Final Cut DaVinci Resolve vs 16?

Final Cut Pro X vs DaVinci Resolve 16. Requirements:
- 4K video 30 FPS H. 264 + 60fps 4K H. 265; before processing in Final Cut is converted to
ProRes 422.
- Installation with 2 cameras; 3 video layer 2-3 audio.
- Gluing, work with speed.
- Simple svetogor (Luty or manual).
Effects: stabilization, transition, 2D titles, mask tracking.
- Use 3-5 plugins (for effects).
- Play in real time without loss of quality, no brakes, developed MicroProse.
- Work without brakes (valid MicroProse, rare freezes.
- Rendering doesn't matter (within reason).
Machine: Macbook Pro Retina, 13 inch., mid 2014 Intel Core i7 2.2 GHz 4 cores 16 GB.
Comparison criteria:
1. Speed work (not render), optimization.
2. The simplicity and usability of the interface.
3. The quantity and quality of the plugins, effects, uniqueness, and most importantly, their availability (whether it is possible to download free of charge with torrent, and how difficult it is to do).
4. Capabilities of built-in functionality and the possibility of its razshireniya plugins, optimization, quality and diversity, the main thing - affordability (free).
THANK you!!!
April 7th 20 at 11:04
2 answers
April 7th 20 at 11:06
Works better on a Mac Final Cut.
Interface they are not much different. Resolve closer to the FC than to the Premiere interface.
About plug-ins to both prompt. The chances of finding something free is significantly higher in Resolve.
What about optimization? Saying that Final Cut, even on slower PCs, like Macbook 2015, draws relatively complex projects, using proxies of course. In this respect, with Resolve?
How are things with the plugins, effects under the Final Cut? Is it possible to find paid plugins and effects (titles, transitions, Luty) for free?
How, for example, of 300 of the most popular plugins can be found in the free access? 80%, 30%, or less than 5% ?
What is the variety of effects you can download for free (whether paid they to be alone initially or not), how is the quality of these effects?
Thank you! - Daisha_Kohler commented on April 7th 20 at 11:09
@Daisha_Kohler, optimization for the Mac in Final Cut is better by definition. Have Resolve the performance will be worse.
With the plugins and effects under FCX did not work, but under Mac is usually more expensive. As a rule, LUT-s are universal for all montages. But the titles and the transitions (finger to the sky, to be honest) it will be easier to find under a Resolve free, but under FCX's choice will be paid more. Accordingly, the greater the chance that some of them will flow away in the network.
The quality of paid effects tend to be higher. But will it find them in the question. - Dante_Bergstr commented on April 7th 20 at 11:12
April 7th 20 at 11:08
In the approach to work are two different things. Resolve nogova. It's like a step-by-step. How looks can be found in any introductory video. In both cases video need to work with proxy files. Even a very fast system, and even in the mounting codec will stutter at that resolution. With plugins it is difficult to judge, it is unknown what kind of need.
Resolve difficult to master, FCPX is close to the common paradigm NLE. Resolve just gaining market NLE, FCPX is already on a lot of that done. For small projects, subjectively this is the fastest and easiest option.

Find more questions by tags Apple Final CutVideo processing