Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: the State of Free Video Editing Tools?

New submitter Shadow99_1 writes I used to do a lot of video editing (a few years ago, at an earlier job) and at that time I used Adobe Premiere. Now a few years later I'm looking to start doing some video editing for my own personal use, but I have a limited budget that pretty well excludes even thinking about buying a copy of Adobe Premiere. So I ask slashdot: What is the state of free (as in beer or as in open source) video editing tools? In my case... I support a windows environment at work and so it's primarily what I use at home. I am also using a camcorder that uses flash cards to record onto, so for me I need a platform that supports reading flash cards. So that is my focus but feel free to discuss video editing on all platforms. I've been looking forward to the Kickstarted upgrade to OpenShot; based on the project's latest update, early versions of an installer should start appearing soon. Video editing is a big endeavor, though, and ambitious announcements and slipped schedules both seem to be the norm: an open-source version of Lightworks was announced back in 2010. Some lighter open-source options include Pitivi (raising funds to get to version 1.0) and Kdenlive, also in active development (most recent release was in mid-May). Pitiviti's site links to a sobering illustration about many of the shorter- and longer-lived projects in this area.

37 of 163 comments (clear)

  1. What about Lightworks? by myoparo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's free and pretty powerful.

    1. Re: What about Lightworks? by yope · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Unfortunately you'd probably find more options if you decided to switch to Linux. Cinelerra comes to mind, or Kdenlive. Cinelerra is very powerful, but needs a lot to get used to and learn to avoid its bugs. IMHO, in the end it's well worth the effort, because it has some really nifty features. If a steep learning curve is not your thing, stay with Kdenlive.

    2. Re:What about Lightworks? by HaeMaker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not open source yet, but it should be pretty soon. The plan was to release the code when the Mac client was complete. The Mac client is in beta (and pretty solid), so if they stick to the plan, should be "real soon now". Lightworks is my favorite, by the way. Extremely powerful, albeit with some quirks. Familiarity with ffmpeg is very helpful as the conversions are the toughest part. I image someone will integrate an ffmepg front-end once the source is released.

    3. Re:What about Lightworks? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's free and pretty powerful.

      It's only free if you're OK with 720p output, limited input, and not being able to move your source material to a different editor. The latter is actually the bigger risk because if Lightworks goes away (let's hope not) there'd be no way to buy the 'pro' version and get your data exported.

      Otherwise it's $279 or you're on a subscription plan. It's probably still the best choice available, but be aware you don't just go buy a GoPro or a Nikon and plan on dazzling folks with the HD output with free Lightworks. From what I've seen, even iMovie parity on Linux costs $79/yr.

      Even if you're very frugal and can use Free, it's probably smart to buy a month once in a while and export your projects.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re: What about Lightworks? by dwywit · · Score: 2

      Don't know about Cinelerra, but you're right about Kdenlive vs. Premiere.

      Kdenlive wouldn't talk to my tape camera (miniDV tapes), so I couldn't capture footage. This was using Ubuntu Studio. The computer recognised the firewire card, Ubuntu could see it, but kdenlive (after 4 hours troubleshooting) just wouldn't talk to the camera.

      Premiere Pro can be had for about a third of retail - if you qualify for the academic pricing. I bought the entire Creative Suite 5.5 for AUD$450.

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
  2. CS2 by wbr1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unless you have an aversion to closed source or need some features it does not provide, adobe has made CS2 versions of their products available for free for some time. You do need to register and login if you do not have an Adobe account, but presumably that could be done with fake info for the paranoid.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:CS2 by Ultra64 · · Score: 4, Informative
    2. Re:CS2 by thedbp · · Score: 5, Informative

      This isn't actually true. Technically, you still need to own a copy of CS2 to legally use the software:

      http://blogs.adobe.com/convers...

      Will it work? Yes.

      Are you supposed to do this if you don't own CS2? No.

      It is ethical? That's for you to decide.

    3. Re:CS2 by ProzacPatient · · Score: 2

      I doubt that. The EULA; End User License Agreement, for proprietary software often contain language in their agreements that the license agreement can be arbitrarily changed at any time for any reason by the proprietor and that by installing or otherwise using the software you agree to that possibility and will abide to any changes. Microsoft in particular has been known to do this and I would think it would be difficult for an end user to contest this.

    4. Re:CS2 by linuxrocks123 · · Score: 2

      Not quite. Such a contract -- "we can change the terms at any time" -- would almost certainly qualify as an adhesion contract. Websites get away with this in terms of service because they're free to use. But if you shell out money for something and the contract says, "we can decide to give you nothing at all for your money whenever we want to", that probably wouldn't hold up.

      Most likely, however, the CS2 terms always were, "you're only supposed to download this if you bought CS2", and Adobe just wasn't publicizing that requirement enough. My understanding with the giveaway is, from a technical perspective, you can register with a throwaway account and download it whether you bought CS2 or not, but you'd be pirating it if you didn't legally buy CS2 in the past. I never bothered to create an account and download the stuff because I had no need of the software. It might be cool to run it in WINE, I guess, but the GIMP is awesome, and mkvmerge + ffmpeg + handbrake works okay for the tiny amount of video editing I do. Also if Acrobat Reader and Flash are any indication, Adobe's software is bloated, unstable crap.

      --
      vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
  3. Davinci Resolve Edit by entertainment · · Score: 3, Informative

    Blackmagic has lots of hardware and likely will be supported in the future - davinci is sweet, if this system proves stable it will create a much needed solution. https://www.blackmagicdesign.c...

  4. Resolve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you're looking for free but not "libre" check out BlackMagic's "DaVinci Resolve". It started out as a color correction software. Now it's a full fledged editor. It's free unless you need uber advanced noise reduction etc.

    i just migrated to it from Adobe Premiere because premiere isn't great for team work.

    -S

  5. Cinelerra or Creative Cloud by thedbp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The first one that springs to mind is Cinelerra:

    http://cinelerra.org/1/

    There's also the Community Version of Cinelerra:

    http://cinelerra-cv.org/

    Honestly though no open-source solution is going to come CLOSE to Premiere. And since you can get Creative Cloud for $50/month, it isn't THAT big of an expenditure up-front, and if you're making money from the editing (and, if you're looking at a Premiere-level video editing platform, I would hope this would be something you're monetizing) $50/month isn't much to get all the tools you'd need for editing, compositing, graphic design, etc etc etc.

    So, yeah, my suggestion is to find a way to afford $50/month for Creative Cloud, and barring that, check out Cinelerra.

    1. Re:Cinelerra or Creative Cloud by iluvcapra · · Score: 2

      Last time I checked, the cheaper version of Vegas sucked, mainly because it had a *very* limited limitation on the number of video tracks allowed on the cheaper non-pro version.

      I have about 30-40 credits on Hollywood features in sound editorial. I've seen a picture editor maybe go out to three video tracks. More than one is unusual, unless you're on an NLE that puts titles and dissolves on second tracks.

      Some guys need dozens or hundreds tracks of layers for compositing, but that's not the same domain as a "video editing tool."

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    2. Re:Cinelerra or Creative Cloud by Shadow99_1 · · Score: 2

      Well as the one who originally posted this...

      My personal project is very simple. I have raw H.264 compliant 1980x1024 (@ 30 fps) video from the camcorder I use and I don't even need to do much if any editing of the video itself currently. The biggest things I do need right now are: Ability to add a title screen to the beginning of a video (and probably and ending screen as well), occasional text overlays, and enhancing audio gain (for when the gain ended up being to low to hear over ambient sound). I am also arguing whether I should combine two videos of 18-24 minutes each into a single video with a transition or leave them separate. Right now the only one likely to view the video in question are people I know online (because online is twenty times easier than making a bunch of discs for people and hoping their DVD/Blueray player can even play the video in question).

      Before I ever touched Premiere I had used Pinnacles video editing software nearly a decade ago... But I've always wanted to replace shelling out a ton of money for video editing. It seems like their should be some solid solution to the need to edit video on a PC after years and years of people doing this that is not expensive or not so expensive, but limited...

      Anyways... I thought Slashdot might be able to give me some things to look at and I have found a few things to take a look at from peoples suggestions. It's also pointed out how many failures are out there as well...

      --
      we are all invisible unless we choose otherwise
    3. Re:Cinelerra or Creative Cloud by iluvcapra · · Score: 2

      I can count probably two dozen layers in the opening sequence for my local news.

      But that's comping, not editing -- as a general rule, if you noticed something, it's either bad picture editing, or not picture editing at all. On features, the crew who does the opening sequence may do it in Vegas or After Effects of some other "editing" workstation, but they're not called "editors," they're called "designers." People who layer VFX shots aren't VFX editors, they're compositors. The people who actually go by the title "VFX Editor" actually don't do a lot of comping, besides some simple mock-ups and garbage mattes, their gig is more organizational and supervisory over the people that layer the shots.

      Maybe someone might do some gig in Vegas or Avid, but there's a line between crafting visual elements for transitions and titles, versus the structuring of a narrative piece with shot selection, order, and pacing. Those are different things. If all you'd ever done was comps and title animation in Vegas, and you went around calling yourself an "editor," you'd get a lot of funny looks and most knowledgable post supervisors in LA and NY would call you out on it.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  6. no real winners by marcello_dl · · Score: 4, Informative

    My desktop power user workflow wrt video is:
    cat (unix command) to piece together the 2gb splices the camcorder makes (avchd)
    ffmpeg to change the container from whatever the camcorder uses to a more editor friendly mkv, you can use the copy option for blazing fast remuxing without reencoding.
    kdenlive or cinelerra. They are both prone to crash so save often. Cinelerra has best curves for fading but it's a very peculiar GUI.

    If you know your stuff, you can do pretty decent videos.

    --
    ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    1. Re:no real winners by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      You must get pretty tired of hard cuts.

  7. Blender by SaXisT4LiF · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I found that Blender has a surprisingly intuitive Video Sequence Editor. It might be worth looking into.

    --
    Fight or flight its all the same
    Live to die another day

    --Ryan
    1. Re:Blender by butalearner · · Score: 2

      blender is good for video editing, but there's no way on earth that you could call it initutive. The quirky UI takes a steep learning curve.

      This is definitely true of their modeling UI, but I found the video editor quite intuitive, and my last video editing experience before that was several years prior, Adobe Premiere 2.0 or so. With only the tooltips, I quickly figured out various helpful keyboard shortcuts without referring to a tutorial or cheatsheet or anything. The only thing that tripped me up a bit was how to change the output settings (you have to go back to the Scene view/window/whatever it's called in Blender parlance).

    2. Re:Blender by deathguppie · · Score: 2

      I've used Blender for years, and use it for tons of stuff. But really when I want to edit, I use KDENLive. There are just to many things that take a lot longer to do in blender than kdenlive. For instance if your output video is a different framerate than your input video you will have to ditch the sound in it, split it out using another program and then import it into blender so that it matches the output video. Also keyframing for audio and video effects are available in kdenlive. I know that I can actually do a ton more in Blender but the amount of time I spend creating nodes and working with sound just makes it not worth it. I actually create content in blender then edit everything together in kdenlive.

      --
      once more into the breach
  8. Blender... by Qybix · · Score: 4, Informative

    Blender is mostly for 3d animation, but it does have it's own video editor built in. Added bonus that you can animate things like callouts, thought clouds, etc... Added bonus that the community for Blender seems massive.

    QYbix

    --
    Qybix ----- I do not have a belief system; I'm an Anti-theist and proud of it! Saying that not believing in anything i
  9. Trolling much ? by alexhs · · Score: 3, Funny

    I need a platform that supports reading flash cards.

    What are you trying to do? Referring to? It's a completely different technology!
    Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
    1. Re:Trolling much ? by multisync · · Score: 2

      What are you trying to do? Referring to?

      On the assumption you're not trolling, I believe he was referring to these.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
  10. KDEnlive by TyFoN · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've been using KDEnlive a lot, and I find it really nice for my personal use.
    It hasn't crashed in about a year either, and uses MELT underneath.

    Slightly OT: I've also replaced adobe lightroom with darktable now, and I like it a lot.

  11. Are you a programmer? by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 4, Informative

    AviSynth is extremely versatile and often leads in state-of-the-art filters long before any other video editor gets them, including professional ones. The trick is that there's no UI for it -- to edit videos, you write scripts.

    1. Re:Are you a programmer? by GuB-42 · · Score: 2

      Yep, AviSynth is a wonderful tool, escpecially for encoding. It has among the best filters for duties like de-interlacing, scaling and enhancement. Is also does a good job at split and merge operations.
      However, if you intend do actually produce something like a short film from camera footage, the lack of good GUI frontends make it very teidous.

      Another thing is that AviSynth is Windows only as it relies on DirectShow. This is somewhat surprising considering how "linux-like" this software feels. The cross-platform "AviSynth 3.0" project hasn't seen updates since 2007.

    2. Re:Are you a programmer? by Sydin · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually AviSynth does have a (very basic) UI: AvsPmod It's not the fanciest thing in the world, but it does the job. You're still writing scripts, but it comes with some nice options like error reporting and previewing, which make life a lot easier.

  12. Impossible by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Free software hates patents and most modern camcorders use H.264, hence a free video editing tool is impossible.

    Or has Mozilla been bullshitting us all this time about H.264 support in HTML5?

  13. It still sucks. by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nothing is really useable and stable enough. Lots of people dabbling, NONE doing feature length or even 30 minute tv episodes.

    I go down this road every year and crawl right back to the single Windows box with Sony Vegas and After Effects on it. I really wish I could replace it with a linux system but it will never exist as the open source options are still not as good as even Adobe Premiere in 2004.

    All pro and prosumer cameras record in MOV or AVCHD and if your editor can not handle those natively it is a major failure. I have no interest in spending 8 hours converting video and introducing generational losses right off the bat.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:It still sucks. by iluvcapra · · Score: 4, Informative

      Reading this thread, the conversation of "video editing" seems to lead directly to

      • hundreds of tracks
      • 3d modelling
      • Writing your own video filters (probably in Lua or something)
      • extensible command line interfaces
      • free codecs

      "Video editing" actually requires

      • never crashing
      • interop with industry standards like AAF and SMPTE MFX (patented or not)
      • long timelines
      • Well-designed and stable UIs (like, buttons and icons don't change for decades)
      • Thorough sound and audio metadata, sound matchback workflows, video (or even film) matchback workflows
      • never crashing
      • 98% of the time, cuts. 1% of the time, an A/B dissolve, 1% of the time, something more complicated a vendor has done for you.

      Professional video editing is all about workflows and reliability. "Open source video editing" is all about hacking for 10 hours on a python script for animating the title transitions in your Kickstarter Dr. Who Fanzine Screencast.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  14. I tried the free/open source route by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

    I tried the free/open source route on video editing and ended up falling back to a commercial tool (MAGIX Movie Edit Pro). I still use Camtasia at home. For me, the key things that saved me time ($$$) when looking at commercial tools were:
    - ability to quickly integrate still shots and movies (without a separate save/load process like some editors - e.g., VSDC)
    - ability to see the voice-over waveform (makes it very easy to close up dead spaces, do in-line retakes and edit out "ums" and stumbles)
    - ability to control every audio track independently (without an explicit "split the original video" step)

    I just took another look out there for a quick project at work and STILL ended up with a non-open-source (but free) editor in VSDC (and CamStudio 2.7 for screen recording), but I'd be embarrassed to put my name on the resulting videos if they weren't just for internal use.

  15. imovie by Noah+Haders · · Score: 2

    if you're open to other platforms, check out iMovie on mac. it's cheap like $20, and runs OK on older hardware. Trolls in three, two, one...

  16. Re:Free as in TPB by Shadow99_1 · · Score: 2

    As the original question poster...

    It has less to do with copyright infringement (even though I don't want to run the risk of being sued for it), but the simple crazy amount of hurdles to do it with Adobe products. The last time I looked into it was(because I'd lost physical copies of the disks for the old master suite work had bought me and I'd had to do all the editing at home as my work PC at the time was a meager Celeron cpu with barely 1 GB of ram, which was no match for my home system with a dual core Athlon cpu running twice as fast and 4 GB of ram and multiple HDDs. However I guess I was stupid and had actually taken the disks back to work to store them, so when I rebuilt that PC I lost the Master Suite install... Looking online the sheer hoops to pirate a copy (permanently making sure it couldn't phone home, replacing certain files after install, the chance that it just refuses to work even after jumping through the hoops) was enough that I didn't go through with it.

    I haven't needed the power of Premiere since then... Well until now. But I doubt jumping through a ton of hoops has changed, Adobe is fanatical about piracy (even though in a lot of cases it helps them in the long run).

    --
    we are all invisible unless we choose otherwise
  17. Re:Uhh... it's cheap by Shadow99_1 · · Score: 2

    Lol, maybe where you live... I live in the middle of nowhere in PA. People don't hire people to mow their lawns... Hell the 'economic recovery' never came here, the unemployment rate is still crazy high and the support system for people without jobs has basically broken. I have a job, but it's part time and minimum wage, though it is basically 'in my field' which is sort of a plus. I'm considered lucky where I live to even have that. Some of my neighbors finally got jobs working manual labor jobs at a food processing plant recently and where immensely happy with that. However all my skills are of a technical nature and like almost everyone else here that plant brought people from elsewhere in to run their technical systems without ever looking for local talent.

    Anyways... Mowing some yards isn't an option. Thanks for that suggestion from on high though.

    --
    we are all invisible unless we choose otherwise
  18. Re:How about for simple animations? by ssam · · Score: 2

    Have you looked at synfig http://www.synfig.org/

  19. My Experiences by ewhac · · Score: 4, Informative
    First, a gratuitous plug for my Let's Play/Drown Out video series, currently focusing on 3DO console titles: http://www.youtube.com/playlis...

    Why is that link relevant? Because they were all made using Kdenlive.

    When I first started mucking around with digital video, I tried a bunch of free/libre packages, and formed the following opinions of each:

    Windows Movie Maker
    Yes, $(GOD) help me, I gave it a serious try. To my utter surprise, it mostly worked and did what I wanted without crashing. However, the UI was rather inflexible, and I needed more than the handful of features it offered, so I kept looking.

    Cinelerra
    Every Google search for free video editing software always turns this up, so I tried it. Then, ten minutes later, I had to stop trying it because it kept crashing and/or hanging at the slightest provocation. It has an impressive-looking array of features, and the editing timeline looks quite powerful. Evidently, you can do some fairly impressive things with Cinelerra, provided you can identify and avoid all its weak spots.

    Pitivi
    The last time I tried this, it was unreliable, under-featured, and incredibly slow. Just loading a one hour-long video clip into the timeline took several minutes as it tried to generate thumbnails and an audio waveform for the clip.

    OpenShot
    Assuming I'm remembering this package correctly, all it does is assemble edits -- that is, you can tack together a bunch of clips one after the other to create a larger work. If you want to do any effects or titling, you're SOL. Perhaps the Kickstarter-funded upgrade will yield some improvements.

    Lightworks
    I had to learn something the hard way with this package: This is a professional package. By that, I don't mean it has a ton of features (although it certainly does). I mean it expects a certain level of media asset before it will operate on it in the manner you expect. Us mere proles are satisfied to use MP4 or MKV or ($(GOD) help us) AVI files. However, in the pro space, you have files that contain not just compressed audio and video, but also timecode. And not just timecode measured relative to when you last pressed the RECORD button, but also a master timecode from an achingly accurate central timecode generator fed to all your cameras and microphones. This not only means all your cameras and mics are in precise sync ('cause otherwise their internal clocks will drift relative to each other), but you can trivially sync all your master footage and then intercut shots without even thinking about it. Also, near as I can tell, there's no such thing as inter-frame compression in professional video. Each frame is atomic, which means you can cleanly cut anywhere, but it doesn't compress anywhere near as small as, say, H.264.

    The result is that, if you don't have equipment that generates all this metadata for you, then you need to convert it from the puny consumer format you're likely using. This means having truly monstrous amounts of disk available just to store the working set, and tons of RAM to make it all work. And hopefully your conversion script(s) didn't cough up bogus timecode.

    So, yes, Lightworks is very very nice, if you have the proper resources to feed it. I don't, so I've set it aside for that glorious day when I get some proper equipment :-).

    Kdenlive
    Kdenlive is built on top of the MLT framework, and is about the best and most reliable thing I've found out there that doesn't cost actual money (either directly or indirectly). It has a non-linear timeline editor, it supports a wide variety of media formats, and it has a modest collection of audio and video effects (almost none of which you will use).

    One of the more amazing things Kdenlive does is transparently convert sample and frame rate