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.
Thread beginning with comment 403674
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: A common problem
by tupp on Tue 12th Jan 2010 09:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: A common problem"
Member since:

The big studios predominantly use Linux and OSS programs in post production imaging.
Yes, many studios do. ILM runs almost exclusively on Linux.

So what?

So, the OP of this sub-thread suggests that Linux multimedia programs cannot compete with the entry level apps in the non-Linux/Unix world. If the "big boys" are using Linux instead of Windows/Mac, obviously, the OP is incorrect.

Did I really have to explain that point?

No! Just, no. If something is open source or not is not important. It's important if it gets the job done. CinePaint obviously does, because it was developed with the VFX industry in mind by someone associated with that industry. But the job was done by someone first. Then the studios decided to use it, and, in some cases, contribute to it. But it didn't originate at a studio.

I don't think that we disagree that much in our points, but we seem to have very different attitudes.

Cinepaint's origins are irrelevant. The studios wouldn't have started using Cinepaint if it couldn't get the job done. It could, and it is open source, which is why they don't switch to something else proprietary that could now possibly get the job done (like 32-bit depth Photoshop).

You said yourself that the studios have contributed to Cinepaint, so we agree that they have a motivation to mess with the code. However, it is most likely that a lot of their Cinepaint development stays in-house, so that that they keep an edge over their competitors. They can't get that edge with Photoshop.

Your whole post is full of "moving the goalposts."

I'm not sure what the hell your quoted phrase means, but I am not very pleased that you are making personal comments.

Yes, the majority of the VFX industry has capitalized on Linux. Nearly every VFX software is available for Linux. But that is totally unrelated to the sorry state of consumer-grade multimedia software.

First of all, anyone can obtain for free all of the open source software that the "big boys" are using. So there is no barrier there.

Secondly, I wholeheartedly disagree that the Linux "consumer-grade" software is in a "sorry" state. Exactly what are the problems that you have encountered? Please give specific examples.

I hope that you are not complaining about something as trivial as an unfamiliar GUI. Keep in mind that the folks using a high-end Linux NLE running 20 hyper-HD threads don't care that the look of its window widgets is not visually consistent with the window buttons on Itunes!

Do I as a user care that ILM runs Linux? No, but I do care if the video editors available to me suck.

You want a Linux NLE that will knock the pants off of FCP and standard-issue Avid? -- get Ant!

Edited 2010-01-12 09:45 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1