Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
OpenShot is a video editor for Linux that aspires to be simple, powerful, and "the very best open source video editor." OpenShot 1.3, which was released on February 13, brings it a little closer to that goal. This release brings a theme for the UI, support for adding multiple clips, new 3D animations, and a wizard for uploading video directly to YouTube or Vimeo. It may be the best open source video editor, but only if one is willing to overlook some stability issues.
Video editing is an area where Linux has lagged somewhat behind Windows and Mac OS X. This isn't to say that Linux users have had no options for editing video on Linux, but the selection of tools is not as broad, nor in many cases as full-featured or well-polished. Mac users have tools like Apple's iMovie that are very easy to use — though inflexible and decidedly unfriendly to open formats like Ogg Theora. Professional and advanced amateur users have quite a few options on Mac and Windows, depending on what they'd like to achieve and how much they're willing to spend.
Linux, on the other hand, has just a handful of viable alternatives. There's Cinelerra and its offshoot Cinelerra-CV, which are very capable editors, but also extremely complex and likely to intimidate most hobbyists. Kdenlive is another effort for providing a free software alternative for video editing on Linux (as well as FreeBSD and Mac OS X), that's much easier to use than Cinelerra. It might be a bit more intimidating than, say, iMovie, but it's usable by mere mortals.
Another editor that aims to be intuitive, but full-featured, is PiTiVi (which was reviewed here in June 2009). This is an LGPLed effort sponsored in part by Collabora and developed around the GStreamer framework. It is relatively easy to use, and is currently the default video editor for Ubuntu. The development for PiTiVi seems somewhat slowish, and the developers seem to be struggling to find contributors.
There's also Kino, which does (or did) a fair job of balancing features and functionality — but its development seems to have slowed to a crawl if not entirely stopped. The last release came out in September of 2009.
Those are just a few of the standouts. You'll find quite a few video editors for Linux in various states of completion and competence, but the landscape is littered with half-baked editors that are not entirely suitable for "prime time" when it comes to usability or ability to produce professional-quality videos.
OpenShot is a relative newcomer. Development is led by Jonathan Thomas, a software and Web developer who had his first taste of Ubuntu Linux in 2008 and found no video editors he felt were easy, powerful, and stable. So Thomas started with Python, the Media Lovin' Toolkit, and set off to try to realize a easy, powerful, and stable editor with OpenShot.
Easy, Powerful, but Stable?
The 1.3 release of OpenShot is available for Ubuntu in a Personal Package Archive (PPA), so I installed it and started practicing with a handful of pictures, a few short movies shot with my phone, and an MP3 to provide a background track. The project is also on the AV Linux LiveDVD, but the 1.3 release is not yet included with the live DVD. There's also an installer for Fedora 11 through 13, but it's not clear if the packages will work with Fedora 14. Naturally, source is also available.
For background, I don't claim any great skill in the area of non-linear video editing beyond having pieced together a number of videos from conference interviews using Kino in 2006 and 2007. Many years ago, I spent about a year working for a small television station (KTVO) in Kirksville, Missouri — which included linear video editing for broadcast news using antiquated (even at the time) 3/4" U-Matic tape.
![[OpenShot interface]](https://static.lwn.net/images/2011/openshot-main-sm.png)
OpenShot has a very simple interface. The left-hand corner holds a set of tabs for files, transitions, effects, and a history tab. The files tab holds all the clips (pictures, video, and audio) used to create videos. Effects are filters to modify audio, still images, or video — this can be used to give a video clip a sepia tone, for example, or apply an echo effect to audio. The transitions are, as you'd expect, a way to provide transitions from one piece of video to another. OpenShot has everything from simple dissolve and clock transitions to more elaborate star wipes or fractals.
On the right-hand side OpenShot has a video preview, and the bottom part of the OpenShot window holds the timeline that shows clips that have been integrated into the working video from the project files organized by track and file, and a small selection of tools for manipulating clips.
OpenShot is particularly easy to get started with. Drop a few video clips, pictures, and/or sound files into the project files tab and start dragging them into the order you'd like in the clips pane. For very simple projects involving just a few clips and music, it's possible to whip something together in ten minutes even if you've never used OpenShot before.
The OpenShot 1.3 release features a new theme for the interface and uses the stock desktop icons. I haven't used OpenShot prior to the 1.3 release, but looking at screenshots of older releases, it does look like the new theme is an improvement.
But there's more than just a facelift for the project. This release is supposed to feature improved stability over previous releases of OpenShot, as well as auto saving. Using OpenShot 1.3 from the PPAs on Ubuntu 10.10 on a system with 4GB of RAM (and a Core 2 Duo processor), OpenShot was still a bit fragile. When I first started experimenting with OpenShot it crashed because I tried to apply the Resize tool (apparently meant for still clips) to a video. It also crashed when applying an effect to a video, but worked just fine on restart, and crashed a couple of times when exporting movies — though the export finished successfully before OpenShot simply stopped responding. OpenShot 1.3 may be more stable than prior releases, but it's certainly not bulletproof.
![[OpenShot export dialog]](https://static.lwn.net/images/2011/openshot-export-sm.png)
One usability enhancement in the 1.3 release is a simplified export dialog. This is a really intuitive dialog when using the Simple tab, but its Advanced tab exposes just about any option that one might want when exporting a project. On the Simple tab, you have the option of Blu-Ray, DVD, Device, or Web. Blu-Ray and DVD have several options that are reasonable for those formats, while Device has presets for Xbox 360, Apple TV, and Nokia nHD. The Web preset features options like Wikipedia (Ogg Theora), FlickrHD, and a few options for Vimeo and YouTube. The Advanced tab provides just about any option that most users would want. Certainly more than enough for the bulk of home users looking to edit family vacation videos or funny pet videos. It may not offer every option that professionals may want, but it's certainly a good start.
The 1.3 release also simplifies organizing and finding files. Since I was only juggling about 10 files at a time, I didn't really find it hard to keep track — but this would be a useful feature for more ambitious projects.
OpenShot 1.3 also adds an "Add to Timeline" feature for pulling in multiple files. For example, you can select a handful of still images, and use the Add to Timeline feature to pop it into the timeline at the precise start time you'd like, as well as setting transitions and/or fades between the clips. The tool also gives the option of re-arranging the order of the files, or just shuffling them if you'd prefer a random order. This would be a very nice tool for creating a video out of family photos.
There's very little that I miss about working with linear video editing equipment at KTVO, but I do miss the physical controls for working with video. The shuttle (dial) for moving back and forth through video frame by frame gives a lot more control than trying to use the mouse and a slider. It is a bit surprising, perhaps, but the scroll wheel doesn't work for single-stepping either. Thankfully, OpenShot has keyboard shortcuts for frame stepping, pausing, etc., that allow just as much control while editing (though they lack the feel).
One thing that OpenShot has done very well, that I missed in Kino, is create titles. Whether you need credits at the start and end of a video, or overlays (like captions) over a portion of the video, OpenShot makes it very easy to do. If you have Blender installed, OpenShot will let you create animated 3D titles. Unfortunately, Ubuntu 10.10 ships with Blender 2.49, while OpenShot 1.3 expects 2.56. Herein lies one of the strengths and weaknesses of open source video packages that I've encountered over the years — many video editing packages build on readily available libraries or supporting packages (like Blender), but tend to be fussy about versions. Getting all of the dependencies right is quite a headache for users who want to use the most recent releases. Waiting for downstream projects means being several months behind the curve — and given the amount of catching up that open source video editors have to do, is also undesirable. A feature like uploading to YouTube — which is new in OpenShot 1.3 — is expected in a commercial package.
For anyone who's going to be at the upcoming Southern California Linux Expo, Thomas will be providing an in-depth look at OpenShot covering basic video editing to advanced effects. There's also a comprehensive guide for those new to video editing or just new to OpenShot. Developers interested in becoming involved should see the Launchpad project and mailing list.
OpenShot 1.3 represents significant progress on the open source video editing front. While it has some work to do in terms of stability, its feature set is certainly at the "good enough" point for many users. OpenShot is worth a serious look by anyone who's interested in doing video editing on Linux.
Index entries for this article | |
---|---|
GuestArticles | Brockmeier, Joe |
Posted Feb 21, 2011 17:34 UTC (Mon)
by togga (guest, #53103)
[Link] (2 responses)
Linux, on the other hand, has just a handful of viable alternatives."
Yet you hear one studio after another persuing Linux:
Is there something lacking in this article?
Posted Feb 21, 2011 18:47 UTC (Mon)
by jzb (editor, #7867)
[Link] (1 responses)
You answered your own question, really. From what I understand inside the studios, they're not using the kind of open source tools that are available to professional videographers and certainly not to home users.
I have talked with one person who works in computer animation, and though I won't say this is how *all* studios work, the impression I get is that the bulk of tools are in-house stuff that is under constant development. It's not being released as FOSS in part because they don't want to, and in part because even if they were motivated to do so it would be difficult at best to replicate their build environment and keep up with their development.
Also, studios are using a lot of Linux for rendering - but that's not the same as editing.
If you can point to FOSS tools that have been missed here that are on-par with commercial tools - both in terms of ease of use and power/functionality, I'd love to hear about them.
Posted Feb 21, 2011 21:27 UTC (Mon)
by smoogen (subscriber, #97)
[Link]
High end commercial tools (which may work on Windows/Mac but aren't in the price ball park of iMovie :)).
In house developed software which is not going to be shared because its their secret sauce.
And you are correct, rendering is the main use of Linux farms versus editing.
Posted Feb 21, 2011 21:07 UTC (Mon)
by cantsin (guest, #4420)
[Link] (21 responses)
There are experienced writers in the FLOSS world, like Eugenia Loli-Queru, who are experienced video editors, too (and suffering under the same OS/platform dilemma, btw.). This article provides little more value than a hypothetical review of a programming language written by someone just learning programming - sorry, no offense to the author intended.
Posted Feb 21, 2011 21:16 UTC (Mon)
by cantsin (guest, #4420)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Feb 22, 2011 10:45 UTC (Tue)
by robert_s (subscriber, #42402)
[Link]
Blender.
Blender _constantly_ gets passed over when talking about video editors. Blender's internal video editor is very capable. The Elephants Dream, Big Buck Bunny and Sintel open short films were all, as far as I'm aware, edited and composited _entirely_ in Blender.
It may not be for grandmas editing together videos of the grandchildren, but it's not terribly difficult to use.
Posted Feb 21, 2011 21:22 UTC (Mon)
by jake (editor, #205)
[Link] (13 responses)
Hmm, that seems rather inaccurate, overall ... there are lots of folks out there who just want to put together a little video of their cat doing something amusing or their kid's school play. For those folks, who probably haven't used Final Cut or Vegas, describing the interface that way would be entirely useless. The review may not have much to offer the experienced video creator, but that doesn't seem to be the target of OpenShot either.
To me, the article seemed well-targeted for just the folks that the tool is targeted for ... it made me interested in trying it out, and i am a complete video novice ... could it be that the article just doesn't have value for *you*?
YMMV,
jake
Posted Feb 21, 2011 22:11 UTC (Mon)
by rvfh (guest, #31018)
[Link] (12 responses)
Thanks Zonker!
Posted Feb 21, 2011 22:15 UTC (Mon)
by cantsin (guest, #4420)
[Link] (8 responses)
Posted Feb 21, 2011 22:24 UTC (Mon)
by rvfh (guest, #31018)
[Link] (5 responses)
Probably not, but then, most of us use editors all the time to type code...
This being said, if you could have a go at Openshot and provide a deeper analysis (doesn't need to be very long), or even just your impressions as an expert, I am sure many people would appreciate. Plus it would increase further the value of LWN ;-)
Posted Feb 24, 2011 11:54 UTC (Thu)
by cantsin (guest, #4420)
[Link] (4 responses)
Besides, the article fails to mention a detail of crucial relevance for beginners, namely that OpenShot (just like most other Linux video editors) does not support proxy files, GPU acceleration or intermediate editing codecs. This means that editing HD video from your average camcorder, smartphone, recent digicam or Flip camera - typically 720p or 1080p video encoded in h264 - is virtually impossible, or at least not with real-time playback/preview in the editor. I am also suspicious that the many crashes the reviewer experienced may have resulted from trying to edit h264 video directly in the program. (Openshot will import such videos without a warning message, but that doesn't mean that they can be safely played and edited.) Editing anything but video from old PAL-/NTSC-resolution (SD) cameras such as MiniDV will be a problem, or can only be solved with expert workarounds.
Openshot has a nice, friendly GUI, but the underlying MLT engine was not built for today's requirements of HD video. Unfortunately, this is a problem because users will be easily tempted to make use of the real-time multitrack editing features, video effects etc., which all will not work reliably with the video of today's cameras. For beginners who want to painlessly perform some simple trims and cuts on their video files, I would strongly suggest avidemux as an alternative. (Since avidemux is not a real-time editor, the above problems do not occur.)
And unlike what was suggested in the article, (I hate to say that...) iMovie is a great, simple yet powerful and well-designed program, and finding some Mac running it might be a pragmatic solution for the time being. (Think of iMovie as the micro emacs or nvi of video editors.) Professional filmmakers edit in iMovie, one iMovie-edited film even won the Sundance festival.
Posted Feb 24, 2011 15:16 UTC (Thu)
by jzb (editor, #7867)
[Link]
Posted Feb 24, 2011 15:47 UTC (Thu)
by foom (subscriber, #14868)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Feb 24, 2011 15:49 UTC (Thu)
by Trelane (subscriber, #56877)
[Link]
EULA and patent terms FTW!
Posted Feb 24, 2011 19:55 UTC (Thu)
by cantsin (guest, #4420)
[Link]
A viable workaround for HD video, and OpenShot, is to first transcode to HDV (high definition MPEG-2) or to high quality MJPEG using for example the command line "ffmpeg -qmin 1.0 -qmax 1.0 -i <input_file> -vcodec mjpeg -acodec pcm_s16be <output_file.mov>". Both have comparatively moderate performance requirements. Still, working on a fast Dual Core or Quad Core machine under 64bit Linux is a good idea.
Otherwise, you could transcode your video to MPEG/MJPEG with very low bitrates (but the same resolution), edit, quit OpenShot, swap the files with high quality files that have identical file names, reopen OpenShot and render your edit. (This is what is called "proxy editing".
The only Linux video editor that internally supports editing proxies is the Sequencer of Blender. I confess that I have been too intimidated by Blender's interface to use it productively (although I have used Cinelerra quite a bit...) so, yes, my comments on Linux video editing might have a big blind spot.
Posted Feb 22, 2011 14:31 UTC (Tue)
by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784)
[Link]
Posted Feb 24, 2011 5:54 UTC (Thu)
by jzb (editor, #7867)
[Link]
Advanced users of *what* though? I appreciate what you're saying - and this review would be wholly inappropriate for a LWN-like publication for video editors. But the percentage of LWN readers who are also experienced video editors is, I believe, relatively small. Going into the finer points of the differences in the OpenShot interface vs Final Cut is probably not going to be very useful (or at least I imagined that it would not be) for folks who are very experienced users/developers of FOSS, but not very experienced with video editors - and certainly not proprietary ones.
I am rooting for the OpenShot folks and other FOSS video editor teams that may help boost the percentage of professional editors working on Linux, though...
Posted Feb 21, 2011 22:30 UTC (Mon)
by cantsin (guest, #4420)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Feb 28, 2011 8:10 UTC (Mon)
by frazier (guest, #3060)
[Link] (1 responses)
Kdenlive does get the job done, though. I launched a TV series last week on local cable (Boise, Idaho USA) + the web:
That show is all digital, with the video being pulled in from SD cards. Most of the show is three shots, consisting of a main shot and two picture-in-picture shots on the right side. Kdenlive does the composites nicely, but when I load up a saved project, it forgets the track assignments for composites and I have to assign them again! That's probably the second most annoying part of the video process for me. With my Qwest DSL connection, sending 15 minutes of 1080p (30fps) to YouTube takes about 6 hours. That's the biggest annoyance, and more hardware or software won't fix that. They have faster accounts, but I just upload overnight instead
Posted Jun 28, 2011 6:21 UTC (Tue)
by frazier (guest, #3060)
[Link]
I'm editing 1080p video. It (mostly) holds up. The 0.8 designation is reasonably accurate. I'm running low production weekly shows off this software (but they're 1080p... ...I understand the contrast) and it works. With the 0.8 series it works well enough. I was about to kick Kdenlive to the curb with the 0.7 series, and 0.8 came out.
Also, I edited more video with 0.7 from the time of the parent comment, and the timeline bugs with Kdenlive actually ate at me more than my cheap upload speeds and even the real stability issues. Those timeline problems appear to have disappeared 0.8. I haven't seen any.
Posted Feb 24, 2011 11:01 UTC (Thu)
by jschrod (subscriber, #1646)
[Link] (4 responses)
You seem to think of yourself as a professional, but that's clearly not true; otherwise you would understand that readership of LWN.net is a bunch of folks with widespread areas of interest and knowledge. Just as many reports about distributions (or, in my case, document publishing) or other application tools are low-level for those deeply in-the-know, there are even more readers who are *not* as proficient in these areas and like the introductionary presentation of a tool that they didn't know before.
If you had written such a review, those readers probably wouldn't have understood a single word. "Final Cut", "Vegas" -- what the h*ll? I have never heard of those programs, and I'm working in IT since 30 years. It would *not* have sufficed to do just such a comparison; to think so is mind-blowingly ignorant of reader's expecations here.
So, I'm glad that Zonker is writing as an author for LWN.net, and not you. This article *does* provide value; maybe not for you personally, but for us other readers. I've go an advice: If you read an article that is too low-level for you, but doesn't have factual errors, JUST SKIP IT. Posting derogatory remarks is a just a public presentation of your narcissm, not more.
Posted Feb 24, 2011 11:19 UTC (Thu)
by cantsin (guest, #4420)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Feb 24, 2011 12:34 UTC (Thu)
by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784)
[Link]
Posted Feb 24, 2011 13:59 UTC (Thu)
by corbet (editor, #1)
[Link]
That said, I do think that the conversation above has gone as far as it needs to.
Posted Mar 6, 2011 23:08 UTC (Sun)
by clump (subscriber, #27801)
[Link]
You seem like you'd be in posession of a decent vantage point to write an article articulating some of your points about Linux and video. Not as a contrast to this article, just the angle you wanted to see in the first place.
Posted Feb 21, 2011 22:46 UTC (Mon)
by Tet (guest, #5433)
[Link] (1 responses)
Your experience has clearly been very different to mine. I haven't tried 1.3 yet, but one of the reasons I've been doing all of my video editing with earlier versions of OpenShot is that it's been rock solid stable, unlike pretty much all of the alternatives I've tried. Most of the work I do involves typically 30+ clips interspersed with still images and overlaid with captions, and I've yet to have it crash on me once (unlike pitivi, lives, kdenlive etc). The interface is easy to use, and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it as my first choice to anyone wanting a free software video editor.
Posted Mar 1, 2011 8:47 UTC (Tue)
by eru (subscriber, #2753)
[Link]
Maybe the simplification of the implementation that this limitation allows is one reason for its stability?
Probably I will give this OpenShot a try, but if it eats my editing, it's back to Kino. Crashing is worse than lack of features.
Posted Feb 21, 2011 22:57 UTC (Mon)
by PhracturedBlue (subscriber, #4193)
[Link] (7 responses)
Another of my desires is a near-lossless editor which could cut and splice videos only re-encoding the necessary frames (generally the missing reference frames) while working with H.264 (or equivalent) codecs.
Posted Feb 23, 2011 11:03 UTC (Wed)
by Oddscurity (guest, #46851)
[Link] (5 responses)
More to the point of editing, it mentioned they'd run a low-quality copy of the original film, splice and edit using some sort of edit table. When they were happy with the result, the original film was spliced identically using some sort of robot.
The analogy being with your comment is that it preserved as much as possible the original high quality material, rather than editing a copy of the master, and then copying the result again for distribution.
Posted Feb 23, 2011 13:59 UTC (Wed)
by corbet (editor, #1)
[Link] (4 responses)
Ah, the good old days...
Posted Feb 23, 2011 14:27 UTC (Wed)
by Oddscurity (guest, #46851)
[Link] (2 responses)
Camera tracking was something that basically had to be invented on the spot at that point, at least for use with the miniature shots they did.
If we ever see another open source video editor, my suggestion would be to name it Nostalgia. Even though in my case, as a guy in his mid-30's, it's a hankering for an era just 'before' my time.
Posted Feb 26, 2011 22:28 UTC (Sat)
by Creideiki (subscriber, #38747)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Feb 26, 2011 22:51 UTC (Sat)
by Oddscurity (guest, #46851)
[Link]
I couldn't recall the name for the life of me. It's a very interesting read, indeed. Complete with descriptions of framebuffers as very expensive (and large) devices, it's entertaining to read about things positively quaint and yet so familiar.
Posted Mar 1, 2011 8:32 UTC (Tue)
by eru (subscriber, #2753)
[Link]
Posted Mar 3, 2011 9:12 UTC (Thu)
by tuna (guest, #44480)
[Link]
Posted Feb 23, 2011 14:04 UTC (Wed)
by xxiao (guest, #9631)
[Link]
Posted Mar 7, 2011 10:06 UTC (Mon)
by yodermk (subscriber, #3803)
[Link]
I use Cinelerra maybe once every year or two. I appreciate its power but it could be a bit easier. Haven't had many stability problems in several years. In general I am very pleased with it.
More specifically, when I work with Cinelerra I generally use more than one video track and composite them together in various ways. Can OpenShot and the others do that?
There's also the in-development Lumiera - http://lumiera.org/ - done by some of the CinelerraCV people. Development appears to be going rather slowly, but if/when they put something out I expect it will be good.
Posted Mar 9, 2011 16:43 UTC (Wed)
by zeke123 (guest, #60445)
[Link]
I have two boys in grade school and they love to film themselves doing skateboard tricks and putting it on Youtube with their friends.
My sons go to their friends houses and edit on Imovie and when they come here, they work on KDEnlive (noneof the other kids use Linux).
And KDEnlive is excellent the few times I have used it. Stable as well on KDE4.5.
Maybe the kids know something old farts dont know but when I asked them about KDEnlive here, they say "its like any video editor, they do the same thing."
Take that how you will but if 9 year olds can use KDEnlive as easily as Imovie, I think we are overthinking this.
I still say video software has to come in two speeds: a full version with the kitchen sink and one version that has a minimialist interface (just like when you go into VLC settings) that features the 10 most used features (which will usually mean the majority of the things you do).
I still sometimes go to the VLC preferences and click the see All options and its freaking scary so I think the two views is great there and should be helpful with video editing.
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/05/07/27/1551250/Disney-D...
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
It is endlessly frustrating for me and many other Linux users to have to resort to proprietary software and OSes for video editing. Reviews like this one really don't help because obviously, the author is not familiar with video editing software and lacks frames of references. The description of the OpenShot interface, for example, is largely redundant for more experienced users. It would have sufficed to write that it mostly follows Final Cut while Kdenlive is modeled after Vegas - while both use the same engine under the hood. And that Kino is obsolete for anything but one-track editing of DV material.
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
> programming language written by someone just learning programming
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
I'm an "advanced user" of computers in general, but I have only a very vague idea how video editing packages, statistical analysis packages, etc. are used. I think it's perfectly reasonable for a generalist publication to give introductory descriptions of specialist tools.
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Kdenlive gets it done... ...with patience.
http://www.tvcycle.com/
Kdenlive gets it done... ...with patience.
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
I don't believe LWN's editorial staff are in the habit of doing that. Usual policy with flamewars, off-topic digressions and such - even when they pass into the realm of personal insult - seems to be for jcorbet to politely request that the parties to such things kindly take them elsewhere. I'm slightly startled that someone with a subscriber number a tenth of my own hasn't noticed this.
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Removing comments is something we really try hard not to do; with maybe two exceptions over the entire lifetime of LWN, the only comments we have removed are outright spam.
Removing comments
For what it's worth, I've found value in your comments as well as the article. I've also been following Linux video editing since the Broadcast 2000 days and hadn't yet come across OpenShot.Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
While it has some work to do in terms of stability
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Stability is the one reason I have stuck to Kino for my very modest editing needs. I have yet to get the video equivalent of "hello world" out of any of the others. The largest drawback in Kino is that it only edits files in the DV format (and supposedly HDV although I have not personally used that), anything else has to be first transcoded into DV (happens automatically but takes a lot of time and space).
Stability
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
All film editing was done that way, back in those days when they used this stuff called "film." The original footage would be carefully labeled and set aside, while editing happened on the "workprint." In our case (my father did film editing) there was no robot to do the master edit, so they did it carefully by hand with special splicers. There were nice frame numbers printed along the edges to help in the location of the right footage.
Film editing
Film editing
Film editing
Film editing
Some people still edit film that way, but it is getting harder. Recently saw an article on the Guardian where an artist lamented that the last place in Great Britain to print 16mm film was closing, http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2011/feb/22/tacita-dean-16mm-film ("Save celluloid, for art's sake"). The article explains her workflow and why a film printing facility is important for it.
Film editing
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
comparison with Cinelerra
Easy, powerful, stable: Pick two with OpenShot 1.3
The non-Linux using kids have no problem using KDEnlive when they are here.
They dont think about it twice.
The newbie doesnt get overwhelmed, the advanced user doesnt get dummified apps and the newbie who wants to have more options can with one click of the button, have all the options.