Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Kdenlive 0.8 Adds Advanced Features for NLV Editing

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the all-it-needs-is-celebrity-endorsement dept.

KDE 182

dmbkiwi writes "For a long time I've been a big fan of Kdenlive. I've written two articles about it. One is a general overview of video editing on Linux and the other is more specific to Kdenlive. For a number of years, video editing on Linux – at least at a consumer level — has been patchy at best. This is somewhat ironic given the heavy use of Linux in major Hollywood blockbuster film production. However, with the advent of Kdenlive, things are looking pretty good and with the release of version 0.8, there have been some great features added for the more advanced users, while still retaining a simple and easy to use UI."

cancel ×

182 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Not quite there, but looking good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35989558)

I just used a the new version of kdenlive on a project yesterday. I've been using kdenlive on and off since somewhere around 0.4-something, I think, and like what I see. However, it still has a long way to go (in stability as well as features).

Re:Not quite there, but looking good (1)

Fri13 (963421) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989588)

I am waiting a very easy way to do pixel accurate cropping and zooming. Simply just dragging with mouse a area to video and zoom in to see pixels (150% zoom?). Now I have not found any other way than play around the numbers and see a overlay on video to move by them.

What I think Kdenlive needs is something like Crop and rectangle selection tool in GIMP (Or photoshop if you really hate GIMP name!).

What is already easy on Kdenlive is use of the timeline and applying most effects. But to get even more users, video editing should be very easy for desktop recorders who does blog posts and other fancy things. And there you need zoom/crop feature to be a very easy.

Re:Not quite there, but looking good (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990034)

Slightly off topic, but does anything actually support MKV? I've looked around and while the codec is probably fine, in practice that's pointless as nobody is bothering to produce software to use it. I've seen a half dozen open source and free products included it, none of which are currently being worked on and none of which are actually useful without a ton of knowledge about the program.

There's a fair number of packages which can read the files, but unlike the MKAs which are pretty easy to do, the video component has been a serious pain.

Re:Not quite there, but looking good (1)

mfraz74 (1151215) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990794)

MKV isn't a codec, it is a container format so can contain pretty much any codec you want.

Re:Not quite there, but looking good (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991466)

Right, but what I'm saying is that aren't any decent authoring programs, the ones referenced on their site are mostly out of date and no longer being worked on. Sure you can play them, but good luck actually making them as the tutorials and software to do so aren't particularly user friendly. I ended up giving up on that for backing up my DVDs and just store them as ISOs, at least with VLC and a few others I can just read those directly rather than have to screw around with a container format that I can't figure out.

Which is a shame, because I've really grown fond of MKA instead of the alternatives for storing albums.

Never heard of it... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35989622)

..and it's not something I could recomend because I have absolutely no idea how it's supposed to be pronounced. LightWorks looks more interesting anyway.

Ediiting (2, Funny)

psergiu (67614) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989654)

What's this "Ediiting" (with double-i) mentioned in the title ?

Re:Ediiting (2)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990184)

I'd be happier if they stopped calling it "NLV Editing", as if Kdenlive allowed you to edit non-linear video. Excellent research there, senor editor. You've created a submission title that is completely incomprehensible to everyone except its target market, which has to work almost as hard to figure out what it means.

(To be fair, there's an NLE package called "Pyxis NLV", but that's pretty much the only intentional usage on the entire internet.)

Ediiting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35989742)

Perhaps the Ediitors should do some Ediiting.

Linux editing? (4, Funny)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989750)

I use a folder full of tens of thousands of BMPs and some perl scripts that move them around as I command.

Re:Linux editing? (1)

webmistressrachel (903577) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989782)

I have mod points, but I can't do this post justice with just one. OMG I'm still laughing!

Reminds me of saving programs to tape, and then copying them for friends on an old hifi double tape deck...

Re:Linux editing? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35990028)

Imposter! A real Linux user would use PNMs, and also would know it's called a directory, not a folder.

Re:Linux editing? (4, Funny)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990248)

Nah, a real linux user would create a FUSE filesystem that mounts an avi as a directory tree full of still images.

They'd pipe those stills through aalib so that the actual edits could be performed using sed.

Re:Linux editing? (1)

GNious (953874) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990376)

I am scared and intrigued at the same time...

Open source names (0, Troll)

605dave (722736) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989762)

Why is it that open source people spend so much time on their programs, and then name them things that seemed designed to confuse people? How is Kdenlive pronounced? How could I possibly know that it was a video app from the name? Or if not descriptive, how about something catchy? GIMP, GNU, kEverything. Weird names don't help persuade people to try open alternatives, they drive the average user away

Here's my theory. Linux developers like to feel superior in some way to the average user, so name their apps with inside nerd jokes or references that most won't get. It started with the man himself, Richard Stallman and GNU. GNU's not Unix! Get it? See its funny how it doesn't make sense! I have never understood this part of the open source community. They seem to want acceptance, but then throw up roadblocks to that acceptance. I guess its cooler to be the smart kid using different software than the ordinary people.

Re:Open source names (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989776)

Yes something like avidemux2 sounds useful, it does something to an avi file.

Re:Open source names (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35989792)

Yes, it demuxes it.

Re:Open source names (1)

Mark Hood (1630) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989822)

I know you're being funny, but a 'home user' probably won't know why they need to do that (or even if they do need to do that), let alone go looking for it.

A name that has some connection to what it does is useful, but since you're never going to guess it from nowhere (I need a video editing application, let's google for 'videdit'? no...) it's not required.

That said, a dumb-sounding name won't help you - until you're already popular, then it doesn't matter any more. Think about Linux, it's just a weak pun on the creator's name, and happily a near-anagram of Unix... hardly a 'meaningful' name like FreeBSD (with all due respect to Linus of course) and yet the name is never even talked about these days, everyone just knows what it is. Same with GIMP, how you can name a free 'clone' of photoshop after what Wikipedia calls "a type of sexual submissive in BDSM who may wear a bondage suit" and expect to be taken seriously I don't know (although I used the early versions and it did feel like I was being treated like one). But it's big enough now that people don't care.

Re:Open source names (2)

nyctopterus (717502) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989976)

Same with GIMP, how you can name a free 'clone' of photoshop after what Wikipedia calls "a type of sexual submissive in BDSM who may wear a bondage suit" and expect to be taken seriously I don't know (although I used the early versions and it did feel like I was being treated like one). But it's big enough now that people don't care.

No, I think GIMP is still one of the stupidest of these naming blunders. Maybe you're used to it, but I don't think it's so ubiquitous no one notices.

Re:Open source names (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991200)

...everyone just knows what [Linux] is

Actually, no. IT people and nerds in general know what it is, but go to your neighborhood bar and ask people if they've ever heard of Linux. People I talk to are amazed that there's a free and superior replacement for Windows that doesn't get viruses and costs nothing to use. Not only have they never heard of it, they don't believe it even exists until they bring me a "broken" computer that's been rendered useless by viruses or a corrupted registry, have no install CDs, and I put Linux on it for them.

Hell, one time I brought a netbook I'd installed kubuntu on to the bar, and people would ask "what version of Windows is that?"

Re:Open source names (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991498)

OOPS, hit submit too soon.

A gimp is someone with a bad, or "gimpy", leg. The word and that definition is way older than I am; I've heard it all of my 59 years. Look up GIMP you find the Gnu Image Manipulation Program with a link to "disambuigation" that lists your BSOM; and I'd bet money that the sex term is newer than the Gnu IMP. Also, I notice that wikipedia doesn't mention the now-politically incorrect original meaning of "gimp".

Gimp [reference.com]

You don't watch Monty Python? They used the slang dictionary useage in the skit that starts out with men in a rowboat and one asks "How long is it?" one of the sailors is to be eaten and the response is "ugh, with a gimpy leg?"

Also, there are some fairly gimpy mathematics." [wikipedia.org]

Re:Open source names (1)

arisvega (1414195) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990010)

It demuxes it too

Re:Open source names (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35989910)

Or my favorite Qtpfsgui which is a gui to the pfs command line program for making HDR images, programmed in Qt. Brilliant naming scheme to compete with something like Photomatix. Thankfully they took the hint and renamed it Luminance HDR.

Re:Open source names (1)

605dave (722736) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989958)

yup, that one took the cake.

Re:Open source names (1)

cynyr (703126) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990600)

hmm I think if was looking for a pfs gui, that the name "Qtpfsgui" would have immediately told me what it was, a gui for pfs in QT. granted that's not a good marking name, but oh well.

Re:Open source names (2)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990894)

What's pfs, to a casual user?

You can see why it's not "year of Linux on the desktop".

"Yes maam, just load that kernel module dynamically using the following easy command, making sure you have root on your box...."

There's a reason Android has been so successful in the mobile space: abstraction. Sure, have the esoteric stuff down in the core that advanced users can mess with directly, but goodness me, if your GUI level stuff is just as impenetrable then newbies will have a learning curve similar to famous Eve Online one.

This is doubly true for applications - you might get a pass for system setup stuff, maybe, but there's no excuse for "Kdenlive" or "GIMP" or "Qtpfsgui".

Re:Open source names (1)

Yetihehe (971185) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989780)

Just like "PCB", a program to design printed circuit boards (PCBs). Now try to find some informations about it - yep, most of the results are about printed circuit boards, not about this program.

Hey - at least blender (rendering program) is among top pages, along with normal blenders.

Re:Open source names (1)

Mark Hood (1630) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989808)

I just did a search for 'PCB linux' and it's the top hit on Google... If I search for 'PCB program' I get a few others first, but it's still on the front page. Obviously if you just search for an acronym you'll get results relevant to that first...

If I look for 'video editing linux' however, the top hit is a list of 5 apps from 2009 (which does mention kdenlive 0.7 to be fair), and the second dates back to 2007, so I suspect neither is that useful if you're looking for advice on the best one today. (Searching for 'video linux' just gives you loads of hits for playing, as you might expect.

Re:Open source names (2)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989852)

Why is it that people these days are so inclined to attribute names they don't like to arrogance? Haven't you considered that the global namespace is running out of good names so developers start using bad ones or non-English ones? Come on, VideoEdit can only be used once and it's probably trademarked too.

Re:Open source names (3, Insightful)

suy (1908306) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989872)

I fail to see the link where you point to the research that proves that names in the open source world are worse than in the proprietary world.

Look, naming is hard, and of course some names suck and could be replaced by something better. But you are nuts if you think that the naming that (for example) Apple does makes any sense to a non-English speaker. Even with the huge popularity of iTunes I've heard this name said in a lot of different ways (how is read in Spanish, and how is read in English, but with very different levels of success).

And with other products it's the same. I had a really hard time spelling Google or Youtube when they were not widely known. Does the Windows name give you any hint that is an operating system? And iOS is easy to write or to pronounce or understand? Why Photoshop is not for buying things? How the hell QuickTime makes you thinkg about video? And so on.

Re:Open source names (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35989974)

Yeah! Linux should use meaningful names for its apps, like "Acrobat", or "Excel". And it should reduce its footprint on the namespace by calling every other app by some minor variant of "Explorer".

Re:Open source names (4, Insightful)

salesgeek (263995) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990018)

Your complaints are somewhat silly:

* Kdenlive is as good a name as Vegas when it comes to making sense for video editing. I suppose Apache (and Cherokee) was a horrible, politically incorrect name for a web server. Unfortunately trademark law prevents using names like "Non-Linear Video Editor", "Photograph Manipulation Editor", "Text Editor", or "Word Processor" because they are common descriptive names.

* Some names have roots in foreign languages and make perfect sense there but sound horrible here (Choquok - an amazing twitter client - is a perfect example)

* Unix itself is a play on Multics, which predates Stallman's great crusade.

* Things aren't designed to confuse people. They are usually designed by one person, who may not be as good as UI design as a six person UX team at a large development shop. In some cases, I've discovered that the graphical interface is wonky, but the keyboard interfaces is amazingly smooth. Unfortunately, doing UI redesigns is a huge to-do for end users who have in many cases become very adept at the original UI of a software package.

I guess its cooler to be the smart kid using different software than the ordinary people.
No, for me it costs a lot less, I can get things done, and if I want to customize, I can and do. In some cases the software is incredibly good at what it does. In other cases, the commercial alternatives are really a lot better, but I don't want to spend $, so you live with it. It's really not about being cool. It's about freedom as in having no encumbered rights and having the economic means to exercise them.

Re:Open source names (3, Insightful)

Tom (822) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990318)

* Kdenlive is as good a name as Vegas when it comes to making sense for video editing.

No, it isn't. It's part of the stupidity to name everything for KDE with a "K" or KD or even KDE at the beginning. A cheap and failed attempt to copy the "i" meme from Apple, but for various reasons it doesn't work half as good. Copying good marketing badly does not give you good marketing, and the "K" thing is just dumb.

Names for products need to be pronouncable, easy to remember and difficult to confuse. "Kdenlive" falls on all three counts. For starters, it helps if they're actually, you know, names, not random gobbled-together parts of words.

* Things aren't designed to confuse people. They are usually designed by one person, who may not be as good as UI design as a six person UX team at a large development shop. In some cases, I've discovered that the graphical interface is wonky, but the keyboard interfaces is amazingly smooth. Unfortunately, doing UI redesigns is a huge to-do for end users who have in many cases become very adept at the original UI of a software package.

UI design is one of the most important parts of creating a good application, and the part most often ignored in the Free Software community. That's perfectly good if you are scratching your own itch, because in that case it must mostly be useful to and useable by you. And if you give it for free to the world, they can adapt to your style or die for all you care, because in the end you're writing the thing for your own need.

What too few people have realized is that Free Software (or open source, whatever term works for you) is a horrible development model for software you write exclusively for other people. People need motivation to work on stuff. Creating something for yourself has its own intrinsic motivation, creating something for others doesn't.

And designing something specifically different from how you like it best takes a lot of motivation, because you go against yourself, in a way. That's why good UIs are not designed by coders, but by UI experts - people who may not have a personal interest in this particular product, but who enjoy the general topic of UI design enough to have made it a job. That (plus the money) gives them the motivation required.

Look around yourself and you'll notice how most Free Software is seriously lacking in UI design. It is quite often comparable or superior to commercial programs when it comes to functionality and features, but the UI commonly rates somewhere between "horrible" and "acceptable" and very rarely above that.

And that's one of the main reasons that the "year of the Linux desktop" has never come. Mainstream people don't want to put up with that shit, they don't use their computer in order to gloat about technology, they use to get stuff done.

Re:Open source names (1, Flamebait)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990426)

No, it isn't. It's part of the stupidity to name everything for KDE with a "K" or KD or even KDE at the beginning. A cheap and failed attempt to copy the "i" meme from Apple

Apple fanboy, eh? KDE community has actually been using this naming convention for years and years and years, all the way from the beginnings of KDE. Way before Apple started using the 'i'-meme across the board of their products. So we could just as well claim Apple is the one copying the meme from KDE if we follow your logic.

Names for products need to be pronouncable, easy to remember and difficult to confuse. "Kdenlive" falls on all three counts. For starters, it helps if they're actually, you know, names, not random gobbled-together parts of words.

Random gobbled-together words or terms, eh? Like for example ColdFusion, RoboHelp, Alcohol 120% etc.? Those are all confusing names which really don't say much about the product itself and seem like completely random words. KDenlive ain't really different from those, it consists of two clear terms: KDE and enlive. I do agree that using 'KDE' or 'K' at the beginning of every damn application is silly, but...really, there's a lot of even worse names in the commercial space and yet many of those products are perfectly good and actually pretty successfull.

Re:Open source names (4, Insightful)

Tom (822) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990536)

Random gobbled-together words or terms, eh? Like for example ColdFusion, RoboHelp, Alcohol 120% etc.?

You may have noticed that all of these are easy to pronounce and remember, and there are no "near-misses" that make as much sense. That's what a good name needs to be like. Kdenlive does not link to any known terms, which makes it hard to remember without additional mnemonic aids. "ColdFusion", just to pick one of the examples, does not make sense as a product name (which has nothing to do either with temperature or nuclear power), but it's two well-known, easily recalled terms. It is unique enough to be remembered, it is pronouncable without effort.

Those are important things. That's how word-of-mouth works. "I found this great video editing tool. If only I could remember what it was called, Kenl-something or so." just doesn't cut it.

Yes, there are stupid names in the commercial space. I must have missed the memo about it being a good idea to copy the failures.
Yes, even if they are successful. You can be successful despite a stupid name. But why make it more difficult then it has to be?

And there are good examples. Broadcast and Cinerella were great examples for naming. Cinerella especially works so well that I still remembered it without looking it up 7 or 8 years after I've last checked on it. I doubt anyone who doesn't use Kdenlive will remember "that video editing software" name even three weeks from now.

Re:Open source names (1)

Narishma (822073) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990742)

It's Cinelerra, not Cinerella.

Re:Open source names (1)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991294)

I wouldn't put a name with a Levenshtein difference of 1 to a Disney movie (and to the name of a fairy tale if you're in an English-speaking region) down as having no sensible near-misses.

(Of course the sibling pointed out that the name is actually different from what you remembered, which does put a different kind of damper on your argument regarding that name,)

Re:Open source names (1)

Tom (822) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991336)

Both true.

And still - the similarity to a well-known name (movie or fairy tale, doesn't matter) is what makes it so easy to recall.
And that I was wrong about the exact name - yes I was and still the #1 Google hit on my wrong term is the correct website.

Does that tell you something about this name working?

Re:Open source names (2)

devent (1627873) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990432)

What is your problem dude? The program is for free and you can use it or not. Nobody is forcing you to use it.

If you really have a problem with the name or the UI than create a bug report (http://www.kdenlive.org/mantis/my_view_page.php) and let see if the developers like your change. If you still insist of a new name than by all means, just fork the project and release it under a new name. You can even sell it with a new name and if you redesign the UI you can sell it with a new UI.

"And that's one of the main reasons that the "year of the Linux desktop" has never come. Mainstream people don't want to put up with that shit, they don't use their computer in order to gloat about technology, they use to get stuff done."

Interesting, because that's the reason why I don't bother to use Windows anymore. Because I want my stuff just be done and I don't want to bother with technology. Linux enables me just to do that. You just grab a Linux CD like Fedora, install it on the computer and it will run for the years to come. Everything you will need can be installed by the package manager and I don't need to be bothered with drivers or anti-virus crap. Even if you get a new computer, just swap out the hard disk and you have your old system on the new computer.

Everything just runs smooth, no trouble at all. The "year of the Linux desktop" won't come because you have to install a distribution yourself and because all the games are for Windows only. If you could just go to Mediamarkt and get a Fedora 14 laptop or desktop (with all stuff installed like Mp3 and Dvd read), I guarantee you, you will have less trouble with it than the crap Windows 7 you get.

Re:Open source names (5, Insightful)

Tom (822) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990632)

What is your problem dude? The program is for free and you can use it or not. Nobody is forcing you to use it.

My problem is that it pains me to see so much talent wasted because the Free Software stuff is so often excellent quality with a crappy exterior. There's these V10 engines that can go 100 km on 3 litres with making hardly any noise - and they put them into Yugos.

People rarely buy cars just for the engine. They want to sit comfortably in them and they want to drive them without a Ph.D.

just fork the project and release it under a new name. You can even sell it with a new name and if you redesign the UI you can sell it with a new UI.

I stopped contributing to Free Software development years ago when I realized that it's a net negative for me - I spent more time working on software than I spent actually using it. I did contribute quite a bit back then, but I also learnt that lots of Free Software people are too much in love with their projects to take a good advise - or patch. Which, again, is a perfectly ok attitude if you run the project to scratch your own itch. But then don't be surprised if the mainstream doesn't share your personal style.

That's my main point. Make up your mind and decide what you want to be - scratching your own itches or making a mainstream product. You can't do both. And no, you can't do both no matter how much you try to argue that you can.

Interesting, because that's the reason why I don't bother to use Windows anymore.

*nod* yes, once you've been outside of the windows mindset for a while, you start to wonder how anyone can get any work done on that abomination of user masochism. I just found that Linux is better but not by enough, and especially that it copies way too much from windos, probably in an attempt to "win over" windos users, so I moved on to OS X and I've not looked back.

I still love Linux to death - everywhere that doesn't have a GUI. All my servers run Debian, which means my company runs on Linux - but my development happens on OS X.

And I love Free Software, I couldn't do without it. Firefox beats Safari any day. It's UI is still crap. It's ok because there aren't any better alternatives right now, apparently nobody has yet figured out how to do a really great browser UI. But ever since I've done some actual research and work on HCI, ironically started by an overlap of Gnome and my other professional interest, computer security (which suffers massively from the same "the user is stupid" hybris), I've become very sensitive to failures in UI design, many of whom most users probably don't notice consciously.

But if you've ever used Keynote vs. Impress you know just how much of a difference some effort into UI design can make. And Keynote is far from perfect - but compared to Impress, you spend a considerable amount of time less on fighting with the interface. And don't even get me started on PowerPoint - if there's one piece of software that Dr. Who should throw into one of those gaps that eradicate it from all of history so nobody even remembers it, this is it. :-)

Re:Open source names (1)

605dave (722736) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990802)

thanks tom, you are handling all the responses for me. we are pretty much in agreement...

Re:Open source names (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35990900)

Dude, these people aren't GUI experts. Designing a GUI takes a different skill-set than that of creating quality code.

Proprietary software can afford to hire a designer to polish their UIs. And even then it's hit or miss. (Nothing pisses me off more than CD burning software).

And they are scratching their own itch. I'm not gonna waste hours of development effort for a bunch of users I don't know. i'm just not. Am I gonna waste a bunch of hours on myself? Darn tootin'.

Some users seem to think that OS devs owe them something. Too much time between releases? Their pet bug not fixed or rejected? The features they want not implemented yesterday? Then a loud-mouth minority of users bitch and moan about it. It actually discourages devs who don't have a good enough BS filter.

The devs are not your bitches. Your not paying them. You don't have them under contract.

For fun, here's some crappy names from large companies:
Nero
Power Point
iAnything - which came after the KDE kAnything
Maya
Opera

And his name is The Doctor, not Dr. Who, which is the name of the show. Nerd fail.

Re:Open source names (1)

Tom (822) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991414)

Dude, these people aren't GUI experts. Designing a GUI takes a different skill-set than that of creating quality code.

Skill sets can be acquired. If you have the motivation and desire. Which is why I'm saying make up your mind. If you want to scratch your own itches, fine with me, just stop whining about Linux not making it into the mainstream. If you want to hit the mainstream, get the skills necessary for making that happen.

The devs are not your bitches. Your not paying them. You don't have them under contract.

You are not saying anything that's news in this thread. Again, I'm not saying "make stuff for me". I'm saying that if you want to go mainstream, then by definition you are making stuff for other people. So be clear about that and accept it - or don't do it and stop whining.

You make stuff either for yourself or for others - never both. Sure, sometimes people find the stuff you make for yourself useful and use it, too. And sometimes you find your own product is something you like using yourself. But don't kid yourself thinking you can merge these two things. The only way to combine them is to make stuff that neither you nor anyone else really wants.

So make up your mind, and stick with it. Scratch your own itch and tell the users that they're welcome to use the thing, and if they want to suggest improvements you're listen or not depending on your mood and they may be accepted or not depending on whether you think they're useful to you.

And stop the damn whining that Linux isn't mainstream. Everything mainstream is because it is made for the mainstream.

And his name is The Doctor, not Dr. Who, which is the name of the show. Nerd fail.

True. It's sunday and I had an excellent saturday night, so I'm tired. Oh wait, is that another nerd fail? Damn, deeper down the gutter. Next I know I'll have to exchange my /. ID for something with more digits. :-)

Re:Open source names (1)

cynyr (703126) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990814)

I'd love to just move over to linux, but all of my component suppliers only support windows(some not even vista/7 only XP). Also there isn't anything like autocad (btw like autocad in this case means 100% compatibility with autocad. All macros, blocks, everything needs to work), inventor, revit, on linux.

So while I would love to use linux for work, and have a useful scripting language, and programs that understand that the data that comes out may not be in the form I need it to be in... but I'm stuck with windows XP.

Re:Open source names (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991006)

The point is that everyone bemoans the lack of penetration of Linux on the desktop, yet when you dare criticise it for some of the reason that this might be the case you get hit with the biggest barrier to adoption: the "butthurt Linux Defender" who tells you to shove your suggestions up your ass and if you don;t like it you can get lost because it's been given to you for free dammit!

No one is forcing me to use Linux, and with the attitude I have come across in some circles there really is no compelling reason for me to keep learning (I have Ubuntu on a Powerbook mainly used to see what this Linux thing is all about) - I can just go back to my OS of choice.

Now, I'd be unfair if I painted every Linux user that way - there's clearly a large number of them who are very helpful and are just as exasperated with the "we know it's impenetrable to do anything more than basic setup" who wrote guides and extensive forum posts - I'd never have got through some of the more basic tasks
that were giving me problems during setup (or after some updates that suddenly broke random things tht didn;t seem to be connected to the thing I updated).

Now, Ubuntu have tried to make it a painless as possible for a total newbie to get started, and what do they get? The accusation that they're "dumbing down Linux"

I really want to like Linux, if I can get it running smoothly on my Powerbook it will make an excellent little machine for when I'm not at my desk, but so far it has been hit and miss. It's just too... I won;t say "hard", but I will say "unintuitive" to do some things, and some stuff is just plain weird.

I tried a Kbuntu Live CD to give KDE a try compared to Gnome (was fed up looking at brown! j/k) and the Live CD worked great! The wireless worked just fine (like it did on Gnome), but then when I installed the CD so it would boot from the disc, the wireless stopped working and I have been unable to get it working again when nothing has changed! I was sure it had to do with the proprietary wireless driver for the Airport Express card, but even the cafeful forum instructions from helpful people could not get it going again. Drop back to Gnome: it works again! I'm not really sure why the window manager should have such an effect on something that I thought was handled by something unrelated to it, but there it is.

My experiences with it are that it would be quite easy to learn *if* you had an expert sitting next to you to answer the myriad questions that pop up, or solve that *one* little speedbump that appears in a long chain of stuff that you don't know how to deal with.

As it is, I have kept OS X 10.5 on the machine too, so I can dual boot if I need to take my laptop anywhere - I am just not comfortable with Ubuntu enough not to keep a crutch nearby that I know how to work with quickly and easily if something throws me off - like the wireless problem, or if I want a hardware-accelerated UI (still can't get that to work in KDE or Gnome, and I suspect it *can* work, I'm just missing something obvious).

Re:Open source names (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991052)

> The point is that everyone bemoans the lack of penetration of Linux on the desktop,

Try saying something productive.

We aren't here to stroke your ego. If you say something stupid or offensive, we will tell you.

Of course whining about stupid minutia that aren't even restricted to Linux will get you slapped down.

Re:Open source names (2)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991164)

So in what way is that stupid or offensive (also note that this is my second post in the thread), or looking for my ego to be stroked?

I am simply offering a point of view based on my experiences on slashdot over the years.

If you think that the issues concerning the ease of use of Linux, or using descriptive names that only really help power users is "stupid minutia", then congratulations, you are proving my point for me - the one I made initially. Now, I have a thick skin and things just roll off me, but consider how the attitude affects the perception of a new Linux user.

"I'm new to Linux and I am struggling to do [X], I've looked it up and still having issues"

"Piss off sonny, we're not here to stroke your ego, you must be at least *this* elitist to use Linux"

*user goes back to Windows or Mac*

Now, maybe *you* don't care about growing the user base, and in fact maybe you want to keep it small so you can be cool, elite and alternative, but I'm not sure that viewpoint is shared by all. S/N ratio is a little skewed though, in my experience.

Re:Open source names (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35990476)

A cheap and failed attempt to copy the "i" meme from Apple, but for various reasons it doesn't work half as good. Copying good marketing badly does not give you good marketing, and the "K" thing is just dumb.

KDE and its K-thing naming scheme predates Apple's use of iStuff names. At the risk of dating myself, I remember trying both KDE1 and a pre-release of GNOME before Apple's iStuff crusades began. Both were already using K* and G* naming schemes, presumably for shell completion, well before Apple popularised alphabet abuse.

Checking dates online confirms this: Konqueror has existed since 1996, and KDE1 beta screenshots show Kmail. It may be a stupid convention, but it wasn't chosen by copying Apple.

Re:Open source names (2)

knarf (34928) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990500)

A cheap and failed attempt to copy the "i" meme from Apple,

Apple? What do they have to do with this? KDE's K-obsession and Gnome's similar G-naming predates the Apple hype by quite a bit. When KDE got started in 1996 Apple was still selling beige boxes with a crashy OS which lacked memory protection and only did 'cooperative multitasking'. It was not until 2001 that Apple finally launched its own Unix-based desktop operating system. Should I say that Apple copied KDE and Gnome...? and CDE... and Solaris... and Ultrix... and Apollo/Domain... and all the others. Come to think of it, this would not have been the first time that Apple based its offerings on something it gleaned from some other team - Xerox PARC is where the WIMP-interface got started after all.

In short, stop comparing everything computer-related to Apple as if they are the bellwether which all others slavishly follow.

Re:Open source names (3, Interesting)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990576)

And designing something specifically different from how you like it best takes a lot of motivation, because you go against yourself, in a way. That's why good UIs are not designed by coders, but by UI experts - people who may not have a personal interest in this particular product, but who enjoy the general topic of UI design enough to have made it a job. That (plus the money) gives them the motivation required.

No, the primary reason UI design shouldn't be done by the coder is that to the coder it's clear box testing, he knows the architecture, the design and exactly what strings he's pulling in the code so to him it makes perfect sense. To the user this is a big black box, he doesn't know anything about the inner workings of it and has to rely on only what the UI tells him. You can't shed that extra information and pretend to know no more than a user, no matter how hard you try.

Sure UI experts would be great, but I think most UI designs would be a lot better if they were designed by someone who didn't know the code, who deliberately didn't take too many lectures from the coders on the inner workings, who wouldn't know much written in mailing lists and forums except basic tutorials. Here's the application, here's the documentation, does the UI make sense on its own? Coders could be decent UI designers, just not on their own projects because you know too much. There should be an exchange program of some kind, you try making sense of my UI and I'll try making sense of yours. Then you'll see how much harder it gets without the invisible dotted lines you have in your head.

Re:Open source names (1)

Tom (822) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990682)

No, the primary reason UI design shouldn't be done by the coder is that to the coder it's clear box testing, he knows the architecture, the design and exactly what strings he's pulling in the code so to him it makes perfect sense. To the user this is a big black box, he doesn't know anything about the inner workings of it and has to rely on only what the UI tells him. You can't shed that extra information and pretend to know no more than a user, no matter how hard you try.

Yes, that's another reason, though you can do end user testing to reach that goal if you don't have access to someone unfamiliar with the code.

Sure UI experts would be great, but I think most UI designs would be a lot better if they were designed by someone who didn't know the code, who deliberately didn't take too many lectures from the coders on the inner workings, who wouldn't know much written in mailing lists and forums except basic tutorials. Here's the application, here's the documentation, does the UI make sense on its own?

Actually, I think the problem is the development direction. Free Software is usually designed from functionality to interface, because you want to get something done, and when it's working you slap on an interface.

Good software is designed from interface to code - the software needs to do something for the user, figure out how the process looks to the user first, then implement the technology.

For simple parts, the difference between those two approaches is purely theoretical, but when you think about complex activities, it makes a considerable difference. Writing a GUI for an existing command-line script is sometimes more cumbersome than re-writing the whole thing with a GUI from the start.
 

Re:Open source names (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35990946)

Where the hell do they get the resources to do user testing?

Effective user testing is done with the testers can observe the users. Most OS development wouldn't exist without the internet.

Who's gonna volunteer to be a tester? It's the most boring job I can think of; I certainly wouldn't volunteer for it. You also can't base your evaluation of an interface on one user. You'd want many users, increasing the difficulty of the testing (can't get enough testers).

Designing a UI from the start, or after the fact, is still a difficult thing to do.

Re:Open source names (1)

Tom (822) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991300)

Where the hell do they get the resources to do user testing?

Friends and family.

Sure, it won't reach the quality of a lab with testers selected to represent the target audience and paid to have patience and go through it all again and again - but it's a lot better than nothing, and still much better than testing only on yourself.

Re:Open source names (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35991170)

No, it isn't. It's part of the stupidity to name everything for KDE with a "K" or KD or even KDE at the beginning. A cheap and failed attempt to copy the "i" meme from Apple, but for various reasons it doesn't work half as good. Copying good marketing badly does not give you good marketing, and the "K" thing is just dumb.

Names for products need to be pronouncable, easy to remember and difficult to confuse. "Kdenlive" falls on all three counts. For starters, it helps if they're actually, you know, names, not random gobbled-together parts of words.

Wow, I would never have expected such an ignorant statement from this low a uid... I guess technology didn't exist before the mighty iMac, at least in the world that you live in.

Re:Open source names (1)

TheSunborn (68004) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990328)

Kdenlive is not as good a name as Vegas, because I have no clue about how to pronounce it which also make it very difficult to remember the name.

Re:Open source names (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990430)

* Kdenlive is as good a name as Vegas when it comes to making sense for video editing.

Sony Vegas is the version aimed at professionals though, the version aimed at customers is called "Sony Vegas Movie Studio". Apple calls theirs "Final Cut Express", Microsoft has "Windows Live Movie Maker".

Granted, Kdenlive might not be too bad in a menu if it says Kdenlive (Video Editor) but by itself it's quite non-descript. Even knowing what it is hard to work out the abbreviation as KDE Non-LInear Video Editor. It's not a particularly bad name, but no more than a passing grade.

My experience with it was that it'd open my HDV clips but crash within 30 seconds of navigating the file, so I'm taking this announcement with a big pinch of salt. It was very much so not ready last time I tried it.

Re:Open source names (1)

infolation (840436) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990416)

Ah. You mean like:

Avid
Smoke
Flame
DS Nitris
Lightworks
Premiere

Etc

Re:Open source names (1)

605dave (722736) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990808)

Yes, I mean exactly like those. They are memorable, and workable, and marketable. That's my point.

Re:Open source names (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990566)

It's pronounced so the last syllable rhymes with "hive", rather than "give".

Re:Open source names (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990700)

There is a well named product for movies called kino.
Kdenlive in very short time dwarfed it in terms of features without being much more difficult to use for simple stuff.
Names might be important but features/price, documentation and stability count more, especially when softpedia and countless others will tag software product by function whatever their name is.

Re:Open source names (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990956)

They seem to want acceptance, but then throw up roadblocks to that acceptance. I guess its cooler to be the smart kid using different software than the ordinary people.

The zealots who want everyone to use Linux are rarely the people who contribute code. The people who code are usually not particularly concerned with whether or not 605dave likes the name. Besides, there are always some people who will complain about the name no matter what it is. Also, there is no "marketing dept" to sit around all day making up new buzzwords and running up the cost of services/goods.

Besides, if you think about things that have been super popular that have names like flickr, digg, slashdot, google, yahoo, lycos, etc one can easily see that the name has almost nothing to do with whether or not it becomes popular.

Re:Open source names (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991150)

Actually, I've started to think maybe Linux isn't ready for the normal user without having a nerd friend to help him. Hell, most people can't even run Windows without screwing it up.

The fact is, almost all Linux users ARE more computer literate and savvy than almost all Windows users. No need to try to look superior when you actually ARE superior.

The awful names aren't a Linux thing, they're a geek thing (Asperger's?). How is wifi in any way descriptive? Bluetooth? TWAIN? The difference between free and paid software is that paid software comes from companies with marketing departments. The only marketing you'll see for Linux is servers, etc, that corporations are producing.

You don't expect a ballerina to be a good wrestler, and you don't expect an anthroplogist to be good a physics. In the same way, you don't expect a programmer to be good at marketing (or a salesman to be good at programming).

How about making it stable first (3, Informative)

JewGold (924683) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989790)

Before working to add new features, why not first make it so you can use it for 5 minutes without it segfaulting? How about making it so your savefiles aren't constantly becoming corrupt? Kdenlive shows great promise, but it's the least stable piece of software I've ever used.

Re:How about making it stable first (1)

jsprenkle (2009592) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990862)

Thanks! I wondered about the quality of this thing. I recently went looking for one of these. Of the ones I tried on Ubuntu they were almost completely worthless. Crash a lot, can't read anything but a one format file from cameras, the interface is so horrid only the author can figure it out, etc.

Re:How about making it stable first (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35991230)

I haven't found this to be so, at least not using Archlinux on an amd 64 bit platform. I've edited a couple of music videos for myself to post on YouTube and spent at least a couple of hours editing on each. I did have two crashes that I could remember, both while just testing effects to see what they were, so they didn't cause too much pain. I haven't tested 0.8 yet, but will try it soon. I would say to upgrade all libs and dependencies and see whether it will run better, or pull a bit of disk space for an Archlinux install - nice bleeding edge but mostly seems to work distro.

NLEs etc, Linux, *deep sigh* (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35989794)

Annoyingly, the painful to use NLE in blender is still more stable. Saying Kdenlive is the best NLE for linux is still not saying much unfortunately. All those 'advanced' features have been available on non-linux NLEs for many years now. Not that that's a problem, I do all my comp, roto and tracking work in Nuke which runs really well on Linux. I just want a simple NLE, that won't crash, that has basic functions I can actually rely on, and can work with HD footage. PiTiVi is the closest to a good linux NLE imo, KDenlive regularly fell over, sometimes just when dragging large clips. I mean, there are all those nifty gnonlin bits in the gstreamer library to make writing a decent NLE in Linux a lot easier, but it still seems to be mission impossible on Linux. I was holding out hope for Lightworks when it went open source, but then they shipped it for windows first, and that beta is completely unusable. Hey-ho, got to keep that windows partition for either Premiere or Vegas.

Can those who own it please open source Speedrazor and make a very old video editor really bloody happy ? If you want to do serious compositing then a node based app like Nuke, Shake and Fusion make so much more sense, we just want rock solid editing out of our NLEs and nothing much else frankly. After Effects is a bloody mess, trying to copy/compete with it is madness, NLEs should be for EDITING.

Disclaimer : I've not breathed near Kdenlive for about six months, who knows, maybe it doesn't collapse in a heap so often now.

Not really (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989832)

This is somewhat ironic given the heavy use of Linux in major Hollywood blockbuster film production.

"Heavy use" is a huge overstatement. Yes, there have been some notable films in which special Linux applications played a part, but I don't think there's been a single "blockbuster" that was produced on Linux gear start-to-finish. I would be surprised if there was a single big-budget film that used Linux for the audio work.

I'm not saying the day will never come, but it's not there yet.

Re:Not really (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35989860)

God yes, good audio apps are even more lacking than stable NLEs on Linux. Seriously, all the good VFX and 3D CGI software does run well under Linux, its just in the areas of editing and the audio where there is a massive hole. Granted I am talking about commercial software, Nuke, Maya, Houdini etc. I posted earlier begging that whoever owns Speedrazor to open source it, but on second thoughts, just sell it to The Foundry, I'll happily pay good money to have a stable NLE.

Re:Not really (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991186)

Speedrazor was owned by Matrox so send them an email and maybe get the ball rolling. It's not listed as a current product and the press release I found was from 1998.

LoB

Re:Not really (1)

andybabin (2096322) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990550)

A lot of the high end editing and finishing systems (Davinci resolve, anything autodesk, apple shake (old), maya, etc) as well as a lot of sound gear (namely the midas xl8) have their OS based on the linux kernel. The apps cost 6 figures and are mostly NOT open source, however. Most of pixar's stuff is nix based as well

All the high end autodesk feature film finishing apps require redhat or centOS: http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/item?id=16477734&siteID=123112 [autodesk.com]

Lots of feature films rely heavily on linux, just not on the open source aspect of it. Linux as an OS is very good at handling the very large data sets that thousands of 2k and 4k film scan files are, they also scale way nicer than any windows of mac OS based system ever will. For the right price there are several of the above mentioned companies that will send you a totally closed linux box that "just works" much like apple was years ago, on a way higher level though. I don't even know if they'll give you the root password.

Re:Not really (1)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991018)

I've been doing sound effects in Los Angeles for 10 years now, worked on two of the Spider-Mans, Battle: Los Angles and The Hurt Locker among 60 or so other films, at Sony, Fox, Disney and Paramount, and I've never heard of a Midas xl8, and I've never seen a Linux platform on any video or sound editing system, ever -- Final Cut is quite happy to handle 2k and 4k files, all the RED tools are Mac and PC only, and write QuickTime files. Everybody uses Macs, and occasionally you meet a Windows user who wants to prove a point. Most Maya and CGI people I know run Windows if they have a choice. Linux runs the render farm, but you could switch it out tomorrow with a licensed *nix and the only people who'd notice was the accounting department.

Not to say that it's impossible for Linux to get a toehold in these markets, but even though we use computer all day, we aren't ricers who want to tweak every little thing -- we have money and we want the cheapest thing that works best, and not have to worry about distributions, or wether or not my kernel's is using the realtime scheduler (or which one?), and there's no one out there that offers any kind of support for professional Linux multimedia applications, albeit because those applications don't exist.

Somewhat ironic? (4, Insightful)

kenh (9056) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989882)

From the above article:

"This is somewhat ironic given the heavy use of Linux in major Hollywood blockbuster film production."

No, it isn't - he is confusing a render farm with an editing deck - a film could easily have a thousand machines in it's render farm, but it is a rare film that uses more than a handful of editing decks. Typically you can count them on one hand, and have enough fingers left to go bowling with...

That throw-away line in his post above prevents me from thinking his "overview" of consumer-level editing of video on Linux will be anything worth spending time on.

Re:Somewhat ironic? (2)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990444)

No kidding. The big NLEs that I'm aware of are Avid Media Composer (Windows and OS-X), Adobe Premiere (Windows and OS-X), Final Cut Pro (OS-X), and Sony Vegas (Windows). As noted, none of them run in Linux.

Also just because you find Linux behind something in a pro field, it does not mean it is "ironic" that you don't see it in a similar consumer field. Where Linux excels is embedded applications. Basically if you have a specialized setup with specialized hardware that is dedicated to a purpose, Linux is a good choice for a basic interface to put under that. It is free, open, and (relatively) easy to customize to what you need.

However that has nothing at all to do with consumer Linux desktops. The software built to run as an exclusive app with special hardware is not something that'll run on a regular desktop.

So even if you can find special dedicated purpose Linux systems in Hollywood, that doesn't mean that they could take that software and release it as-is commercially for normal Linux desktops.

Re:Somewhat ironic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35991198)

How about the Autodesk Flame package? It started its life on IRIX, but I believe it's Linux software these days. You don't hear too much about it, but that's more because it's hideously expensive than because it's not good enough.

Re:Somewhat ironic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35990570)

I remember working in a post production house some years ago and they were using Discreet editing and compositing applications that ran only on Linux and were very, very, very high-end.

Re:Somewhat ironic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35990868)

I work for a major film studio and we have thousands of Linux servers in our data center(s), over a thousand Linux desktops, and you need more than one hand to count the edit suites.

But true, nobody there uses open source editing tools like this one. Other studios will vary of course.

arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year ago (2)

IYagami (136831) | more than 3 years ago | (#35989888)

http://arstechnica.com/open-source/guides/2010/01/video-editing-in-linux-a-look-at-pitivi-and-kdenlive.ars [arstechnica.com]

Conclusion

Demand for video editing tools is only going to increase. This is an area where Linux desperately needs to be competitive if there's hope for the Linux desktop going mainstream anytime soon.

PiViTi and Kdenlive show promise, but neither application is fully "there" just yet. PiTiVi is stable and intuitive, but lacks features. Kdenlive is very feature-rich, but needs to be stabilized just a bit; and some work could be done to make it more user-friendly. My first recommendation for doing video editing on Linux is definitely Kdenlive at this stage, though. It may not be as capable as a tool like, say, Final Cut Pro, but it does have most if not all of what many users need from a video editing application.

Progress is being made, but some work is needed to take these applications the "last mile" to be entirely suitable for mainstream use.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35989950)

As you said ... conclusions from that review are a year out of date.

The latest version of Kdenlive, which this Slashdot thread happens to be about, is a significant improvement over previous versions, one of which Ars Technica reviewed a year ago.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (4, Insightful)

inflex (123318) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990058)

This is an area where Linux desperately needs to be competitive if there's hope for the Linux desktop going mainstream anytime soon.

Okay, look, I know we all believe that we know what's best for the market and what's in demand - but I am so sick of hearing this line pulled out. "What Linux really needs is ***** if it's to become acceptable in the mainstream". The reality is that there's no single app that will propel Linux into the mainstream magically, the best we can do is just continue to improve where we can and as we do we pick up more and more converts. We are long past a position where a single application will suddenly make Linux mainstream. For every application/area you knock off that list there will always be another one that raises its head.

I'm not saying we shouldn't be doing our best to deliver great new apps of good stability and functionality (like Inkscape, Scribus etc), I'm saying that the sky isn't falling if we don't deliver X Y or Z.

Paul.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (1)

Seeteufel (1736784) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990108)

Video editors are a must. I don't miss anything else.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (1)

inflex (123318) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990168)

Video editors are a must. I don't miss anything else.

For you, yes - but that's not mainstream in a global user sense. You want it to be, but it isn't. Yes a lot of people would love a good NLVE, myself included (I even bought a copy of MainActor for Linux before the bastards took it away - still it crashed more frequently than even Kdenlive!) but it's not something that'll stop everyone migrating to Linux (just like the lack of 100% VBA script compatibility in LibreOffice doesn't stop people migrating), hell most people have no idea what a NLVE is, let alone use one.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (1)

Seeteufel (1736784) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990218)

I never used or wanted to use Mainactor. Actually I would be happy with Pinnacle Studio Videospin, the freeware version. Until recently there was no comparable video editor available at all and no usable way to edit videos on Linux.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (1)

inflex (123318) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990288)

Good thing you didn't go with MA... the demo seemed to work okay... but the production version was like trying to stop a jello mould from wobbling. It wasn't the first or last Linux package I've ever purchased (Closed and Open) but it was certainly the worst purchase.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991072)

> Video editors are a must. I don't miss anything else.

That said. Any video editor should take the user's stuff in whatever form it come in and not give them any grief. It should "just work".

This is one of those areas where Macs intentionally make themselves more limited/difficult than Windows or even Linux.

Don't just focus on what might be a bad product with too much hype behind it. Also see what could use improvement.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35990138)

I'm not saying we shouldn't be doing our best to deliver great new apps of good stability and functionality (like Inkscape, Scribus etc), I'm saying that the sky isn't falling if we don't deliver X Y or Z.

Paul.

A fairish point, however, why do I and many others who do creative video, animation and sound work spend more time in windows ? Apps.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (1)

grumbel (592662) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990160)

The reality is that there's no single app that will propel Linux into the mainstream magically,

A single up won't make Linux mainstream, but not having that single app can very certainly hold it back from ever getting there, as people want an OS that can serve all their needs, not just 90%. The second you give people a reason to boot back into Windows, Linux will become that toy OS again with which they might play around once in a while, but which they won't actually ever use for their daily use.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (2)

inflex (123318) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990274)

Maybe it's the developer in me. One becomes proficient with eye-rolling every time someone vouches for their wanted feature "because without it your software will not become mainstream". It's a self-serving tactic, trying to get what you want by pushing the fear of obscurity, which likely just takes time away from more needed work. We all have different ways of trying to coax the world to our bidding, that one tends to make me put it into the last position in the consideration queue. It happens in all areas, software, electronics development, hell even model aircraft design and most of the time where people have succumbed to the whims, it turns out the 'feature' really didn't make as big an impact as portrayed.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (1)

moonbender (547943) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990424)

There's also OpenShot and, at some point, Lombard. I initially used PiTiVi but I found OpenShot to be superior in most ways, though PiTiVi's UI is a bit more polished (but then, it just does a lot less). Just installed Kdenlive, and it looks fantastic, I'll try that the next time around. For instance, it apparently supports freezing a frame out-of-the-box, something neither PiTiVi nor OpenShot can do AFAIK. Hmm... actually, I guess you can set the speed to 0x in OpenShot, that'd should accomplish the same thing.

Re:arstechnica reviewed kdenlive / PiTiVi a year a (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35990902)

>

Progress is being made, but some work is needed to take these applications the "last mile" to be entirely suitable for mainstream use.

Didn't you hear? Nowadays, unix includes this wonderful video app targeted at mainstream users straight out of the box: /dev/null.

"mainstream" video editing? balony.

I just got off the toilet (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35989930)

I shit out an Obama.

Plop!

Hollywood and Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35990240)

A bit criticizing them, a bit just being curious: besides FilmGimp/CinePaint, they contributed something else back? I don't expect they buy Maya and release it with a BSD license, but I guess they have tweaks to other FOSS apps, and also some in-house stuff.

Going Mainstream (1)

oldmeddler (1614805) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990348)

If "going mainstream" means looking and acting more like Windows, then No!, thanks. I'm already pissed at default double-click, having to use Ctrl C and Ctrl V in Open Office, and putting the reload button on the location bar in Firefox. Please don't dumb down Linux any further. A decent Gnome video editor would be nice, though.

Demand (0)

nekohayo (856257) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990462)

There are many reasons why consumer/prosumer video editing for Linux still isn't there yet, and not moving at a very rapid pace. If my talk proposal is accepted, I'll be presenting them in detail at Libre Graphics Meeting next week (there should be a video recording of the talk afterwards). Off the top of my head, I can give you some broad clues: the very small market of Linux desktop users (1.5%) combined with the small percentage of computer users who actually do video editing, combined with the very small percentage of those who know programming, combined with the incredibly hard task that is making a full-fledged, stable video editor, combined with the general lack of economic incentives for it. Oh, and the fact that everyone keeps trying to reinvent the wheel.

Re:Demand (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990520)

Oh, and the fact that everyone keeps trying to reinvent the wheel.

Ugh yes. Every time I go to look for NLE for Linux I try everything I can find. Every time there's more tools than there were before. Every time they are all crashy or inscrutable and undocumented, or both. I sure wish we'd had more training in cooperation in school and less in competition. I know I'm not the only one around these parts who found that taking over groups was the only way to get shit done and there was always tons of dead weight that refused to get on board no matter who was leading. But having to run everything all the time is poor preparation for knowing when to let go...

Kdenlive is great (1)

supersloshy (1273442) | more than 3 years ago | (#35990524)

I've been using Kdenlive ever since it's port to Qt4, and it works very, very well. It has tons of options and effects, so even the most novice users can make something nice with a little effort. It has a bit of a leaning curve, but any "pro" software usually does. It fits in well with my desktop and Pulseaudio, even though I use GNOME and not KDE. If you've given up on video editing for Linux and haven't tried Kdenlive, you really should try it. It's not the most feature-filled editor, but it's great for casual and semi-pro users. And by great, I mean fantastic!

HD editing (1)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991068)

I like Kdenlive, but I can't edit most over-the-air HD content. Most of the time when I import the video clip, the video is white (effectively no video), but there is audio.

Video plays in Xine (but audio messes up) and VLC after a brief stutter at the start plays the audio and video perfectly.

Despite posting samples from videos, nobody has come up as to why Kdenlive does this. I can only guess that the software starts recording in the wrong part of a GOP, and that's what is screwing up the playback / editing of video. It's also strange because Kdenlive will edit my HD video camera footage without problem.

Having said that, Avidemux is good basic editing apart from MPEG4 footage where it cannot keep frame accuracy with audio (keeps on warning to accept or reject it's recommendations on file opening, but makes no difference).

I suppose it's easier to summarise that video editing software is still a bit of a black art.

Openshot (2)

sakti (16411) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991100)

I don't do much video editing, but another one I've read is supposed to be decent is openshot.

http://www.openshotvideo.com/ [openshotvideo.com]

They are at version 1.3 and have nice documentation.

What about Linear Editing? (1)

Skinkie (815924) | more than 3 years ago | (#35991122)

What are currently the options of linear video editors available on Linux? I know there is dvswitch, but any competing projects in that direction?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>