Lightworks Video Editor To Go Open Source

Art3x writes "EditShare will release its video editor as open source this summer. Lightworks handles high-definition media, DPX, and RED, shares projects with Final Cut Pro and Avid, and was recently used by Academy-award-winning editor Thelma Schoonmaker on Shutter Island. Introduced in 1989 and bought by EditShare last year, it 'has come from over one million hours of software development,' says EditShare's James Richings. But he says releasing the source will 'generate concepts and capabilities never seen before. I expect that the Lightworks Open Source initiative will transform not only the technology, but also the opinions on what a professional editing tool can achieve.'" From the press release's description, it sounds like the "open source" phase will follow a period of free-as-in-beer downloading.

Comments

Great something

[ooshna]

People can use instead of their stolen Adobe Premiere programs.

Re:Great something

[ZaphDingbat]

I agree completely, which is why I'm actually in the middle of writing one for Linux (+ maybe other OS's). A lot of work.

If anyone's interested, I'm working on a two-fold project: a video framework that works in 4:4:4 linear floating-point RGBA with OpenGL acceleration, and a video editor built on top of it, all scriptable via Python.

The framework is coming along nicely. I've just begun on the editing interface. You can see recent (but not current) framework code at: http://www.fluggo.com/redmine/projects/show/fluggo-media

I would be absolutely happy for someone to take the framework and build their own editor on top of it. I would love to provide support for that case. If anyone's interested, drop me a line at brian@fluggo.com.

Re:Great something

[cupantae]

if I can't figure out how to import and splice clips in less than 30 minutes of picking up a copy of your video editing software, I conclude that the software is no good.

I have the same attitude with all products: if I can't figure it out in 30 minutes, without consulting a manual (see below), I just give up.

Incidentally, I can't read, write, swim, drive or ride a bicycle. I assume none of those things is any good.

Re:Great something

[h4rr4r]

For an illiterate you made quite an insightful comment.

Re:Great something

[cupantae]

Thanks. Martha reads out stories and comments. Then I dictate replies of my own.

[Please help me. He has me locked in his basement and the smell is horrific!
      - Martha.]

Re:No doubt, will equal GIMP

[fotbr]

Finding fault with Blender is* easy, and for much the same reason people find fault with GIMP -- the UI is something you either love, or absolutely despise, with very little in between.

*Referring to Blender circa 2003, so this may need to be changed to "was". The UI was bad enough at the time to make me not look back.

Much-needed pro-level competition for Avid

[ev1lcanuck]

I'm really excited about this move. The first editing system I ever experienced when I was young was a Lightworks/Heavyworks system. My dad (a film editor, now director) loves the Lightworks systems due to their natural and intuitive control systems. I still have an old Lightwave controller sitting around that I've thought about hacking to work with the Avid.

Currently we work on Avid Media Composer, since it remains the only true pro-level editing software. Final Cut has it's pros but, at least to me, it's more for video editing (by which I mean not sourcing or finishing to film) and smaller projects (promos, commercials, shorts). If you want to cut a feature film - you use Avid. I have arguments with co-workers about FCP versus Avid but we usually arrive at the agreement that Avid is simply the standard to which all other systems are currently judged.

With the open sourcing of Lightworks I can only hope that the best of modern systems like Avid and FCP can be integrated with the very intuitive Lightworks way of working. At the very least, I hope it scares Avid and Apple at least enough to make them fix some of the problems that currently exist with their systems. More competition is always better for the end user.

Re:Analogy Pendant

[uglyduckling]

Beer is free when someone gives it away. You get the liquid but not the recipe. That's the point of the analogy.

Two things I noticed

[bomanbot]

Maybe thats just me, but does anyone see any system requirements on anywhere? I read the press release, looked all over the company website and still could not find anything even remotely looking like system requirements anywhere.

I would guess that there is a Windows version and since it seems to integrate with Final Cut Pro, a Mac version seems likely as well, but there is no way to be sure and strangely, I could not find anything.

Also, it seems that Lightworks was only recently (August 2009) acquired by EditShare. Making it OpenSource now could mean that EditShare maybe was not able or willing to continue developing, selling and supporting the program and now tries to salvage something by open-sourcing it, hoping the community will pick up the slack.

Re:Depends...

[gyrogeerloose]

I refuse to ever use C/C++, because I consider its outdated design [...] and its inelegance and programming inefficiency to be a pain to my brain.

No problem. All Lightwave development is done in LOGO. Just tell the turtle what you want it to do.

Re:Nothing good will probably come of this

[I'm not really here]

the company more or less considers the tool to be dead.

OR... the company realizes that the benefits of crowd sourcing the application far outweigh the potential monetary gains of keeping it closed source. If the company releases it via BSD license and then develops and sells closed source plugins for the architecture, the massive adoption of the core software will springboard their new plugin products. As the developers of the software, they are best positioned to be the leader in plugin development for this project.

So, the cynical view that the application is dead completely ignores the possibility that it may simply be more profitable for them to open source it.