Posted by: Anonymous
on February 08, 2008 04:45 AM
'Some other free tool with many effect plugins, bangs, and whistles -- but delivering only amateur quality -- will eventually take most of the user base, leaving the (obviously small number of) people needing professional grade quality with no free alternative to the commercial video editing solutions.'
The above line is flame bait . 'Amateur quality'? Prove it. Is Hermann Vosseler saying that a rendered video in Cinelerra is better than one rendered in Pitivi? There are only a few current a few Linux Video editors that provide any 'effect plugins, bangs, and whistles' like LiVES , kdenlive, and OpenMovieEditor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_editing_software#Free_.2F_Open_Source_Software so I guess what Hermann Vosseler is really dissing are these programs Multimedia Frameworks/Backends.
And there is only really one actively developed Multimedia Framework for Linux that has more than one or two people working on it and that is Gstreamer. Gstreamer is the choice of all major distros.
Of Course there are other multimedia frameworks such as MLT (which runs kdenlive and maybe Diva in the future ), mplayer ( Lives ) and libquicktime/ffmpeg (Open Movie Editor ), but MLT has basically a one man show.
libquicktime on linux may not be a "Multimedia Framework" per say and neither is mplayer.
But my point is this... Why start something from scratch ( because they want to... sheesh ) when they could pick one of the currently developed frameworks?
I would suggest these guys should start hacking on Pitivi and make something out of it ( Or even resurrect Diva ) .
I can't believe it, even Richard Spindler ( the creator and sole developer of Open Movie Editor ) seams to be more interested in the 2/3 year plan of rewriting Cinelerra than even his own project.