Anyone who's tried video production on free and open source editors has come up against some serious limitations. Could this be the one that changes everything?: http://www.pitivi.org/?go=tour
What, you wanted a boring list of features?
- Unlimited video/audio track layers
- Full undo/redo history
- Frame stepping, keyboard controls and shortcuts
- Trimming, splitting/cutting
- Ripple edits/roll edits
- Sound mixing of multiple concurrent audio layers
- Volume keyframe curves
- Keyframable audio effects
- Audio waveforms
- Keyframable video effects
- Opacity keyframe curves
- Video thumbnails with two-stage caching
- SMPTE video transitions
- Ability to specify custom aspect ratios and framerates
- Ability to create presets for project settings and rendering
- Welcome dialog that helps you start a project or load recent projects in two clicks
- Ability to preview video, audio and image files directly in the file chooser before importing
- Fast, playhead-centered zooming
- Mousewheel integration with modifier keys for timeline navigation
- Grouping and ungrouping of clips
- Importing support for all video/audio/image formats provided by GStreamer plugins. Pitivi was the first open source video editor to support the Material eXchange Format for professional digital video and audio media.
- Rendering in any container and codec properly supported by GStreamer plugins
- Nanosecond precision
- Accepts both timecodes and frames
- Automated project backups
- Tarball export
- Commandline processing and rendering mode using GES
- Scripting capabilities using GES
- Written in Python, with a clean and modular codebase
- Hardware-accelerated and touch-capable user interface
The best thing is, it works on Linux so you aren't stuck with a crappy, problematic proprietary OS. Linux is great for video!
So long, Microsoft MovieMaker. The King is dead. Long live the king!
Another interesting observation in the codec arena: http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/02/23/0544243/ffmpegs-vp9-decoder-faster-than-googles !
Great about the crowd funding. Spread the word!
Re: CODECs, the on-going issue seems to be that Microsoft Inc., Apple Inc., Google Inc., Adobe Inc., etc. all seem to prefer MPEG LA's proprietary CODECs and some speculate that they've done mutually beneficial licensing deals (forming a cartel) in order to dominate the market and squeeze everyone else out (WebM is looking more and more like a PR smokescreen these days).
Have you tried using free and open source CODECs with Chrome, Safari, or IE? Even Mozilla and the Wikimedia Foundation are debating giving into the pressure and supporting MPEG LA CODECs.
Why can't browsers allow users to install CODECs? Consumer choice... Problems solved!
Corporations' version of consumer choice is that consumers get to choose between the options that corporations give them.
As I understand it with large projects like this, sometimes glitches and bugs tend to get resolved away from the core code, AKA "hacks", rather than reviewing the core code to see what the issue is, what issues could arise in the future because of it, and what can be done.
Easier said than done and it requires a lot of openness and collaboration at all levels of the organisation/community, i.e. a more horizontal, less hierarchical organisational structure.
I wonder what the policy is here at Moodle.org??
Not had anything this juicy since a piece of pineapple last summer
Nope, there is no policy, have looked. However, maybe there is no need for such a policy, when dealing with like-minded people. Policies can say 'go away'! Could be wrong, of course.
To upstream the downstream hacks
I think Moodle is very different as it runs in pretty much a known environment (PHP) and is built upon its own framework.
With things like video I would imagine you have to deal with a lot of things beyond your control, hardware drivers etc.
They would be working with a very different set of problems / constraints.
Why not just dual boot you Mac with a nice version of Linux? ;)
Major FOSS projects usually deploy to Linux first - it's a less problematic OS to develop for so you can concentrate on making the software do what you want it to and spend less time worrying about dealing with Windows' and OS X's idiosyncrasies and unreasonable restrictions, e.g. the last time I looked it up, OS X doesn't expose the necessary "hooks" for GPU hardware acceleration. This is one possible reason why Mac users report more crashes when running high bit-rate video and graphics apps than other OS'.
Once you've got proofs of concept running on a friendlier, more open OS, then you can start dealing with the others.
Another thing is that video production and editing is a particularly CPU and GPU intensive activity and, if you intend to do a lot of it, it's best to use the lightest, most stable OS possible. It can make significant differences to output quality (when compressing final cuts) and to the time it takes to perform intensive operations; hit enter and go for a coffee break, instead of a lunch break, or instead of leaving it to run overnight.
Just my €0.02
It may be a pragmatic decision to only code for linux.
Imagine how simple it would be to not have to code for other OS. Like the simplicity and joy of coding for windows.