tech - FOSS video-editing software that isn't shit

Posting mode: Reply [Return]
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Password	(For file deletion.)

File: 1448382779228.png (24.78 KB, 299x299, stallman.png) ImgOps iqdb

FOSS video-editing software that isn't shit Anonymous 2015-11-24 16:32:59 No.14290

Does it exist, lains?

sage 2015-11-24 16:52:54 No.14291

Assuming you've already tried Cinelerra, no, it does not.

Anonymous 2015-11-24 17:44:50 No.14293

A production level video editor is one big piece that the FOSS community is missing. Last I heard there isn't anything that even compares with proprietary software like GIMP, Blender, and Inkscape can.

Anonymous 2015-11-24 18:35:46 No.14294

>>14290
I would just use this if I ever needed to edit video:
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GNEVE
http://1010.co.uk/gneve.html

I already use Emacs for almost everything else anyway though.

Anonymous 2015-11-24 21:00:36 No.14296

File: 1448398836345.jpg (172.87 KB, 450x338, aaaaa.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>14290
Remember 99% of all video is just done with well placed cuts.

Cinelerra looks very good... But if what your actually after is a replacement for After FX then your not going to find FOSS even remotely close.

An old school way of getting more post power is to render video out as an image sequence and then batch gimpshop that soykaf ... can allow for some more advanced cleaning and masking prep than avalible in some video editors.

>>14294
Video editing with a typed EDL... the 70s called and they want their U-matic edit suite back! (pic related)

Anonymous 2015-11-24 21:07:14 No.14297

>>14293

There is no FOSS software that is for suitable for creative professionals. Unfortunately you'll just have to buy Premiere or Avid until the open source devs decide to make something more than web browsers and crap Office imitations

sage 2015-11-24 21:21:48 No.14298

>>14297
>There is no FOSS software that is for suitable for creative professionals.

Gimp, Krita, Audacity, JACK, LMMS, The Cadance suit...

How could you possibly be missing so much?

Anonymous 2015-11-24 21:26:46 No.14299

>>14298

Tell you what: download a demo of Cubase and compare it side by side with Audacity and tell me which is the superior program.

Then take a poll of serious audio professionals and see what they use. Chances are it's Pro Tools, Logic, Cubase, FL Studio, or Ableton Live.

You get what you pay for

Anonymous 2015-11-24 21:30:12 No.14300

>>14297
Final Cut Pro. (mac only)
Sony Vegas.

Just to balance the list a little.

Anonymous 2015-11-24 21:52:33 No.14301

>>14298
Thing is the Pro area expects a format - what matters is how good your music is, not what app made it.

I should think Audacity is as good (easily) as anything back in 1996 or a bit later... also audio quality or cpu power is not the issue today as it was back then.

Anonymous 2015-11-24 23:22:32 No.14307

File: 1448407352816.png (476.53 KB, 560x500, Girls.png) ImgOps iqdb

>>14298
>Audacity

Anonymous 2015-11-25 00:08:45 No.14308

File: 1448410125583.jpg (11.02 KB, 253x224, 10149971_652306948137888_8….jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>14298
"LMMS"

yeah, if you want a questionable DAW. It's capabilities compared to FL Studio (especially that playlist) is so primitive, and it hurts to have large projects in LMMS.

It's one of those points where it should be fine to use proprietary software, the 'market' for FOSS DAWs (or digital audio workstations in general) is incredibly niche.

Anonymous 2015-11-25 00:30:01 No.14309

File: 1448411401707.png (21.96 KB, 299x299, 1448382779228.png) ImgOps iqdb

>>14290
I could not help but notice your png was not optimized lainon.
I have optimized your png.
Your png is now optimized.

Anonymous 2015-11-25 05:56:09 No.14312

>>14290
Blender contains a surprisingly excellent video editor.

Anonymous 2015-11-25 13:42:48 No.14314

I've found PiTiVi perfectly adequate.
It may lack some of the more advanced features of proprietary software, but the interface is nice and intuitive and I'd guess it's good enough for 90% of users.

Anonymous 2015-11-25 14:04:54 No.14315

How can big production studios who made Avatar use Linux and yet some guy in his backyard can not use it to make a video?

Anonymous 2015-11-25 23:23:42 No.14324

>>14290
Hello, Logan.

:)

No it does not.

Anonymous 2015-11-26 03:52:20 No.14338

>>14315
Millions of dollars...

Anonymous 2015-11-26 05:52:30 No.14341

>>14315
Linux is the render farms, they do the interface side on different boxes, from what I gather.

ffmpeg ffmpeg 2015-11-26 18:38:30 No.14349

ffmpeg

seriously just do it on the fuarrrking command line it works great i recently converted some AVI screencaps to a nice mp4 format, added an intro and title image etc