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!

WeVideo Helps You Edit Your Videos Online (Video)

Roblimo posted about a year ago | from the lights!-camera!-action!-edit! dept.

Movies 48

This video is WeVideo CEO Jostein Svendsen talking about his company's service, not a demo of it, although we surely should do a demo/review of WeVideo before long. If you are involved in casual video production, this is something you need to check out. And if you want to try editing a video or two but have no idea if you're going to be good enough that it will be worth spending money on video editing software, plus the time to learn how to use it, WeVideo's free version (which puts a watermark on your finished video) might be a good way to try your hand at this necessary but unheralded part of the videomaking process.

cancel ×


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

Come on, try harder (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43842713)

At least pretend to hide the slashvertisements?

Re:Come on, try harder (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43843585)

I'd like to know why in the hell I'd want to upload a video I'd shot to edit it? My laptop is as powerful as a twenty year old mainframe and has plenty of juice to edit videos. Why would I want to spend the time waiting to upload, then edit, then have to wait for it to download it all over again just to see it?

This is, IMO, fucking retarded. Give or sell me software to do it! Jesus, you kids and your stupid cloud... we overthrew you bastards back in the eighties when we traded mainframes for PCs.

-mcgrew (will log in later and say the same thing)

Video (1)

DFurno2003 (739807) | about a year ago | (#43842753)

Video Video Video. Kind of like Marklar

Can I edit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43842771)

the Slashvertisement out of this submission?

Cloud storage quota (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#43842773)

like for instance Dropbox they have a feature to automatically take all of your photos and videos from your cameras and push it up to the cloud.

I imagine that raw video footage is big enough that people will run out of the 2 GB that Dropbox provides without charge fairly quickly. More than that requires paying a recurring fee to Dropbox. What's the crossover point? How long does one have to use Dropbox before buying a copy of proprietary video editing software becomes cheaper?

Its a false choice (3, Interesting)

Giant Electronic Bra (1229876) | about a year ago | (#43842967)

Why would you ever need to BUY anything? I have at least 3 or 4 decent video editors that are free I can install in 5 minutes that for the level of stuff you can do with an online suite are perfectly fine. The 'article' (aka slashvertisment) is putting up a false dichotomy between pay software and a free webapp when nobody in their right mind that doesn't have at least pretensions to serious video editing has PAID for their software in a while now.

Re:Its a false choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43843123)

Can you give us names/links to the "at least 3 or 4 decent video editors that are free I can install in 5 minutes that for the level of stuff you can do with an online suite are perfectly fine."

Re:Its a false choice (1)

drkim (1559875) | about a year ago | (#43847425)

Can you give us names/links to the "at least 3 or 4 decent video editors that are free...

You can get "Lightworks" []

Completely free (no watermark) - and used on films like "Pulp Fiction," "Hugo," "King's Speech," "Jerry Maguire," etc.

A favorite of Thelma Schoonmaker.

Re:Its a false choice (1)

azav (469988) | about a year ago | (#43843185)

What platform(s) are these free solutions available for?

Re:Its a false choice (2)

Giant Electronic Bra (1229876) | about a year ago | (#43843603)

Well, I KNOW there's perfectly good software available on Linux. I am pretty sure some of those things also exist on Windows, do they not?

Re:Its a false choice (1)

ramk13 (570633) | about a year ago | (#43844229)

Not that we don't believe you, but what pieces of software (on any platform) are you referring to?

Re:Its a false choice (2)

martinX (672498) | about a year ago | (#43844797)

Lightworks has some happy customers. (Windows, Linux). It is free-ish, but there is a cost associated with the use of some codecs.
iMovie (Mac) and Windows Movie Maker are also available.

These should fill the need for "casual video production", or the "want to try editing a video or two but have no idea if you're going to be good enough that it will be worth spending money on video editing software" scenario. Given that the free version of WeVideo drops a watermark on any exports, someone who just wants to have a go at this stuff could alternatively download a trial version of Premiere Elements, FCP X or something from Corel if they want a more professional system that won't watermark their videos.

In addition, some video cameras come with rudimentary video editing software.

Others may be found here: []

Re: Its a false choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43846189)

It's free, as powerful as Premiere, oh, and it runs on a $199 Chromebook. U wanna go mobile - there have mobile apps. Html5 is ok for play ack, but i'd like to see tou code something with 10 video layers with opacity and render a flat mp4.

As for the $5 a month - u get 10 gigs and 720p

Why is this here? (4, Insightful)

dingen (958134) | about a year ago | (#43842789)

Who reads Slashdot but can't install a video editor?

Re:Why is this here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43843347)

Who reads Slashdot but can't install a video editor?

For me at least, it's good to know that such a product exists so that I can introduce it to people who are not as technologically literate as me.

Re:Why is this here? (1)

tibit (1762298) | about a year ago | (#43844601)

Do you trust them to keep their flash player updates as well?

Re:Why is this here? (1)

edumacator (910819) | about a year ago | (#43845155)

WeVideo is awesome for my students. They have short video compositions, and this gives them an intro to visual literacy and composing without having to go through my IT department, which is - understandably? - nervous about installing new programs.

This is a perfect bridge for education where we don't have the resources we need to introduce our students to all the programs they should should at least use once or twice.

Flash player? (2)

earlzdotnet (2788729) | about a year ago | (#43842801)

And... still no support for machines without Flash player. HTML5 video is quite stable and drastically more performant. Why are you not using it?

Re:Flash player? (1)

earlzdotnet (2788729) | about a year ago | (#43842835)

It's so stupid that they say "works in any browser" as well, assuming that everyone is either using a mobile browser or has flash player.

Re:Flash player? (1)

dingen (958134) | about a year ago | (#43843099)

And it isn't really running in the browser anyway. It's running in the Flash player. One can embed the Flash player on a website, but it's by no means required and the application running inside the Flash player doesn't really have any interaction with the browser at all.

Re:Flash player? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43843295)

Probably because HTML 5 video support is so incomplete and inconsistent. Yes, it works for basic playback, but writing an editor requires much more stable and precise control of the video. See this [] for an example of the kind of inconsistency I'm talking about.

Re:Flash player? (2)

PCM2 (4486) | about a year ago | (#43844857)

HTML5 video is quite stable and drastically more performant.

Performant [] is not a word.

Re:Flash player? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#43845075)

It's like they came here just for some abuse. I really hope the read these comments. Let's see...

- It's an advertisement, but annoying even a subscriber with AdBlock enabled it got through

- It doesn't work without Flash, a technology universally reviled by all Slashdot posters

- People are listing all the free desktop alternatives, along with reasons why they are better

- It uses The Cloud, another universally hated technology.

- The transcript is full of errors.

- You don't even own the resulting video, the steal the rights from you.

Re:Flash player? (1)

RespekMyAthorati (798091) | about a year ago | (#43847647)

If you are involved in casual video production, this is something you need to check out.

No, I don't.
Fuck you, Roblimo.

Re:Flash player? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43848093)

Not on the subject, being on slashdot, I assumed commenters' IQ would be larger than...err... your waist circumference. With these outbursts and language, you're just hinting is less than your "penis" (yes, quotes) size (in cm).

On the subject, if you read up instead of just being a fuckin hater, WeVideo are already said to be working on an HTML5 editor to get rid of the FP dependency. If that benefits them enough, and quickly enough, that remains to be seen.

Skeptical fungus is very skeptical indeed... (4, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43842809)

Unless their capabilities are god's gift to amateur video editing or something, I don't get it. The pricing [] is (while probably necessarily so, to handle the bandwidth and compute) dangerously close to basic video-editing shovelware that doesn't require you to twiddle your thumbs while the source video gets uploaded, or put up with a 720p(extra per-export fee for 1080!) resolution cap. And the storage and export-length limits should be fairly easy to hit unless you are really just looking for something that is the video equivalent of the 'crop' tool.

Mac users, of course, have something out of the box that is dangerously likely to be competitive(and even more recent WMM, while a bit of a joke, is at least unhindered by bandwidth constraints and nickle-and-dime pricing).

Heck, if it simply must be 'cloud', let's see your 60-second elevator speech about why this [] isn't the sound of Google curb-stomping your company and spitting on its corpse. Surely you have one, right?

Re:Skeptical fungus is very skeptical indeed... (1)

Skylinux (942824) | about a year ago | (#43848105)

The prices are nuts. For private use I'd get a "student version" of Pinnacle Studio 16.0 Ultimate. It comes with green screen accessories and can do anything I would ever need from a video editor.
Ohhh and it will not expire in a year where $99.99 will only get you one year of WeVideo service.

Slashvertisment (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43843019)

Slashdot helps you advertise your shit online!

As long as the Free Shit keeps coming (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43843077)

President Obama is outraged over the IRS scandal. Attorney General Holder is remorseful over the James Rosen subpoena. Former Secretary of State Clinton is exasperated by Benghazi. Lois Lerner is apologetic for the targeting of Tea Party groups. An unnamed White House adviser is chagrined by his own idiocy.

All of these emotive responses to scandal have in common that they help insulate the person doing the emoting from any real responsibility. Holder feels bad about what he has done but that's it. He's not leaving office.
As long as the Free Shit keeps coming, the Free Shit Army doesn't care.

Secretary Clinton is frustrated that people working for her denied additional security, rewrote talking points and blamed everything on a You Tube video. But "What difference does it make?!" she blurted out during her appearance before Congress. She feels terrible, just don't hold it against her in 2016.

President Obama has been on an emotional jag lately. He was outraged by the IRS targeting of his political opponents is shocked by the subpoena of James Rosen's emails and, (implicitly) by the drone strike that killed a 16 y.o. American citizen on his orders. It's all very shocking and he knew nothing (except when he did) but in those cases he's going to make sure it never happens again.

The idea behind all of these responses is that the person responsible has learned their lesson. Everything in Washington becomes an Aesop's fable the moment it goes wrong. The powerful ham-handedly act out the role of the enlightened pupil and then carry on as if expecting more than a self-inflicted slap on the wrist would be, well, outrageous.

this thing is terrible (2)

D1G1T (1136467) | about a year ago | (#43843187)

Tried it a few weeks ago while seeing what kind of cool apps are available from a chormebook. This isn't one of them. It takes forever to upload source files, so pretty much any cloud video editing is going to frustrate people. Add to that WeVideo's terrible interface, and you want your time back from even trying this. Your phone's video editing is more intuitive and has more features. Need more than what's on your phone? Lightworks (NLE) and Davinci Resolve (grading) are available for free.

Re:this thing is terrible (4, Informative)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43843539)

It gets better: Apparently, there is a 500MB [] upload limit, so if you want to trim the fat on a long take(only one of the ridiculously common use cases for a basic video editing tool, and the one most likely to save 'my-insufferably-drawn-out-shakycam-footage-of-some-tourist-bullshit-you've-all-seen-shot-by-professionals-a-dozen-times.m4v'), you are SOL...

Also... encouraging... is the little tidbit on their 'business' [] page. Down near the bottom, "Usage rights". Apparently, kids, what you can do with the video you create is determined by what tier of video editor you purchased. Welcome to the glorious future!

Bandwidth vs. Bitrate (1)

Miletos (1289588) | about a year ago | (#43843227)

The CEO claims problems with bandwidth have been overcome. I disagree.

Most broadband connections today still have severely limited upload speeds. Sure, they may be slightly faster. But since 1080p video has become a commodity, the amount of data per frame (bitrate) for amateur video has increased quite dramatically, compared to a few years ago when 480p was still common. So any increase in upload speed is negated by higher video resolutions.

I think this will only work when symmetrical fiber connections become normal.

Re:Bandwidth vs. Bitrate (1)

Rinikusu (28164) | about a year ago | (#43844785)

Yeah, I'm not sure where he's getting that. I shot a short 2 weekends ago. Six and a half minutes of finished product, cut from over 30gb of footage. That would take... god knows how long to upload from my Roadrunner connection. Not to mention blow my "storage limit" with them. I applaud them for their initial efforts, but I'll continue editing and manipulating video on my local drive (or a very fast local network) for the time being. However, who knows, this will surely change in the future and they'll be a step ahead of the curve. Then again, I'm just a student filmmaker, and perhaps I'm way out of their user base.

More Cloud Crap (3, Interesting)

Lazarian (906722) | about a year ago | (#43843229)

Beside this being a blatant ad, this whole "cloud" thing is really getting retarded. All "cloud" is really is getting applications and your data off your own computer and on to some company's systems where you have to pay to use "premium" services. WeVideo watermarks the output of the free version of their service? Other than them having some pre-made templates, I don't see anything that this can do than the dozen other free options I can think of: OpenShot, Cinelerra, even Windows Movie Maker, and you don't get watermark bullshit.

Re:More Cloud Crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43844059)

I'm sick of the cloud too, so I've installed this [] Firefox addon (Chrome one available also) that makes my life a bit easier when reading about the cloud.

Re:More Cloud Crap (1)

Lazarian (906722) | about a year ago | (#43845331)

Heh, cool. Now if there was only something that would replace "cyber" with something more deserving... I propose "penis".

Watermark (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43843343)

Does it say "Showstealer Pro"?

Thanks, Rob. But I use Linux. (1)

Slartibartfast (3395) | about a year ago | (#43843553)

Which has plenty of video editing options -- some of them even quite good, and some of them even quite easy. (Note the two don't always overlap.)

P.S. If you think my subject is sarcastic... well, yes.

Never even got the look at the features (1)

Mark Lewis (2834621) | about a year ago | (#43843561)

Their only purchasing option is in the form of a monthly subscription, which seems like it misses most of their potential market.

For a monthly subscription pricing structure to make sense, the customer would need to be producing multiple videos per month, and as other posters have already mentioned, in that case most would install some more capable local video editing software that doesn't require uploading raw footage to a cloud system.

It seems like most of their target users would be people like me, who occasionally author a video, but only a few times per year and don't want the hassle of installing locally-running software.

But paying a monthly subscription for a service that I'd only use at most a handful of times per year would be stupid, so for me I don't care about how whiz-bang their video editor is, I didn't even look at their features, and don't plan to.

Offer me a pay-for-what-I-use model, and let me upgrade to a monthly subscription if I actually start using it a lot. Then it would at least be worth considering trying it out. That would at least get me to look at their feature list before writing them off.

Virtualdub was here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43843647)

Local editing, more features. Free.

Seriously, such a blatant advertisement? (2)

neminem (561346) | about a year ago | (#43843841)

Why? I don't get it. Yes, slashvertisements have always existed, but at least they've always been of the form "here is a neat thing I found." This is one very, *very* small step removed from just posting actual ad videos. Cut it out.

Re:Seriously, such a blatant advertisement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43848613)

Seriously, how is "there is a new video editor out -- but it works in the cloud!" not news for nerds?

Look, do you complain when your local newspaper gets so big, that all the movie stars start giving interviews to it when their movies start coming out?

Of course we hope to get some interesting reporting from SlashDot. But the fact that cool new tech enterprises are reaching out to SlashDot is Not Per Se A Bad Thing(tm). It beats /. having to stumble over that.

Re:Seriously, such a blatant advertisement? (1)

neminem (561346) | about a year ago | (#43849503)

No, I don't complain when movie stars start giving interviews about their movies. I do complain when news channels talk about them as if they were actual news, rather than interviews about movies. More relevantly to this, though, I would get annoyed if the newspaper posted an article that started with "this movie is the greatest movie ever! Everyone should go see it!", and it wasn't in the reviews section.

Re:Seriously, such a blatant advertisement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43854609)

I've noticed GoPro seems to be very good at getting their name on TV as well. Whenever ABC (and possibly other networks) show a video shot with a GoPro they always seem to mention it.

Apparently it's a good camera for shooting video, but if they're going to show a video they think is worthy of airing on TV shouldn't they show and discuss the actual content that was shot?

This is retarded (1)

terjeber (856226) | about a year ago | (#43844043)

Upload video to edit? Are you shitting me?

This does not look like product placement. (1)

olip85 (1770514) | about a year ago | (#43844777)

At all.

Yo Dawg, we hear you like videos. (1)

SeaFox (739806) | about a year ago | (#43845127)

So here's a video on the Internet of WeVideo editing videos you upload to the Internet, so you can edit your videos and upload your upload.

I've actually been thinking about this (1)

rsilvergun (571051) | about a year ago | (#43845865)

speaking of /vertisements, I've been thinking of adding this sort of thing to my Firefox [] extension. It's not too hard to do, but I haven't had many people express interest in it per se. And doesn't youtube already have a video editor?
Check for New 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>