camera sales due to AI soon.
- Forgeties79 4mo ago
  Yeah they don't make a single consumer grade product. Prosumer at its lowest, and even then they're way too technical for the uninitiated. No one is picking up a BMPCC and just shooting/posting online.
- echelon 4mo ago
  > I don’t think they’ll see a decline in cinema camera sales due to AI soon. Happy to bet on this! Expensive glass and all of the processes around it takes more time, money, and resources than Seedance 2.0. And these models are only a few years old at this point.
  - echoangle 4mo ago
    > Expensive glass and all of the processes around it takes more time, money, and resources than Seedance 2.0. Sure, but the results will also seem better to a cinematographer. When do you expect the first movie with fully 3D-generated imagery (which would mean that a camera was actually replaced by AI) will be released? I can imagine it will happen at some point, but I don't see it soon.
swatcoder 4mo ago
> Most video is going to be AI in the near future That's like saying all fine art would be photography, all film would be CGI, or all music would be synthesized electronica. That's not how aesthetics seem to work. Artists will make more or less good use of generative AI in their work, and it will probably seep into most media in some way or another, effecting them, but arts mostly don't get replaced and AI doesn't really offer an exception to that history.
- darkwater 4mo ago
  There will also be a longer or shorter period of time in which such technology will be abused by artists (because it's new) and at some point it will stabilize.
- criddell 4mo ago
  > That's like saying all fine art would be photography Or is it like saying most portraits will be photographs rather than paintings? There are still a lot of portraits painted (maybe even as many as the pre-camera days), but by raw numbers most portraits are created by photographers.
- echelon 4mo ago
  It's saying most art will be created with AI. Like saying most pictures will be made with digital cameras. Like saying most music will be captured and edited digitally. You guys have an anti-AI bug and it's eating you alive and blinding you to the future that is unfolding. It's toxic and you're all 100% wrong. Your hate makes it impossible to see all of the improvements. I've been a filmmaker for decades. This tech is the most amazing thing I've ever witnessed. And it's just getting started. Stop being old men yelling at clouds. If you don't like it, you can continue doing things the way you're used to.
  - vile_wretch 4mo ago
    It isn't like saying any of those things because they are referring to recording media and not to a pipe dream invented by tech bros to attract investors so that their deeply-in-the-red company can stay afloat a little while longer. AI can't create anything.
BoredPositron 4mo ago
You are only looking at your own consumption at the moment. There are a lot of problems that still need to be fixed especially with rope artifacting. The 4k most models taunt isn't equivalent to a real 4k image or video as well at the moment you need a quality factor of two to get the equivalent result of a shot image or video. Resolution does not indicate quality.
AngryData 4mo ago
I doubt it because I wouldn't waste my time watching it and I can't imagine all that many people today that don't already watch AI videos are going to suddenly change their mind and decide they like AI produced Hallmark movies.
Sohcahtoa82 4mo ago
No way. Even the frontier models running on insanely powerful hardware could only generate 15 second clips in low resolutions. And yeah, I saw some demos from Seedance 2.0, and they were awful. It's ridiculous how much people on Xitter were like "You can't even tell it's AI!" and I was like "It's trivial to tell it's AI" and could easily pick out all the markers. An individual screenshot could look good, but every time the camera angle changed, there would be a glaring inconsistency. You people are either blind, delusional, or outright insane. AI might be used for a quick clip, or used to enhance something recorded by a camera, but "most video" is definitely wrong.
Forgeties79 4mo ago
So live A/V is just dead now? Movies are dead? I really don't get where this take is coming from.
- echelon 4mo ago
  > So live A/V is just dead now? I'm an indie filmmaker and I do community theater. We use gaussian splats for 3D filmmaking, and we're already using AI for background plates and VFX shots. Where this is going - your local community theater will be able to have Lord of the Rings / Gollum-style facial/body rigs that eventually work in real time, and actors will markerless mocap into super high fidelity fantasy and science fiction scenes. > Movies are dead? I really don't get where this take is coming from. Movies will never be more real and more personal. The folks at A24 are going to have Marvel powers with way better stories. Stop being so bearish. These are tools, and creative people will abuse the hell out of them to do wildly cool things.
  - Forgeties79 4mo ago
    I’m not bearish. I’m incredulous at their statements and agree with you. Take a second look at it. Good luck on your journey as a filmmaker (truly not being sarcastic), I’ve been in the industry for 15 years so we are colleagues here who can have a dialogue.
t0bia_s 4mo ago
For commercial use maybe. Not for documentary or personal use. Actually what ruins camera businesses are smartphones, not AI.

jackofalltrades 4mo ago

I was not aware that we could edit photos in DaVinci Resolve in Linux. Thank you for this info, I'll certainly give it a try!

Hobadee 4mo ago
You couldn't until this release. :-P
dofm 4mo ago
Output size is limited to 4K in the free version, I think. Which is not nothing (8MP or something, good for a reasonably large print) but it might make you question how much editing belongs inside Resolve.
- Melatonic 4mo ago
  Seems odd to limit photo output also to "4K" resolution. Although I suppose if they did not someone could probably do workarounds like outputting an EXR sequence of an edited video file.

well_ackshually 4mo ago

Also, nobody would have complained about "content aware face fill", "AI" image edition tools have been standard for ten years in Photoshop

embedding-shape 4mo ago
I remember CS2 making big news with the "healing brush", that's like 20 years ago or something like that.
- dofm 4mo ago
  That wasn’t an AI tool at all, though. Neither is pre-2023 content-aware fill, AFAIK. They are both PatchMatch (well the healing brush certainly is), which is a heroic bit of code. Entirely deterministic statistical algorithm. Not AI by really any definition (including back then)
  - embedding-shape 4mo ago
    In my mind, it's as much "AI" as "AI Slate ID" introduced in this release, which I guess was kind of the point of what GP said.
  - nandomrumber 4mo ago
    Probably not you, but on this very forum there are plenty who will argue that LLMs / AI are entirely deterministic and that given enough time, a chisel, and sufficient clay tablets, any AI output can be calculated by hand. I don’t know enough about anything to determine which opinion is correct. Is AI output not just matrix multiplication and a random seed?
    - dofm 4mo ago
      I don't disagree necessarily on the fundamentals; I am slowly catching up on what LLMs do and don't do but that sounds right to me. But what I would observe is that the healing brush does not have a random seed. It will always do the same thing if applied at the same pixel. (I am actually less sure if content-aware fill randomises; I always got the impression it did not) This makes it both incredibly powerful and occasionally frustrating. Because on the one hand, you can learn to apply your judgement to precisely control what it will do, and change the radius or position if you learn it is likely to fail, which becomes instinctive. I absolutely love using it to fix scratches in film scans; it's a quick, precise, controllable tool that can be used in a way that is amazingly convincing, and it ends up quite a "zen gardening" thing as a result. It'll sell you on the cheapest wacom pen once you know how efficient it can be. On the other hand there are situations where it simply cannot work the way you want because it will always find a pattern you don't want it to. (You can sometimes use the clone brush tool first, to manually break up the pattern that patchmatch will find)

altairprime 4mo ago

Is the Lightroom stuff the same as was discussed on HN a couple months ago? If so, then, see also 296 comments about the new photo mode: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47760529 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47760529

bbatha 4mo ago
It is. That was for the beta

thewebguyd 4mo ago

I run a photography biz on the side, and this is huge tbh. I already used Davinci to make a custom LUT, blended it with the Adobe camera standard profile to use in lightroom as a base for all my edits as Davinci's color tools are much better, and doing it this way just lets you get tones that you couldn't other wise get with Lighroom/ACR alone. This basically removes the need to have lightroom in there as a finishing step. The only downside is by now I've got a really solid ImagenAI profile based on the 30k photos I've fed it over time, and that obviously relies on a lightroom catalog, and is also capable of applying my LUT since I've made it a slider in LR. I hate adobe, but I'm not sure I could go back to not using Imagen as now I can turn around a full wedding gallery in about 2 days.

Forgeties79 4mo ago

>They also added a ton of motion graphics stuff which from the beta seem to be enough to undercut a lot of basic uses of after effects out. I moved my team to Resolve about 2.5 years ago and I can say with absolute confidence Fusion > AE. Resolve Studio is all you need, period. Lightroom is clearly better right now than their Photo editor but like all their other offerings (ehhh except fairlight lol still mediocre), it's only a matter of time

httpsterio 4mo ago
This has not been my experience. I have frequent crashes with Fusion that seem to be related to specific nodes. Checking my computers usage it doesn't seem like I'm running out of juice either. When it works, it's really nice and I'm sold on the node based workflows, but it's not all entirely roses. Resolve itself is excellent, Fairlight works just Ok and is still heaps better than Audition ever was. But Fusion I feel like hasn't seen enough love in the past few years. The whole Reactor setup for installing Fuses feels really broken and for the free users they disabled those entirely in version 19.1.
- Forgeties79 4mo ago
  That’s interesting, our experience with fusion has been fantastic. But maybe you’re doing certain kind of work or more advanced work than we are

dheera 4mo ago

Is there any RAW processing software for Linux that works for DJI drone photos? I have a bunch of photos from a Mini 3 Pro and Mini 4 Pro -- 4 years' worth -- that I haven't published because I don't have a way to process them. No tools on Linux (RawTherapee, Darktable, RapidRAW) render their colors correctly no matter how you mess with the sliders, and all of the Github issue pages are dismissive of the problem. There is something fundamentally wrong about how Linux RAW libraries are reading DJI photos. Lightroom on a Mac tested on another computer renders them all correctly, but I don't own a Mac nor Lightroom.

__mharrison__ 4mo ago
Resolve runs on Linux. What am I missing?
- bbatha 4mo ago
  Resolve unfortunately only supports a few brands of raw. Om systems is not supported for instance.
deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]

gglanzani 4mo ago

Laat time I checked, deleting an image on DaVinci didn’t delete on disk. That’s something I’m really missing

alfirous 4mo ago
If I remember correctly, Davinci is Non-linear editing which doesn't affect the original file. Unless you mean there's copy of original file somewhere on disk?
- gglanzani 4mo ago
  I know, but what I miss is be able to delete in Davinci, and have the file disappear from disk :)

storus 4mo ago

Can you run batch processing with the same settings over a large sequence of images like in Lightroom as well? And/or make slight changes to some parameters at certain points of time like correcting light intensity during sunsets the transitions smooths when your hardware made a step change when capturing it?

embedding-shape 4mo ago
I haven't tried these new image features at all, nor do I know how well exposed it is in the scripting API in the new version, but Resolve does have a Scripting API I've used for batch processing (of videos) in the past, I'm guessing this gist will soon be updated for version 21 then you can take a peek there: https://gist.github.com/X-Raym/2f2bf453fc481b9cca624d7ca0e19de8 https://gist.github.com/X-Raym/2f2bf453fc481b9cca624d7ca0e19...
bbatha 4mo ago
You can. Davinci is more powerful for this too because you can copy the parts of the node tree. So you can have a base edit for exposure, white balance etc then apply your look as a copy paste on top of the clean part. In Lightroom and most photocentric workflows you get one prebaked pipeline.

sbarre 4mo ago

I haven't had a chance to look at the non-beta version but in the 21 Beta, the Photo page didn't support Lumix or Olympus raw formats, and I own two cameras: a Lumix and an Olympus. :-( I assumed they would add them later, I hope I'm right! edit: nope, still only supports Canon, Fuji, Nikon, Sony and iPhone ProRAW.

omnimus 4mo ago
They mentioned in notes the support will come. They support lumix videos.
- sbarre 4mo ago
  Oh I missed that, thank you! That's good to know.. Yeah I've used previous Studio versions to edit videos from my camera without any trouble. I'm just excited to finally ditch my Adobe subscription ASAP. :-)
  - Melatonic 4mo ago
    Hope they add the Lumix support soon too!
    - sbarre 4mo ago
      So it seems RW2 support is in the non-beta version of 21, I spoke too soon. The docs page is incorrect, I was able to load my Lumix RAW files in no problem.
    - jackofalltrades 4mo ago
      RAW files from my Lumix S9 are working without problems with the latest free beta in Linux.

omnimus 4mo ago

It might be best editor on linux but running it on linux is not easy. You basically need pick correct hardware pick right distro. It might be pretty easy on the oficial rocky linux but on other distros good luck. Also no AMD support. I am pretty experienced linux user and i would have to buy new NVIDIA card and pray things work out. Sadly i found out it will be much cheaper to buy refurb mac mini. So now i have dedicated machine for editing video.

omnimus 4mo ago
I suspect main reason resolve supports linux is render farms with purposefully bought hw.
riidom 4mo ago
There install script is quite aggressive as well. Well at least around ~v16 it was.

BuildTheRobots 4mo ago

> ...before you'd want to change your subscription... For anyone not in the know, Resolve has an exceptionally capable and feature rich free version. A lot of the AI features (and >4k editing) are locked to the Studio licence which is a one-time payment, but works simultaneously on two computers (including different OS's) and allows upgrades across major versions. I spent less than $300 on it a decade ago and my licence works fine on new v21 released this week. My least-regretted software purchase in 3 decades.

switchbak 4mo ago
I was a lightroom user for almost 20 years, and their licensing ridiculousness was enough for me to: - change up my workflow, avoiding raw so I can use simpler editing processes - do way less editing - take way fewer photos It sucks, but I just can't justify their insane pricing scheme. I've been looking for Linux-capable tools for a while, and Darktable / Rawtherapee are a long way from what I'm after. What you describe sounds like a dream.
- lofaszvanitt 4mo ago
  Lightroom is terrible, was terrible. Use Capture One.
- qmr 4mo ago
  Absurd to let them affect you so. There are powerful alternatives many of them open source.
  - lofaszvanitt 4mo ago
    All of the open source alternatives are a mountain of shit. Hard to use, shit ui/ux experience. End of story.
    - switchbak 4mo ago
      This is what I've found, sadly. But there's always folks like Arainach in the sibling thread that'll chew you up if you dare complain about the usability of anything OSS. This is the new version of "GIMP is better than Photoshop", it seems.

andrei_says_ 4mo ago

I have both the latest Lightroom and Davinci Resolve. Recently I edited a few images requiring removing extra people from the frame and I was able to do all editing in Lightroom, in seconds. As much as I dislike Adobe, Lightroom’s shortcuts and flow are now habits. I will likely continue using both.

vjvjvjvjghv 4mo ago
I have tried most RAW editors and as a total package Lightroom always came out on top for me. The AI masking is a huge improvement.
- Daub 4mo ago
  I believe that DaVinci’s edge is the excellent masking and node based editing it offers (via the color page) and the insanely powerful hue tools. Neither Lightroom nor Potatoshop has effective hue tools - e.g. selectively change the hue or the saturation of a color except in the most primitive way.
  - Auracle 4mo ago
    Capture One, however, does.
    - Daub 4mo ago
      Thanks for pointing that out. You are indeed correct. However, from what I can see DaVinci's tools still have the edge. With Capture One the feedback on what hues have been selected is far vaguer than I would like. Moreover, the node-based workflow is far more suitable for complex adjustments. Repeating a point I made in another comment: in DV it is possible to edit hue to hue, hue to saturation, hue to luminesce, luminesce to saturation, saturation to saturation and saturation to luminesce. There is also the amazing chroma warp, using which near arbitrary color adjustments can be made. Nothing out there comes even close to that capability. No wonder most Hollywood movies are color graded in DV.

mistic92 4mo ago

Unfortunately they are far from Lightroom, maybe next year they'll be closer. I really would like to ditch Lightroom but there is no alternative

qmr 4mo ago
Ridiculous. Darktable and rawtherapee off the top of my head. There are many others.
- vjvjvjvjghv 4mo ago
  I tried to like Darktable but even after more than a year I couldn’t get the hang of it. It almost killed the hobby for me. Lightroom just works for me.
  - patrakov 4mo ago
    I suggest that you try https://artraweditor.github.io/ https://artraweditor.github.io/ as an alternative.
- t0bia_s 4mo ago
  None of those have reliable selective tool. Unpractical to use professionally.
  - patrakov 4mo ago
    Darktable 5.6 will have AI masks. Anyway, I tried them, and found that, after you master the "a few rough brush strokes + adjust feathering and mask opacity until it snaps" and "overzealous brush + parametric mask" techniques taught in any Darktable course, for wildlife photo editing, AI doesn't bring much. And yes, this does require a course to break the "perfect mask is required" mindset. Yes, Lightroom courses will brainwash you that AI "select subject, select sky, select object" workflow is the only modern way to do selective editing, but this is the Lightroom workflow. For Lightroom, it is a natural workflow, because it is, in Lightroom, the best strategy that can create a mask that aligns well with the object edges - until it doesn't. Other editors (such as ART and Darktable) have other idiomatic workflows for masking, and they work, because they have other tools than Lightroom for snapping the mask or refining it. Bird feathers spread out on the tips of their wings are one particularly bad example where AI struggles, but non-AI tools don't.

Daub 4mo ago

Agreed that the photo editing features are killer. AFAIK no other photo editing app allows the user to selectively desaturate a hue and its ability to adjust scoring to restricted lightness range is world class.

larusso 4mo ago
Lightroom maps support color range and luminance range. Can you explain what the difference is?
- Daub 4mo ago
  Are you referring to Lightroom's masking capability? Indeed, even in Photoshop it is possible to select a color and perform a masked adjustment. Lightroom's selection/masking tools are pretty good and for basic tasks it is fine, but the masking workflow is (IMHO) fundamentally limited. DaVinci's nodes can be stacked on top of each other and the per-hue adjustments are live. Also... I gotta say that the visualization the DV's tools offer is far superior. At a glance I can see the range of hue that have been selected as well as the degree of change they are being subject to. FYI, In DV it is possible to edit hue to hue, hue to saturation, hue to luminesce, luminesce to saturation, saturation to saturation and saturation to luminesce. There is also the amazing chroma warp, using which near arbitrary color adjustments can be made. Nothing out there comes even close to that capability. No wonder most Hollywood movies are color graded in DV.
  - larusso 4mo ago
    Stacked you mean each node works on the input from another nodes output? So I could add a node to make green blue and another node to make blue green again? Because Lightroom mask only work on the base adjustment. Sounds good if I got this right. I wanted to play around with it anyways.
    - BOOSTERHIDROGEN 4mo ago
      Yes it work like that.

RobotToaster 4mo ago

At least some of the motion graphics stuff (Krokodove) was part of reactor, an open source community plugin that BMD added a paywall to use. https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1hf5lk6/reactor_is_hidden_beehhind_paywall_after_updating/ https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1hf5lk6/rea...