Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 69

Thread: Lightworks Linux Beta Is Finally Public

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    832

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Del_ View Post
    It is quite clear from this thread that you made this claim on false basis. Morever, the statement is useseless without elaboration, which you are spectacularly uncapable of providing. I mentioned kdenlive in particular since it covers all my needs for video editing, and I know several people uses it professionally with success. Moreover, you will find threads where professionals discuss issues with kdenlive going four years back, guess what, most of what was noted as missing or not good enough has been rectified. You are of course free to believe what you want, but brosis was 100% correct in his analysis of the thread. I welcome proprietary apps on linux, but I seriously dislike when great open source projects are being unfairly bashed. For your information has kdenlive been funded very successfully when they asked for it (they got more money then they asked for in no time). The project has never been more alive.
    Name any hollywood studios, using Kdenlive - name any well-known broadcasting companies using Kdenlive..??? and fyi, you need to prove that Kdenlive is at least commanding a somewhat large segment of those industries, otherwise my comment (and Kivada's) are factually correct... You claim you know all ofthese professionals using Kdenlive, but then (laughably) linked to a teenager's blog as evidence...lol

    and again, your a hypocrit Del - in your mind, it is okay to bash companies who write software, but it's not okay for people to do the same for OSS projects. (we've been over this, and you know it! hence, why you avoided even commenting on that part of my post, when i called you out for being a hypocrite - so GFY, dumabss - you made that comment what, yesterday - so unless you've drastically changed your position in the last 24hours, save it for someone who isn't capable of remembering and/or looking back at your previous posts!)

    Quote Originally Posted by Del_ View Post
    Personally I am of the opinion that open source gaming has to a large extent failed to provide viable alternatives, and that proprietary offerings there is important for linux. On video editing I believe you are seriously out of touch with reality if you reach that conclusion. Home users are very well catered for with open alternatives that are arguably better than imovie and wmm. For Lightworks even basic import functionality (where kdenlive is full featured, just drag in clips from variuos formats and sources and start editing) is totally crippled unless you go for the pro version. That said, I welcome proprietary offerings, especially if they refrain from claiming to be open source when it is evident for anybody who cares that they are not.
    So gaming gets a free ticket, but since your a kdenlive user - Video-editors dont... :\ Imovie and wmm aren't in the same class as Lightworks, Sony Vegas, AVID, etc - so why are you comparing them - one is for professionals, one is directed at non-professionals. fail! absolute fail! Lightworks isn't 'totally crippled' lots of people have been using it just fine and i had more headaches with Kdenlive than i have had with Lighworks (during it's Alpha cycle! no less). and in lightworks you can also 'just drag in clips from various formats and sources and start editing'... I'm not sure why you are claiming otherwise (other than the fact, we know you've never even used Lightworks)... using Kdenlive is painful in comparison, imo. (and everyone else i know that has used both!).

    ..and *again* - lightworks is moving towards having an opensource codebase - I don't think anyone thinks it's (currently) opensource software - so you can just stop with this fallacious BS...

    if you're happy with Kdenlive and don't like Lightworks - then *why are you even commenting in this thread to begin with*???

    ...and you think I'm the asshole - i'll take being an a-hole any day of the week instead of being in your shoes!

  2. #52
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    What part of FREEWARE do you not understand? Lightworks isn't F/OSS
    Hey, check this out. http://www.lwks.com/index.php?option...1251&Itemid=81
    They SAID that they will release the source code. So lightworks SHOULD be free....free as in freedom.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    So, go fuck yourself.
    Watch your mouth!

  3. #53
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    2

    Default Non-Free Software? No thanks!

    As long as it is not FREE software, this program is full of shit...
    We need freedom, this was the best part of this software. Otherwise I switch to Windoze and use Adobe Premiere...there would be no difference.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    521

    Default Files to big/ong to take time to transcode them all for proxies

    [QUOTE=Del_;328976]Luke, sad to hear about your performance issues with playback. I will have to test a bit at my end. One simple thing you could do with that format is to use proxy clips. I haven't tried the functionality, but I would be very surprised if it is still buggy. That should give you a smooth experience regardless.

    Using proxy clips would obviously require some form of transcoding. While I can quickly copy existing streams into new containers with ffmpeg/avconv, to transcode to a small resolution and light codec 2-8GB of files, sometimes more, up to an hour or two of AVCHD 1080p clips would take too long and use too much power. No way are smooth transitions in the editor worth that they come out smooth enough in the rendered product. I am not about to wait on a transcode job for editing same-day news videos.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SuperUserLand
    Posts
    538

    Default

    no,


    here's the thing: GIMP is actually pretty good for what it is and provides the most basic functionality for a casual user.

    it will never be photoshop but it's free and opensource.


    There's no DECENT or USABLE open source video editor

    COZ DEVELOPMENT COSTS A LOT OF MONEY

    get it? no one is going to just make an open source video editor that can be to premiere/finalcut what gimp is to photoshop

    openshot went to kickstarter to ask for money

    they got $45.000

    will it be enough?? I sincerely doubt it

    lightworks is not free, is not open source


    you can use it for free but if you want access to some codecs etc you have to pay like 50eur a year

    I think it's pretty fair.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,447

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pallidus View Post
    here's the thing: GIMP is actually pretty good for what it is and provides the most basic functionality for a casual user.

    it will never be photoshop but it's free and opensource.
    You mean, it will never be a bloated, DRM-riddled monstrosity that costs hundreds of dollars and requires a high-end CPU just to run? I should hope so.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    980

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pallidus View Post
    There's no DECENT or USABLE open source video editor

    COZ DEVELOPMENT COSTS A LOT OF MONEY

    get it? no one is going to just make an open source video editor that can be to premiere/finalcut what gimp is to photoshop

    openshot went to kickstarter to ask for money

    they got $45.000

    will it be enough?? I sincerely doubt it

    lightworks is not free, is not open source


    you can use it for free but if you want access to some codecs etc you have to pay like 50eur a year

    I think it's pretty fair.
    Developement requires CONTRIBUTIONS, not necessary money. See nouveau case.

    45,000 is only for specific amount of features. They asked 20,000$ for them and recieved 45,000$. I think OpenShot is more than back-uped.

    If you want closed source Lightworks with all this usual license/activation mess, use it. But I want opensource video editor. I am kind of person that refuses microsoft office and supports libre office, even at times when people say there is no alternative but mso. Software does not compile itself out of the air, so I know they need support and they will get it.

    FYI I used GIMP for professional ISO restoration on about 7,000 RAWs and it works for me better than photoshop and is open.
    Last edited by brosis; 05-04-2013 at 12:30 PM.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    521

    Default No usable FOSS editor? Than how come I can edit video?

    [QUOTE=Pallidus;329082]

    There's no DECENT or USABLE open source video editor

    No usable video editor? I use kdenlive several times a week doing activist news videos. All versions after the KDE4 switch were "good enough" to be decent for my purposes, and now even the crashes I used to get are nearly extinct, hanven't seen Kdenlive crash in months. My main interest in lightworks was to play with GPU compute for rendering-if is does that, as that would allow retrofitting medium size GPU's into ordinary dual core or slow 4 core desktop systems to build video editing systems. The idea of being able to drop a $250 GPU into a computer from a dumpster, then render AVCHD 1080p video into 1080p H264 even in realtime x 1.3-1.5 like my AMD "bulldozer" machine can now, much less in less than realtime, is quite appealing.

    At least by the time Lightworks becomes open source we should get decent openCL support in Mesa. I just hope Kdenlive can live long enough for this to happen-and for someone to then port Lightworks to real open source, no-patent license versions of the needed codecs such as ffmpeg/avconv. Also good would be the death of H264 and AVCHD, and their replacement with a multithreaded open codec that scales well enough for GPU compute to be useful. Fine with me also if the shotcut work with OpenGL and shader language, already supported in Shotcut, get picked up by Kdenlive. That will likely beat a true FOSS version of Lightworks to market.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ninez View Post
    That isn't what they are doing; http://www.lwks.com/index.php?option...=51&Itemid=177


    Releasing source code wasn't planned until well after MacOSX and Linux ports. Plus, honestly, the average consumer is not drawn in that much by 'open source', beyond the odd person.(however, the film industry is, since they prefer tools that they can modify as needed. - which you can bet is a big reason/motivation for EditShare to open up the codebase, if i had to guess).
    It may be that they aren't planning on just using open source for publicity. However, so far, that is all they have done. A product road map doesn't mean much until you carry through on it. They aren't under any real obligation to release the source, or for any source release to be truly meaningful. Don't get me wrong; I'm still taking a wait and see attitude, but my past experience warrants a bit of skepticism on my part. I'm not going to cheer for them until they make good.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    832

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFWhitman View Post
    It may be that they aren't planning on just using open source for publicity. However, so far, that is all they have done. A product road map doesn't mean much until you carry through on it. They aren't under any real obligation to release the source, or for any source release to be truly meaningful. Don't get me wrong; I'm still taking a wait and see attitude, but my past experience warrants a bit of skepticism on my part. I'm not going to cheer for them until they make good.
    well, in fairness - there on working on item 3 right now - the others have been completed. So clearly, so far - they are following their roadmap

    They also had no obligation to even consider open sourcing any code, in the first place ~ but that seems to be something that they actually want to do and seem to be working towards that goal.... Skepticism seems more than reasonable (on your part), but personally, i think they will end up releasing an OSS version, since there isn't any indication that they won't. I'm sure they make more money on the software/hardware combo and/or specialized services than they do from just the app itself...

    even if this app stays purely proprietary with no goals of opening up any code at all (which i don't think is likely) - i still think bringing Lightworks to Linux is good though, just as Autodesk bringing their titles to linux is a good thing. But the one key difference between EditShare and someone like Autodesk - Lightworks is reasonably priced (pro version) and accessible in comparison to some other pro-video editors... So far, the editshare guys seem reasonable to me.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •