Why I didn't migrate to edit on DaVinci Resolve yet.

I've worked on Moviola, Steinbeck, Media100, Final Cut Pro, Avid, Premiere Pro, DaVinci and back to Premiere...

A little context: now that I have a small postproduction / editing house (around 10 employes) in São Paulo and Resolve is the obvious choice for color and we are having a good experience with Fairlight, the dream is to edit on Resolve and break the number one rule that locks the workflow that is: start postproduction only with the picture locked. Change this paradigma will be revolutionary for efficiency of the business. The colorist and sound editor will have less idle and lazy days and less rush and busy days. Balance.

So why back to Premiere?

Because I can't use Multicam and Multichannel Audio at the same time. Period.

When I say Multichannel Audio, I say the ability to choose which channels to use or delete and also the ability to make basic edits on this audio, like cut off bumps and clicks of one mic maintaining others.

It's great that you can keep all channels on an adaptative track of a Multicam clip to keep editing simpler, but you should be able to make edits on this multichannel track.

In other words, the feature I miss so much is open a multichannel adaptative track and edit the tracks inside it individually.

If this is possible, please tell me how because I can't figure out.

I think it is possible, I've had the same issue before... just writing from the road right now and don't quite remember how I did it, but I think I found a way in the end... maybe someone else can chime in?

For me the key is using multiple timelines. I start by setting up media on tracks in the order I want. Then highlight, right click, sync with audio etc. Duplicate timeline and call audio. Duplicate again and then convert to multicam clip. Bring this multicam clip into a new timeline of course called multicam. Now go back to the audio timeline, move audio tracks down one track and copy all the audio tracks. Then paste into the multicam timeline. Mute the multicam clip audio track and now all the individual audio tracks can be edited as you want. They will still all be in sync if done this way. My multicam is simple 3 cameras plus two external audio tracks from F3 and this is how I do it. In my case I do the audio edit first in Fairlight then do multicam edit and finally flatten so that I can pan crop zoom into the clips where needed as source in UHD and edit is HD. I actually use one more timeline for titles etc.

Using multiple timelines was the biggest change for me coming from EDIUS and Vegas

Here's the approach I use and recommend:

1. Create the Multicam using only camera clips.
2. Add the Multicam to a timeline.
3. Add the audio you want to hear under the Multicam and sync it up.
4. Disable the audio track of the Multicam.
5. Edit away...

Keeping the usable audio out of the Multicam makes things a lot easier down the line in Fairlight.

The difference Jim is my approach includes all the camera audio. I too of course mute the multicam audio because everything is there in the audio tracks below.

The difference Jim is my approach includes all the camera audio.

Mine can as well. You add whatever audio you want to hear in Step 3. If that includes all the camera tracks, so be it.

I've worked on Moviola, Steinbeck, Media100, Final Cut Pro, Avid, Premiere Pro, DaVinci and back to Premiere...

A little context: now that I have a small postproduction / editing house (around 10 employes) in São Paulo and Resolve is the obvious choice for color and we are having a good experience with Fairlight, the dream is to edit on Resolve and break the number one rule that locks the workflow that is: start postproduction only with the picture locked. Change this paradigma will be revolutionary for efficiency of the business. The colorist and sound editor will have less idle and lazy days and less rush and busy days. Balance.

So why back to Premiere?

Because I can't use Multicam and Multichannel Audio at the same time. Period.

When I say Multichannel Audio, I say the ability to choose which channels to use or delete and also the ability to make basic edits on this audio, like cut off bumps and clicks of one mic maintaining others.

It's great that you can keep all channels on an adaptative track of a Multicam clip to keep editing simpler, but you should be able to make edits on this multichannel track.

In other words, the feature I miss so much is open a multichannel adaptative track and edit the tracks inside it individually.

If this is possible, please tell me how because I can't figure out.

All of software in the world are just tool. Use it if it works for you. If Premiere has features you familiar with, use it. Simple.

So. Not. Simple.

Any program that’s even a bit complex has pros and cons. Premiere has lots of cons. Resolve addresses many of these but then introduces a whole new set of cons. So picking between them is not like picking between two tennis racquets.

The OP is simply saying that there’s one big con that keeps him away from Resolve Edit. Many people have mentioned this con. The hope is that BMD will address it given all this user feedback. Which is way more useful to Resolve users and BMD than people just silently going back to Premiere.

Here's the approach I use and recommend:

1. Create the Multicam using only camera clips.
2. Add the Multicam to a timeline.
3. Add the audio you want to hear under the Multicam and sync it up.
4. Disable the audio track of the Multicam.
5. Edit away...

Keeping the usable audio out of the Multicam makes things a lot easier down the line in Fairlight.

I think that's a very valid way of using multicam and picking the picture you want while listening to the audio you want. And then once you commit to the picture edit, go back to the sound and choose the specific sound/track sources for the final mix. We did this same kind of thing in the 1980s and 1990s as well, with film and the early non-linear systems.

I know for music videos, we'd frequently use the master music track to drive the whole project, and each individual angle would be given its own video track. And (through the miracle of creative editing), sometimes the editor would drop in a "grab" shot that had nothing to do with sync, but just happened (by chance) to work perfectly for the cut.

So. Not. Simple.

Any program that’s even a bit complex has pros and cons. Premiere has lots of cons. Resolve addresses many of these but then introduces a whole new set of cons. So picking between them is not like picking between two tennis racquets.

The OP is simply saying that there’s one big con that keeps him away from Resolve Edit. Many people have mentioned this con. The hope is that BMD will address it given all this user feedback. Which is way more useful to Resolve users and BMD than people just silently going back to Premiere.

Would be a complete re design of multicam. Yes I would like it to work like I was used to with EDIUS ( which I consider the best of all implementations of multicam. Using VA tracks audio switches with video like Resolve. But separating input to V and A tracks only video is switched and all audio tracks are left to edit separately.l All tracks are also visible so one can see the muted tracks all the time ) However moving from one NLE to another will always require some adaptions to take advantage of what is available. As I mentioned it took me a while to move away from using a single timeline to take advantage of using multiple timelines. The real advantage of Resolve is the ability to use multiple timelines and switch between pages all in sync. So it is not the best at multicam but it has so many other advantages it is worth adapting the multicam approach. I can do exactly what is being asked for, just takes a few steps to get there.

Here's the approach I use and recommend:

1. Create the Multicam using only camera clips.
2. Add the Multicam to a timeline.
3. Add the audio you want to hear under the Multicam and sync it up.
4. Disable the audio track of the Multicam.
5. Edit away...

Keeping the usable audio out of the Multicam makes things a lot easier down the line in Fairlight.

Thanks, but i really like to have all attached so I can use Match Frame to use another part of the clip, instead of keep switching timelines and searching again for the point I need.

Agree that there are enough advantages to using Resolve that it’s worth staying.

Don’t think I agree that the OP’s request requires a complete redesign of multicam.

Still think it’s totally reasonable to ask BMD to address these issues rather than just quietly living with a workflow that requires many extra steps.

Agreed Joe

Here's the approach I use and recommend:

1. Create the Multicam using only camera clips.
2. Add the Multicam to a timeline.
3. Add the audio you want to hear under the Multicam and sync it up.
4. Disable the audio track of the Multicam.
5. Edit away...

Keeping the usable audio out of the Multicam makes things a lot easier down the line in Fairlight.

Yep another vote for this system I do a lot of work with multicam interviews and this is the only logical workflow I find

Multicam in Resolve is a compound clip which is the source of the issue. Much like Vegas. My reason for saying a redesign. To get actions on all parameters multicam needs to be a different form of the timeline when editing just like EDIUS. Need to be able to direct the edit separately to video and audio as required. As a compound clip it has to be together in some way. For those that know EDIUS at the edit point the edit selection is active and the other tracks automatically muted but all are in full view all the time not buried in a single track. In EDIUS you can move to edit in a single tracks too if you want. You can even go back and change what is muted to get a different edit. Yes it would be great if Resolve would improve multicam as that is about all I do in Resolve too. But it is possible just different approaches. Each of the NLE`s have their strengths if you want to use only one then the things that are not so good have to be worked around. For a long time I edited in EDIUS, did colour corrections in Resolve and audio in Vegas!! Evenually took the time to learn multicam in Resolve and since moving to GH5 and GH6 with h264 and h265 files EDIUS did not cut it on my PC and moved completely to Resolve having also spent some time learning Fairlight. Still use EDIUS for interlaced edits.

Here's the approach I use and recommend:

1. Create the Multicam using only camera clips.
2. Add the Multicam to a timeline.
3. Add the audio you want to hear under the Multicam and sync it up.
4. Disable the audio track of the Multicam.
5. Edit away...

Keeping the usable audio out of the Multicam makes things a lot easier down the line in Fairlight.

Thanks, but i really like to have all attached so I can use Match Frame to use another part of the clip, instead of keep switching timelines and searching again for the point I need.

Not sure I understand what you mean here. This system does allow you to have everything attached, although I do it a little differently to Jim

1. Create a multi-cam of all the angles/cameras etc
2. right click that multi-cam and open as a timeline
3. arrange the video/audio within the timeline on separate layers, keeping or removing anything you do or don't want.
4. Insert the multi-cam into your main timeline
5. option + left click to select either the video or audio track
6. option + number keys to select the video or audio track you require

The above gives you full control over all of your content without having to switch timelines and search for anything

I see, Ron - that makes sense then as to why you advocate a redesign. I'd like to see some sort of enhancement to the way compound clips (incl. Multicam and nested timelines) handle audio so that proper patching and audio manipulation can be performed between the host timeline and the nested 'clip'.

Effectively EDIUS runs multicam in the mode Resolve calls " open in timeline " so you can see the multicam edit as it happens with edits being muted etc. The issue with EDIUS is audio. If clips are placed in VA tracks audio and video are cut together, if they are in separate V and A tracks only video is cut. Maybe the answer is for Resolve to do the same. Maybe the ability to exclude tracks from multicam actions.

i really like to have all attached so I can use Match Frame to use another part of the clip, instead of keep switching timelines and searching again for the point I need.

Not sure what you mean by that. Can you expand a bit?

i really like to have all attached so I can use Match Frame to use another part of the clip, instead of keep switching timelines and searching again for the point I need.

Not sure what you mean by that. Can you expand a bit?

I mean the command "Match Frame" - Keystroke "F". Which opens the any media in timeline in source monitor so you can use it again. If you need something after or before any shot, you can Mach Frame, mark in and out and and insert again in timeline. Much faster than "Find in Media Pool" and double click it. Any way, if the sync between Multicam Clip and multichannel audio is only in a timeline it's not possible to do that, unless if you use the timeline nested, as if it was a clip, but you lose all multicam capacity.

I don't like to switch timelines every time I need a new clip. Open from bins or match frame is a must for me as an editor.

So multicam is more than group clips, it remains attached as a clip that opens full synchronized on Match Frame and you can flatten to original media when needed. It's so convenient that I use all the time in Premiere Pro to sync audio and image, even if there are only one camera.

Got it.

For that scenario, I would just Copy/Paste the clips right in the timeline, bypass the Source Viewer.


Out of curiosity, what kind of projects are you working on where MC content gets reused?

Got it.

For that scenario, I would just Copy/Paste the clips right in the timeline, bypass the Source Viewer.


Out of curiosity, what kind of projects are you working on where MC content gets reused?

Mostly documentary features and series. Interviews usually made with 2 cameras.

Got it. Thanks.