Slashdot Mirror


HD Video Editing with Blender

Posthis writes "While the VSE sequence module has been part of Blender for a while, the upcoming version v2.46 comes with some new powerful video editing features, like Proxy editing, optimized FFmpeg support, and more. Not many use Blender strictly as a video editor because it's not very straight-forward, but given the fact that it now deals with HDV and 24p footage much more comfortably compared to other OSS video editors, it makes it a sound contender. This new tutorial shows the basics of how to use it as a video editor and put your masterpiece together."

27 of 73 comments (clear)

  1. Now if only I could find ... by Skapare · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... a video input/output card for Linux that supports component (YPbPr) video.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    1. Re:Now if only I could find ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      S-Video isn't really component. It uses a luma and a chroma signal, while what people typically refer to as component video uses luma and a pair of chroma channels, or just map to straight RGB.

      I agree with your point about just going digital, though. For capture, sure, there might be some analog sources you might want to grab from, but there's no point in going to analog output these days. Professionals still dream about keeping everything in their pipelines digital; at the end of the day, they still have to print out to film, at least until digital cinema has taken over the market.

    2. Re:Now if only I could find ... by Saval · · Score: 4, Informative

      ... a video input/output card for Linux that supports component (YPbPr) video.

      There are lots of products from several manufacturers to choose from:

      Deltacast

      AJA

      Bluefish444

      They are high quality professional grade cards and the price range is also high.

      --
      --Saval
    3. Re:Now if only I could find ... by Saval · · Score: 4, Informative

      AJA has linux support, drivers and SDK for (at least) their OEM boards: http://www.aja.com/html/products_oem.html

      and Bluefish444 has Linux SDK available to registered OEM customers: bluefish444 OEM

      We are about to try those for use in our product in Q4/08 (hopefully)... If anyone knows other possibilities we would like to know!

      --
      --Saval
    4. Re:Now if only I could find ... by Bill+Wong · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've been using a blackmagic intensity pro for my own high definition video captures over hdmi/component
      No linux support though, which is unfortunate
      But it's very very very cheap (~$330 online for the pro, ~$235 for the hdmi-only version)
      Didn't post in reply to your parent post as he was looking for something that was linux native, but, if you're working for an OEM, your company might be able to convince blackmagic to finally provide linux support.. They've been tethering on the edge for a while..

    5. Re:Now if only I could find ... by Bill+Wong · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oh, and your company might also want to look into a couple Japanese OEMs with products in that space
      The hardware is cost-competitive with most of the other products on the market, but, probably at the expense of increased support costs
      There's Sknet with their Monster X
      And, Canopus Japan has a notable HDRECs product.
      And, also earthsoft who I know has done some OEM work for Sony in their high defintion PVRs

  2. Re:With that UI.. by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm usually pretty quick to defend the Blender UI, I'm one of those people who understands how quick and powerful it really is, but this time I have to agree.

    Any tutorial on video editing in Blender should be akin to a tutorial on cleaning teeth which starts with:

    First off, you'll need to remove all of your teeth so you can get a really good angle with the brush.

    Otherwise, it's lying or incomplete.

    --
    I don't therefore I'm not.
  3. S-Video is not component. by Skapare · · Score: 2, Informative

    S-Video is not real component. S-Video still has NTSC subcarrier modulation. Its only benefit over composite is that the subcarrier is not mixed with the luminance, making it unnecessary to filter them apart later. That reduces the artifacts of NTSC, but it does not eliminate them. Component is all baseband; there is no modulated subcarrier.

    Additionally, S-Video only supports the NTSC format, which is 480i59.94. Component can support all the video formats used by ATSC and DVB video transmission standards. Many DVD and BR-DVD players have component output. I've seen one DVD recorder with component input. Many high-definition, and a few standard-definition, TVs and TV-oriented monitors have component input. You can recognize component input/output with 5 RCA or BNC connectors (1 for luminance referred to as Y, one for Y-B chroma, one for Y-R chroma, and 2 for stereo audio).

    As for "going digital", suggest a digital input/output that is universally available (e.g. is input for monitors, output for cameras, input/output for computers including Linux supported, and input/output for recording devices like DVD-R, DVR, etc) ... and supports HD. Hint: I doubt you can find one.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    1. Re:S-Video is not component. by ZERO1ZERO · · Score: 3, Informative
      "Additionally, S-Video only supports the NTSC format, which is 480i59.94"

      Erm. That's bollocks. There are more countries and standards in the world than America you know.

  4. Excellent! by _Hellfire_ · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Now does anyone know how I can capture HD footage from my camcorder over a supported firewire input in Linux?

    Kino does SD great over firewire (my camcorder can downsample), but borks out (gray output) when I try it with HD. I've googled and sourceforged but cannot seem to find anything that will do it. I know my PC is fast enough because I used to do it with Premiere Elements.

    --
    "And then I visited Wikipedia ...and the next 8 hours are a blur..."
    1. Re:Excellent! by Eugenia+Loli · · Score: 3, Informative

      Kino does not do HD, but dvGrab, the utility that Kino uses does HDV capture. You simply need to use the dvgrab 3.x version (not earlier) and use it from the command line. It captures HDV fine, in .m2t format, that Blender supports.

  5. The real question is... by TheShadowzero · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is it still insanely counter-intuitive and hard to learn? The blender i used for rendering was nigh-impossible to figure out without at least three tutorials.

    --
    If history repeats itself, why can't we study the future?
    1. Re:The real question is... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Is it still insanely counter-intuitive and hard to learn?

      For the 3D part? Probably. But the video editing was (surprisingly) a snap. Just follow Eugenia's instructions and you'll be up and running in no time flat!

      If you don't believe me, check this out. After seeing this story, I downloaded the latest Blender and got cracking. A short time later I had this video uploaded to YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUzVi_f5kyE

      All the source videos were fairly large clips that Blender handled without issue. With only a smidge of practice, I was able to clip them to size and add transitions. So I'm pretty happy with the result. Especially since I have absolutely NO video editing experience. If I had a bit more time with this tool, I imagine I could whip up a pretty good promotional video.

      I didn't bother with the audio tracks on my first run-through, but it doesn't appear to be too difficult to include them. The one issue I'm concerned about is if there is support for a decent mixer. (e.g. Could I play background music, then at some point fade it to a less audible level, play the original speech/effects, then adjust the BG music back to full volume?) Worst case, that's probably something I could work out in an audio editing program, but it would be a major pain.

      I can't complain, though, given what I paid for Blender. (i.e. Nothing!) It's possibly the best FREE video editing tool I have ever seen. Which probably says more about the lack of such tools than about the brilliance of Blender, but I'm still happy. :-)

      Feel free to give it a go yourself. If you need some footage to mess around with, the stuff I used can be found here: http://blog.wiicade.com/?p=177
    2. Re:The real question is... by Eugenia+Loli · · Score: 3, Informative

      For bg music in addition to another audio track, use the "ADD" plugin between the two audio tracks and then use the iPO curve editor to make one of the two tracks louder or less loud.

      As for other audio options, go to the panel at the bottom and click the last toolbar icon, the one that reads "Sound block buttons".

    3. Re:The real question is... by MenTaLguY · · Score: 2, Informative

      Unless they've changed things in the newer versions, you don't need the "ADD" part (though you do need IPO to set volume); all of the audio tracks are mixed automatically.

      --

      DNA just wants to be free...
  6. Re:Learning Blender by Eugenia+Loli · · Score: 2, Informative

    Lots of links here:
    http://www.blender.org/community/user-community/

  7. Yes, the UI sucks. by Animats · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've used Blender extensively. I've even used the Game Kit and extended Blender in Python.

    Even after you know it, the UI still sucks. There's not enough feedback, it's too modal, the tools for aligning objects are weak, the keyboard shortcuts manual is over forty pages, and things that aren't implemented just silently don't work. Other than that...

    1. Re:Yes, the UI sucks. by rabiddeity · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow, it sounds like every other 3d modeling app I've ever used!


      Yeah, except this is an article about using it as a video editing and compositing tool, so we're not comparing it to Maya and the like. We should be comparing it to Premiere and Final Cut Pro. Does being powerful mean it must be difficult to figure out? I don't think so. Adobe Premiere took me about half an hour to figure out, behaves pretty much like film junkies would expect a video editing tool to work (with terminology like "razor tool" and "shuttle"), and doesn't have any rusted pointy edges to catch yourself on. If only Premiere didn't cost so damn much.

      Looking at the tutorial, it seems like you CAN use Blender to edit and compose videos, but it seems like choosing a Leatherman to do surgery because it has a scalpel and tweezers and a screwdriver all in one tool. But you don't need a screwdriver when doing surgery. It'd be nice if they scrapped the existing UI skin and started with a deliberately limited interface specifically for video composition. Hide the buttons related to 3D rendering, rework it to make it look like Premiere or Final Cut Pro. Separate audio and video tracks. That's a start. Then start adding back in useful Blender features to the UI, under a separate extra toolbar or something. I don't need to know about the internals, I don't care that a fade transition effect is actually a Frazzleby-Zharfontane Swinklebury Matrix Transform chained to an iDCT followed by whatever. In fact I don't even want to see those things. It's confusing and irrelevant. In Premiere I drag the transition to the timeline between the two cuts and it works. I can tweak it if I want, but by default it does pretty much what I want. The focus is not on the how, but the what. KISS method.

      I want a tool that only edits video and does it well. If you can fake it with a UI skin, then do it! This is one thing the pro tools do so well, and it's something the free tools would do well to emulate. Call it "Blender for Video". Same internals, different UI.

      One more thing: make the goddamn windows look right according to what OS it's compiled for. I made this point about GIMP before, and it applies equally to Blender. Spit and polish make a huge difference.
    2. Re:Yes, the UI sucks. by Qbertino · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even after you know it, the UI still sucks. There's not enough feedback, it's too modal, the tools for aligning objects are weak, the keyboard shortcuts manual is over forty pages, and things that aren't implemented just silently don't work. Other than that...

      I see you haven't used 3DSMax yet.

      --
      We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  8. Re:Will It Blend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You still suck. Quit whining about Blender just because you're too lazy to learn how to work it.

  9. Re:Learning Blender by LetterRip · · Score: 2, Informative

    'The Essential Blender' is a pretty good book for learning the basics of Blender - after that use the Blender Wiki and other sources for deeper information.

  10. Re:Learning Blender by WK2 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sorry I can't answer your question about finding a good book, as I read all my technical information online. Here's a source for great blender tutorials though:
    http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/BSoD

    BSOD stands for "Blender Summer of Documentation". It was a Blender/Google Summer of Code/Documentation thing they did a few years ago. It produced the best documentation that Blender has to date.

    Try starting with this one:
    http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/BSoD/Introduction_to_Modeling

    --
    Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
  11. 3D kits are difficult to handle. Quit wining. by Qbertino · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Once again lots of Blender UI bashing from the less knowledgable here. Please listen to this:

    3D kits are difficult to handle. Period. That goes for Maya, Softimage, Lightwave, 3DSMax, Houdini and Blender. That even goes for Cinema 4D, allthough they claim to be the easiest to use in the pro legue.

    Pro-level 3D with pro-level tools is a non-trivial task, and trying out every feature in each of these packages and learning to use it takes well over a year, a stack of books and porbably even some hands on training by a professional. Somebody who is good at operating a 3D kit usually knows nothing else about computers. These software behemoths are like Emacs with the brakes removed - allmost an operating system by themselves.

    That you need a stack of tutorials to get going with a full-range 3D package is the *norm*, not an exception. Blender has some unusual UI concepts (most of which make perfect sense and actually are and allways were innovative) but it is definitely not any more difficult to handle than Lightwave or 3DSMax. Take that from someone who has a full commercial license of Lightwave 8 *and* has been using Blender since 1.8.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:3D kits are difficult to handle. Quit wining. by chammy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That you need a stack of tutorials to get going with a full-range 3D package is the *norm*, not an exception. Blender has some unusual UI concepts (most of which make perfect sense and actually are and allways were innovative) but it is definitely not any more difficult to handle than Lightwave or 3DSMax.

      Finally somebody says it. 3D graphics have been a hobby of mine for the past 10 years, so I've played with quite a few trials of various editing packages. NONE, I repeat, NONE of them are "pick-up and learn" tools. The sheer amount of information you work with when modeling in 3D makes any sort of editor horribly complex (or horribly simplified).

      I like to think of Blender as "GIMP for 3D" because people like to complain about the UI. It seems complex, but once you get to know it you see how incredibly flexible it is. After several years of using an old Maya license, I actually prefer Blender because I can customize panes and save views into what my "ideal" 3D package would look like. There are also quite a few tools and scripts I can't live without (brush vertex selecting, anyone?).
    2. Re:3D kits are difficult to handle. Quit wining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'd like to mention that the 'most' intuitive 3d Modeling interface I've come across is probably Sketchup [www.sketchup.com](from @Last and then bought by Google!). It's not one for Nurbs or any of the more complicated features of modeling, but for the basics of solid items, it's a dream. And then export the results into your preferred editing/rendering package and continue to fine tune the work.

      My current workflow is either model in Sketchup then build the scene and render in either Blender or 3DSMax or Hexagon or Lightwave (or any other tool I have at hand).

      Works for me.

    3. Re:3D kits are difficult to handle. Quit wining. by Bombula · · Score: 2, Interesting
      These software behemoths are like Emacs with the brakes removed - allmost an operating system by themselves.

      Funny how creating a powerful, intuitive, user-friendly GUI for OSs is what catapulted computers from being nifty novelties into being essential productivity tools from the top to the bottom of society in every sphere, from social to economic. Funnier still is how many bozos are too stupid to realize this, still think command-line interfaces are where the cool kids hang out, etc. It's ridiculous. Get. Your. Farking. Interface. Sorted.

      Compared to the challenge of creating the tools themselves, the task is trivial; but it takes the skillset of a designer, not a math jock or code monkey.

      --
      A-Bomb
    4. Re:3D kits are difficult to handle. Quit wining. by Tetsujin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      These software behemoths are like Emacs with the brakes removed - allmost an operating system by themselves.

      Funny how creating a powerful, intuitive, user-friendly GUI for OSs is what catapulted computers from being nifty novelties into being essential productivity tools from the top to the bottom of society in every sphere, from social to economic. Funnier still is how many bozos are too stupid to realize this, still think command-line interfaces are where the cool kids hang out, etc. It's ridiculous. Get. Your. Farking. Interface. Sorted.

      Compared to the challenge of creating the tools themselves, the task is trivial; but it takes the skillset of a designer, not a math jock or code monkey.

      Let's get this straight:

      It doesn't just take a designer. It takes a designer who understands what the program is and what it's supposed to do, and how people are going to work with it and (if you really want to pander to the audience) what they expect, what they're used to. In short, it's a harder problem than you acknowledge.

      And, in general, for an interface to be easy to use it must be limited. Too many options means users complaining that your app is too complicated, or too cluttered with buttons and huge-ass menus. That's the problem with current GUIs - they don't scale well to large sets of possible commands. And a mesh editor is pretty much all about the large command set...

      Honestly, I don't give a shit about what made computers massively popular commodities instead of niche items - not in this context. Blender, 3DS Max, Photoshop, etc. - these aren't apps that everybody runs. They're for specific groups of users - people who will do a lot of work with the app, can afford to take the time to learn to use it right in exchange for being able to use it more efficiently.

      'Course, I do like command-line interfaces, and I like the Blender UI, so therefore I must not know a damn thing, right? :D
      --
      Bow-ties are cool.