Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 11th Jan 2010 08:10 UTC
Multimedia, AV I followed the hype: Reddit, Slashdot's front page, months of thumbs up on my blog and various video forums by Linux users for OpenShot. Given that I'm longing for a usable Linux video editor since 2003, and given that OpenShot version 1.0 had just been released, I naturally gave it a go, by also downloading its provided dependencies on my Ubuntu Linux 9.10.
Permalink for comment 403676
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: A common problem
by wargum on Tue 12th Jan 2010 09:46 UTC in reply to "RE: A common problem"
Member since:

The big studios predominantly use Linux and OSS programs in post production imaging.

And it is used in supercomputers, render farms, I know! You are talking about the super high end here that has soooo little volume.

For example, the open source nature of Cinepaint is the main reason why the major film studios and major animation houses use it, and not Photoshop. Not only is the development a lot faster (having 32-bit color depth years before Photoshop), but they can (and do) accelerate the app's development if they need a feature.

If Cinepaint is so great, why isn't it bundled in most distributions?

Post production techniques are constantly developing at a rapid pace, and every minute of the average theatrical feature film costs about one million dollars to make. With that kind of money involved in every detail and with competitors writing their own image manipulation code, do you think that the studios are going to settle for the stock features of off-the-shelf proprietary programs like Photoshop? They need an image editor that they can develop in-house to their advantage. This advantage is why Cinepaint is so much more attractive to the studios than Photoshop.

Again, you are talking about some people in the high end here.

Here's the NLE/compostitor, Piranha:

Man, this is so bad. Did you try to get it? For Germany they only mentioned a swiss distributor that has prices well hidden somewhere. I couldn't find it. This is a lot like when trying to buy other super high end and super expensive software like Maya.

Another big advantage of Linux NLEs over FCP: one can change to a darker theme so that the OS's window elements aren't glaring into one's eyeballs in a dark edit bay.

Yeah, whatever...

What's wrong with Ardour? ... Blender? Both are incredibly powerful programs.

Ardour is NOT a fully featured DAW like Pro Tools, Logic, Cubase etc. It has nothing to offer for MIDI.

Blender's UI is very very difficult to learn. I tried it myself, now I use Cinema 4D. I bought it and never regretted! Blender was originally proprietary commercial software. If it were better, they wouldn't be out of business by now.

GIMP is better than Photoshop in many ways. First of all, it's easier to use.

It's hard to find people like you these days. GIMP's GUI is awkward, that's common sense.

... Try that with your proprietary software!

Why would anybody do that? You travel with your laptop which contains all the software you need. Period.

I can do the same with Ardour, Blender and probably with Ant and Piranha.

The question is just: Is time worth anything to you? I mean if mentioned OSS would be all that great, why would anybody still buy software? The answer is: You glorify OSS like there is no tomorrow. But as I said, when you look a little deeper, you find problems in the OSS 'alternatives'.

Reply Parent Score: 3