Slashdot Mirror
New Red Hat Multimedia Oriented Distribution
ezadro writes "I just spotted this article at LinuxToday about Redhat being directly involved in a new distribution that will be known as ReHMuDi, which stands for Red Hat Multimedia Distribution." The goal seems to be
a system for professional audio composers and engineers. Don't expect it
for awhile- they have 24 months scheduled to do it, although it looks like
releases will start by the end of 02.
I just spotted this article at LinuxToday about Redhat being directly involved in a new distribution that will be known as ReHMuDi, which stands for Red Hat Multimedia Distribution.
I'm not a Linux user, so I may be wrong, but I seem to recall there being a Debian-based distro that someone was working on called "Demudi".
Sounds like duplication of effort, one of the common features of Open Source projects.
Has anyone used Demudi? How ready is it for prime time?
--saint
well, aint the european union supporting some multimedia version of debian to?
this seems awful similar to the Debian Multimedia Distribution slashdot covered a awhile ago?
That's ok, Jesus likes me anyway.
Perhaps the worst name in technology history?
Looks like 3L33T speak, takes a minute to think of how to pronounce. Why not "Redhat Media" or something like that?
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
Can't wait to see this, I hope that it is headless, and can be controlled by pedals and synths like a Roland box. If small linux boxes can duplicate the power and features of sage sound enquipment, it will make for some cool possibilities.
/., retinas burn...
Too much
gnaws at my left nut.
When I clicked on comments the only two comments I see are about how demundi was already announce or something, and the ad was "Don't be another development clone. Sourceforge improves visibilty to root out duplicated development projects."
Linux is a great server OS. It's even a great desktop OS, if you know what you're doing. But professional audio?
:)
It's nice to dream, but for now and for the forseeable future, the software just isn't there. There's barely enough professional audio software for Windows... Linux just doesn't compete.
Until the software's written, there's no point in making a distro to pretend that it is.
Besides, about 98% of professional audio tweaks use Macs. The other 2% use Amiga.
Cretin - a powerful and flexible CD reencoder
First of all, what is with the ridiculous name? Second, is Linux really suited for multimedia development?
When it comes to the Unices, the operating systems are slow themselves. But the graphic user interfaces are especially bloated and slow. A high performance and responsive operating system is what's needed for these applications. Linux is neither of these.
I would like to see this Linux be competitive in this field. But I think Linux needs a lot of work under the hood before it could be successful here.
The goal seems to be a system for professional audio composers and engineers. Don't expect it for awhile- they have 24 months scheduled to do it, although it looks like releases will start by the end of 02.
How do they expect to make money from this? It's such a small market. Granted, in small professional markets you can usually charge a lot for support, but I just don't see business case here.
"By developing a release specifically designed for professionals in the musical industry, Red Hat wants to enable authors and composers, as well as simple amateurs, to free themselves from technological and cultural constraints," declares Franz Meyer, Director for Southern Europe at Red Hat, before adding "By giving more freedom to artists, our aim is to expand the global nature of music even further and to extend the concept of Open Source Software to Open Source Music."
Not really related to my previous point, but I just have to say in response to this: "Barf me".
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Too damn many distros for every set of tasks.
I think this is a cool project, and I wish them the best of luck. However, the article failed to mention how Red Hat would be making money off of this. Selling support packages doesn't seem to work. And since the article says that the product will be distributed free of charge, they can't make money that way either. I suppose that they could sell boxed copies, but I don't know anyone who actually buys those (I just DL the ISOs).
Can someone who knows more than me explain how they hope to profit off this project?
Steve
This distribution looks alot like Demudi. I've never seen a little friendly competition hurt anything, especially in the Linux world. I hope companies like Steinberg and Protools start releasing apps for it.
Then you would know about the Agnula project, of which Demudi and Rehmudi are two off-shoots. It is cited in the first sentence of the article. Agnula itself is old news on Slashdot...
expand the market by makeing a much cheaper solution that is useable by just about anyone. It's not unthinkable that they are trying to come up with a product that will be geared towards the ever growing number or DJ's and musicians. There would probably be a greater number of musicians if the tools were cheaper and easier to use. I'm just takeing this from the quote that you used, expanding music further and geard towards music professionals kinda gave me that impression.
I've been paying attention to AGNULA for a while now and used DeMuDi (the debian based audio distribution) for some time. While the project could definitely use some serious corporate funding, we really don't need Red Hat Making Life More Difficult
A lot of people have complained about the sheer numbers of different distributions, and argued that this will lead to fragmentation. But this is really the most interesting thing... Instead of using some generic, jack of all trades, master of none distro, there can be distros targeted for every segment of the population.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
According to the Agnula website, DeMuDi and ReHMuDi are essentially the same thing just built on different distros (Debian and Redhat).
Ohh I get it. rehmudi... remedy.
Man, that's a bad acronym.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
Multimedia is not just audio
only agnula (audio) website linked
where is the Rehmudi website?
-- Hasbullah bin Pit (sebol)
Redhat also announced its complex innerworkings of its business plan regarding their multimedia distribution. The general outline of the plan is as follows:
1. Make Redhat Multimedia Distribution.
2. ???
3. Profit
Hopefully this distro will encourage companies like
steinberg (cubase) emagic (protools) to make their software available for linux.
I doubt it though, but if it does I can imagine myself sitting behind a rocksolid computer in the studio with a cool desktop manager.
I won't be running redhat but gentoo, unless ofcourse the redhat people and the software manufacurors decide that the audiosoftware will only run under this distro.
If I'm missing something, please enlighten me (and others, I'm sure)
---
Information wants...you to shut your pie hole.
As a Musician, if Redhat can manage to bring the right tools, such as fruityloop and reason like tools, something to edit stuff like protools, etc, and make it all open source.
This could really help linux, I know I'd love to be able to make my music in linux. I'll buy the redhat multimedia linux if its reasonable in price, meaning under 200 bucks. Redhat should also provide services geared towards the needs of musicians, maybe even create a peer to peer music sharing network to allow musicians to share their music in an open fashion.
Oh by the way, Redhat if you are reading this and Need a beta tester, please reply
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
That is a truly ugly name for the project.
It'll be interesting to see how they tune the Linux kernel for this, though. A lot of the issues in PC-based multimedia work are latency-related, so they'll probably be spending a lot of time working with kernel patches for that. The article doesn't give many specifics.
We know the software is not there, if Redhat makes the software, it can work.
We need a fruityloop or reason like tool, We need a protools like tool, a cakewalk like tool, and a file sharing tool so we can create music and then upload it onto a network or even an extention of redhats site, and redhat can do something like Mp3.com to make profits.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
If they set it up so musicians who do create can create can upload music onto their site, or give music away for free, like mp3.com does.
I think Redhat could easily make money from this because music unlike art, everyone can appreciate.
An Open source music portal site could be created after enough musicians are using the open source software. It could really grow into a real community.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Red Hat is not trying to make anyone's life more difficult. They are just doing what they are required to do by law if they want to keep their trademark.
Considering that their trademark is just about the only thing they own (they give away everything else under the GPL) I'd say they have the right and duty to defend it. You can distribute copies of their distribution - just don't call it Red Hat.
On a more philosophical note - I wouldn't mind living in a world without copyright or patent laws. Neither of them protects my rights to be free from violence or fraud. On the contrary - patents and copyrights are a deal with the government to use the force of the courts underwritten by police violence to go after people who are doing something that doesn't harm anyone.
But trademark is different - it serves an important role in protecting me from fraud. How can trust in a vendor be built without a means of identifying his products that has some protection from fraud? It doesn't seem practical to put this burden on me as a customer. This tradeoff between two freedoms is therefore justified.
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
The idea of a free OS that is completely optimized for audio/video is a neat idea, the problem will be getting professional quality audio software available. I wouldn't dream of switching from a Mac or Windows until you could get a version of Cakewalk, Logic, or Pro Tools on it. If the companies that make these tools (arguably the top 3 multi-track recording software packages) ported them to linux, that'd be nifty, but since most people who do audio recording via software use one of these three, it'll be tough to crack the market.
ReHMuDi
Are script-kiddies now employed at Redhat?
... more than audio authoring.
...and I'd definitely use it.
As long as it's being referred to as multimedia authoring, let's talk about video, graphics and 3D modelling too!
I think all of those things being tied together into a single distribution could work nicely especially if integration is made a large point of focus on this.
I have a camcorder with a 1394 port. I'd love to be able to download my video, edit the frames with GIMP changing my broom handles into lightsabers! Perhaps I could do some 3D modelling and rendering to create a droid or two and overlay them into the scene as well? Next thing you know I'm fighting an invisible "remote" with broom handle!
Sound is only PART of the project...
Hell, for that matter, I could at least be able to make commercials or something commercially viable like that.
All I'd want from the distribution is a relatively flexible range of supported hardware that doesn't compromise quality of output and performance... that way I know in advance what I'm buying and can build a tool that will serve my purposes best.
So anyway... yeah... why stop at music?
It may *LOOK* ugly but it should probably be pronounced as "remedy" which is a lot better than most names that also *SOUND* ugly too, like DeMuDi.
I'd love to see my two ancestral clans finally reunite - seems the obvious route to entertainment industry destabilization.
BTW, Andromeda just got a cool writeup on Shift.com
-Scott
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
Never say "It can't happen" because I just glanced at the list of charter members and supporting companies for RealNetworks Helix development community effort... and RH is one of them. For those who don't recall, Helix platform is a client/server combination for producing and publishing streaming content of all types, not just Real files. Oh, and BTW they're going to "open source" it all thru their development community...
C|N>K
Suppose Red Hat is doing this for name recognition, or better yet
they are doing it for a weak vendor lock in type thing.
Say all the people who download this and use someday switch to linux completely. Who do you think they will go to for their home computers and such. Also, if companies start using this distribution who do you think they will buy support from? IBM, I don't think so.
Stupid things kids do.
That raises the question. What is the present state of multimedia support under Linux?
...because this eliminates one of the last reasons I have to still run Windows. Get software that can match ProTools, Sound Forge, Vegas and Acid (the latter three are from Sonic Foundry) and I will gladly take Windows 2K off of one of my machines. Gladly. One of my big complaints about Linux is that there is no decent pro-level audio tools for Linux. Hopefully ReHMuDi will fix that. One less Windozer==one less headache.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
LMFAO, I fell off my chair when I read the name.
I think people will actually buy it to say "Oh, yeah, I'm running Rehmudi Linux" when asked.
ROFL.
The page is not anti-Red Hat, but pro-knowledge. I'm sure many people who stumbled on the site didn't know Red Hat's policy on copied CDs.
Red Hat has made our life a slightly more difficult. This is what they have done. We are not trying to slam them, or tell them they are wrong, or even had another choice, but this is how it is.
24 months to wait!
I guess I have to keep using my Windows based
multimedia till then!
Thanks Red Hat! That's some quick work!
When I read this, I just think about BeOS and sigh.. BeOS was so excellently suited to multimedia.
say what you want about there distro, but rh has the coolest logo.
Not bizare, enlightened.
That just reminded me of a Simpson's quote:
Homer2: Bust in here and take it? You must be stupider than you look.
Homer: Stupider like a fox!
...and it never caught on with the intended audience. I hope that this project has better success, and/or that OpenBeOS is successful where the original failed.
libertarianswag.com
I swear to god, the fact that an assclown like you posts at +2 now says more about the incredible decay of this site than anything else.
SHUT THE FUCK UP, HanzoSan.
First off, let me say I'm glad they didn't blow a lot of money on a naming consultant. That ugly acronym they settled on must have saved them millions of dollars...
Soundtracks, film scoring, and even some album production is being done increasingly on DAWs, pronounced just like it's spelled. A typical configuration is a tricked-out PowerMac (Sun Ultras used to be the platform of choice) with maximum RAM and a fast RAID array (i.e RAID 0 -- don't laugh, I'm not kidding. RAID 0 is used to lower latency on the drives) and a MIDI adapter, for both driving sound modules and inputting music on a master keyboard. Add a copy of ProTools, some Mark of the Unicorn software, a DAT drive, a CD-burner, a mixer, some rack effects, and maybe a high-end audio PCI card for when you hit the limits of the Mac's decent but not that great on-board audio. This is not a sub-$1000 iMac rig were talking about here. If you want a good DAW, you go to the bank in your best suit and tie and apply for a loan.
Of course this makes no sense to an amatuer composer/musician. You might ask what's wrong with a stock PC with a good sound card, a quality microphone, UltraATA disks, a MOD Tracker with WAV/MP3 export, any old MIDI synth with velocity-sensitive keys, and CD-RW/DAT drive? Nothing really, if you want you music to sound like it was created on a computer. But that's not what a real DAW is for.
A DAW has to be _FAST_. The software used (like ProTools) is used to edit and master a gigantic audio file of CD-quality sound. Document sizes are often routinely in the gigabyte range, unless you're just editing small leadins for TV or commercials. You can use MIDI and samples to provide voices in the soundtrack, but the goal of a DAW is to have total control over the audio in the file, just like you have over a photo in Photoshop. It should be just as easy to work with a "real" audio recording (like a studio session recorded with a real orchestra) as it is to use sythentic music (samples from a microphone or synth, MIDI sequences, etc) and tweak the finished product to sound completely natural, as if real musicians had played it that way start to finish in the first place.
So any latency you have in the DAW can put skips or glitches in your recorded input. You need a workstation with enough RAM to avoid paging, fast disks that don't cause the CPU to have to wait (DMA/SCSI), and good all around performance to prevent bottlenecks: fast OS, fast graphics, fast CPU, fast audio chipset, etc.
Linux is perfect for this, because comparatively MacOS 9, MacOS X, and all versions of Windows except CE are complete pigs. Linux just lags in solid support for audio input, mixing, MIDI, and audio applications, etc. the way Macs and PCs do.
This distro isn't something you sell to end users (though they may) but to OEMs and VARs who want to sell Linux-based DAWs but want a vendor for the operating system beside Apple, Microsoft, or Sun. Other people have mentioned how poor musicians and DJs are. If you could make and market a Linux-based DAW out of PC parts with comparable performance to a ProTools rig and a substantially lower price, you could make a place for yourself in the market and do pretty well. Anything in the music equipment world that is both "really good" and "pretty cheap" and word gets out. Selling distro CDs just raises money and hopefully creates good PR for the concept of Linux as a good enough OS for a DAW.
Democracy. Whiskey. Sexy. Pick any two.
if these guys got together with steinberg, and produced a distro that would run ported versions of cubase, reason, rebirth, rewire, and reaktor, and packaged with same, i would pay out the ear for it in a heartbeat.
frankly, if they could just get the midi implementation to work, i would be impressed.
hell, this and wineX would be reason enough to blast my windows installation entirely.
This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
The first time I remember seeing this joke was when Eazel was going under, and it was something like:
1. Write a file manager and give it away for free
2. ???
3. Profit!
But I went searching for this post yesterday and I couldn't find it in any of the eazel-related stories. So can anyone clear this up? Who posted this joke the first time, and when?
What I would like to see is a implementation of ASIO and VST to linux. That yould help alot since the protocol is already tune for audio. And porting any original program like cubase or reaktor would be alot more easier. Same thing for VST which is already a standard plugin interface, and the IRIX part is already done...
Step 1: Steal Underpants
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!
And now you know.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Hopefully ReHMuDi will fix that.
so you hope ReHMuDi will remedy that?
i dum ed vs. i DuM HeR
Until someone proves otherwise, Debian's (female gender) title is wittier since it can incorporate "dep" backwards too. Witness "i dum(ped) ed".
Try fitting "rpm" into ReHMuDi...
Btw, who was ed?
Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?
Because you have to stand on the shoulder's of the giants before you, it's nearly impossible to do patent a new idea in high technology.
Big business has just figured out how to user their size and the current rules to their advantage. Being big is always a huge advantage over a start up.
with regards to both patent and copyright, you are right, for the consumer, these laws have neglegable benefit
Now that's not true. Copyright gives incentive to author's and other generator's of copy rightable material a financial incentive to produce them, and in theory it should improve the public commons in future. Patents do the same thing for inventors. Advancements are good for the consumer. Possibly not directly or immediatly, but they are good in the fullness of time. However, the current abuse of the system and other weirdism's in corporate behavior is harming the public consumer.
For the record, my opinion on the guy who is selling copies of the Ret Hat CD and upset about Red Hat asking him not to. What you're doing costs Red Hat money, and dilutes Red Hat's trade marked name. They have worked incredibly hard to build up the Red Hat brand, and they have a legal right to protect that investment.
It costs RedHat money to deal with the people who go believe they have support from RedHat. From people who call RedHat and want them to solve problems for them. Red Hat has to deal with those people and politely turn them away, telling them they don't own Red Hat. Then people start talking about the piss poor support Red Hat gave them. They'd purchased a reduced price copy from Red Hat, and then they wouldn't even support it. That costs them in terms of branding, and vendor reputation, which in a lot of ways is more valuable then money. The government prints money, and it has an extremely hard time building up trust with the public. Goodness knows I wouldn't want to have to build up the trust Red Hat has with the public.
While I understand that you want to promote Linux and make it nearly free for people to try, and that's great. It's a lot like over fishing a pond. You can ruin a perfectly good thing, by merely doing what you thought was fun without considering all of the long term affects. They want you to use you own name so those people associate the success or failure of their experience with you, not with Red Hat. This way Red Hat has control over the experice consumers have this things they associate with Red Hat.
Does this make it harder for you to let people try Linux out, yes. Is that Red Hat's problem? No.
Kirby
Oh I agree. He should be posting at +5, and you my friend, at -100.
Why -1? Can't you Linux geeks face the fact that your beloved systems isn't the optimal solution to every single problem that nags mankind?
The problem is that most of the music/recording software companies would probably want to keep a lot of the more interesting applications proprietary, which would result in a very different end product. Most of the industry has years of experience trying to stay alive in a competitive niche market, where a good percentage of their customers are (through no fault of their own) not burdened with lots of extra cash. Consequently, they see less advantage in giving important things away (you also see a lot more copy-protection in this industry, and less openness with file formats, etc.)
That's not to say that these companies would have a problem with using Linux as a platform on which to base their software, or that they couldn't produce a pretty good distro. But I wouldn't expect them to Open Source a lot of their code, even if they did contribute to such a distro. And since even hardware manufacturers are often in the software business, it's not certain that you would see a major difference there.
If any standardization starts to happen, I wouldn't be surprised if it comes about as a gradual stone-soup kind of thing, where commercial businesses gradually start to see the advantages this project as a platform for their proprietary products only after a lot of the ground-work has been done by dedicated volunteers.
But who knows-- I could be wrong.
Now that's not true. Copyright gives incentive to author's and other generator's of copy rightable material a financial incentive to produce them, and in theory it should improve the public commons in future.
My apologies.. I should have been more careful how I worded that. They do benefit the consumer, I just meant most consumers do not go out and personally use copyright or patent law for their personal benefit.
I agree, the RedHat trademark deserves to be protected. RedHat is not just the Linux distribution. When you buy a RedHat product, you are also buying documentation, support, and assurances that your copy of RedHat is the same one everyone else gets (the CDs on eBay could be modified in ways that the standard RedHat distribution was not).
slashdot!=valid HTML
He Slashdot people, I have been wondering about multimedia and Open Source, Linux etc for quit some time. Remember BeOS which should result in an operating system designed for the multimedia professional, well I have been wondering how much is available for the multimedia professional in the Open Source, Linux,etc community. Especially after this news. I mean I do browse through Freshmeat et al, but I don`t have the impression that there are many professional multimedia programs available. To give an example is there a software package which allows me to author cd-roms for the Windows/Mac (...I know...*sigh*) platform, something in the line of Director or Flash? If there are programs which allow me to create professional multimedia on a Linux machine, which can be used on a Windows/Mac platform I will definately abolish Windows and use Linux for all my work and not just for my server. Any information about professional creation of multimedia is very much appreciated and can be sent to bwijers@bdisfunctional.net
Mac OSX is there. Now if we can only get support for x86.
Oh wait they already use that. Hmm why would musicans switch then???
If all you're interested in is supporting them, couldn't you just make a donation instead? Fewer glossy software boxes in the landfills?
Do we like it? No.
Is it right? Probably.
Businesses tend to get involved and complicate what it is we love to do.
Most of us loved to use napster, and the RIAA got involved.
Most of us loved to surf the internet, and the advertising agencies got involved.
All I am pointing out is that companies tend to complicate things. Whether any of us like it or not is nearly beside the point. I really enjoy DeMuDi as it stands, and I probably would have/will enjoy ReHMuDi, but with Red Hat involved, it has the potential to change things. Maybe I'll contribute thousands of lines of code, but when it comes time for me to sell a product based on it, I will be denied the ability to associate it with ReHMuDi, a project I personally (may have) helped to create and promote.
I Agree With This Post
Dude, you're playing Tetris on Redhat? Ximian, or did you compile gnome games from source?
Wasn't DeMuDi (http://www.demudi.org/) supposed to be a Debian-based multimedia distribution? Red Hat could at least try to come up with a more original name than ReHMuDi, honestly!
putfwd.com - 1GB Free file storage with a twist
Can't compete on the desktop against Windows. Can't compete against IBM, et al., on the service and support front. I know! Let's put on a (multimedia) show!!!
WTF is the point when there are no real apps? (rhetorical) OSX is where it's at PERIOD
What do I think of when I read the article? The word stupid comes to mind.
Gentoo already comes with a low-latency kernel, ALSA, JACK, all the libs needed for compiling Ardour, audacity, MIDI sequencers like MuSE etc, ecasound and all that stuff.
It also has ebuilds for xine, all the DeCSS/DVD nav/DivX/AVI plugins, along with many other video and graphics packages.
For me, Gentoo is the perfect 'multimedia' distribution, and since so many of the really interesting multimedia projects are still in heavy development and often must be compiled from CVS to benefit from new features, a binary RPM-based distro of this stuff seems redundant to me.
That being said, I think it will be interesting to see how such a project turns out.
What I would like to see in such a distro are, in no particular order:
Standardization on ALSA, since OSS doesn't support things like JACK.
Development of a 'shared' ALSA wave device, so that multiple apps can use the soundcard (SB Live owners are already well looked after by the hardware) at the same time. This code exists in ALSA, but is apparently buggy or unused for other reasons. ESD is neat for network-transparent audio, but not optimal for content creation due to high latencies.
Full set of MPEG/MPEG-2/DivX/AAC encoders/decoders and prebuilt modules for MJPEG, DV and BTTV cards.
Pre-built packages of Cisco's MPEG-4 Streaming tools - Not sure about the licensing for Darwin Streaming Server, bundled with the Cisco project - possibly hack on the VideoLAN server so it supports MPEG-4 streams.
'Grand Unified' MIDI/audio/video mixer/monitor/router, permitting selection of video and audio playback and recording sources, along with a 'drop-target' for previewing image, mp3, sound and video files. Possibly nautilus integration?
Reworked version of Blender (presuming it goes Open Source) with hooks for mapping images, frames of a video stream etc. to texture coordinates on objects, or MIDI events to object attributes(rotation etc.) in Blender, and output plugins so you can route blender-rendered frames just like any other video source.
Those are a few f the things that would make Multimedia on linux a more productive experience, at least for me.
(Prepare to lose all karma...)
I too wanted to do all of that with my primary workstation... and without sacraficing everything that I was already used to.
So, I bought a G4 with Mac OS X.
Granted, I had to add ram and buy a wireless 3 button mouse, but it's been working great and both my camcorder and Kodak digital camera worked perfect the first time I plugged them in. The next purchases on my list are a larger hard drive, Final Cut Pro (at my university computer store) and a USB jog/shuttle controller.
And I still handle my email with pine and fetchmail.
Linux is for Bitches
no. no. nononono! text
Red Hat is not doing OSS a favour. I preffer to use any other distro that tries to keep directory structures as the should be, standard packaging systems (debian, slak tgz's), etc.
Anyone can choose what they like of course.
unfinished: (adj.)
The biggest hope I have at the moment for video production stuff on Linux is Jahshaka.* (see http://jahshakafx.sourceforge.net/)
Really, I'd be 80% happy with a freely licensed (GPL, BSD, whatver) ultra-simple (but grahical, something like iMovie on the Mac) program which would let me rearrange chunks of video so I could cull the junk which shows what a bad cameraman I really am, then save the result in a choice of formats (DV, MPEG4, hopefully before I die Ogg Theora).
Fancy titling and 3D effects are nice enough, just not something I want / need / wish for as much.
timothy
* And people complain about the name of Ogg Vorbis!
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5