Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Revideo – Create Videos with Code

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 81 posts

Re: Show HN: Revideo – Create Videos with Code

#71

Post by supermatt »

hkonsti wrote: post #43
sansseriff wrote: post #40

How does Jacob (aarthificial, creator of motion-canvas) feel about this? Will you compensate or include him in some way? I understand the license is MIT so you can do what you want. Just seems like it would be polite to maintain a good relationship with him and other motion-canvas maintainers.

We tried to reach out to Jacob but unfortunately didn't get a response from him. In general, Revideo and Motion Canvas have very different goals and we were very reluctant to go the route of forking his work. We are always open to contribute changes back into Motion Canvas if that is wanted, so far we haven't seen that to be the case.

You mention in your README that you had to fork it in order to make it so you could trigger renders programatically instead of having to click a button. Couldn't you have just used render from the core lib directly?

https://motioncanvas.io/api/core/app/Renderer#render

Re: Show HN: Revideo – Create Videos with Code

#72

Post by mike31fr »

> Remotion is pretty good, but we didn’t want to rely on it as it is not FOSS (source-available only).

Noob question : How would you explain in the simplest form the difference between FOSS and source-available. In other words, what does Remotion do not have that would make it FOSS?

Re: Show HN: Revideo – Create Videos with Code

#73

Post by matsemann »

Is it possible to render and export the video in browser, preferably faster than playback speed?

Use case is a service where people can upload certain data and I use that to generate a video. Let's say I gave you the option to make a speed gauge video, that display the values you input, one after another, for a second each. If you upload 60 values, that will be a minute video. But if you upload your speed each second for an hour, that will be an hour long video. But should ideally not take an hour to render. Unfortunately I've seen most browser based tools can't render faster than playback. So would have the user watch the whole video to actually download it.

Re: Show HN: Revideo – Create Videos with Code

#74

Post by LelouBil »

mike31fr wrote: post #72

> Remotion is pretty good, but we didn’t want to rely on it as it is not FOSS (source-available only). Noob question : How would you explain in the simplest form the difference between FOSS and source-available. In other words, what does Remotion do not have that would make it FOSS?

A more restrictive license ?

Remotion has a custom license that requires you to have a Company license if you don't meet certain criterias for the free license.

Revideo just has the MIT license.

Re: Show HN: Revideo – Create Videos with Code

#75

Post by justusm »

mike31fr wrote: post #72

> Remotion is pretty good, but we didn’t want to rely on it as it is not FOSS (source-available only). Noob question : How would you explain in the simplest form the difference between FOSS and source-available. In other words, what does Remotion do not have that would make it FOSS?

In the simplest form: Revideo is MIT-licensed. That basically means that you can do anything you want with our code - you can modify it, fork it, build commercial products, resell it, etc., without owing us anything.

While you can look at Remotion's code on Github (that's what we mean by source-available), the project has a custom license that doesn't grant you the permission to do anything you want with it. Remotion retains ownership of the code (i.e. you cannot simply fork it and give it away for free), and when you are a company with more than three employees, you have to pay Remotion if you want to use their code to render videos

Re: Show HN: Revideo – Create Videos with Code

#77

Post by justusm »

supermatt wrote: post #71
hkonsti wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We tried to reach out to Jacob but unfortunately didn't get a response from him. In general, Revideo and Motion Canvas have very different goals and we were very reluctant to go the route of forking his work. We are always open to contribute changes back into Motion Canvas if that is wanted, so far we haven't seen that to be the case.

You mention in your README that you had to fork it in order to make it so you could trigger renders programatically instead of having to click a button. Couldn't you have just used render from the core lib directly? https://motioncanvas.io/api/core/app/Renderer#render

You can use the render function from motion canvas to trigger headless renders (which is what we do!) without forking the project.

However, this is not the only change we made. Our goal is (as stated in the Readme) to enable developers to build entire video editing apps with Revideo. This encompasses a few more things than just triggering headless renders. For example, here are some of the changes we made that were quite drastic and were not possible without forking:

- we export the audio of elements in a scene. Enabling this required us to modify parts of the core package: https://github.com/redotvideo/revideo/commit/d0f72b6df68b380...

- we made video-in-video renders a lot faster by requesting video frames from a backend process rather than seeking video frames using the HTMLVideoElement API. This required us to make all draw() functions in Motion Canvas async: https://github.com/redotvideo/revideo/commit/a6e1bcdf0ca8200...

Re: Show HN: Revideo – Create Videos with Code

#79

Post by ramengrowth »

justusm wrote: post #75
mike31fr wrote: post #72

> Remotion is pretty good, but we didn’t want to rely on it as it is not FOSS (source-available only). Noob question : How would you explain in the simplest form the difference between FOSS and source-available. In other words, what does Remotion do not have that would make it FOSS?

In the simplest form: Revideo is MIT-licensed. That basically means that you can do anything you want with our code - you can modify it, fork it, build commercial products, resell it, etc., without owing us anything. While you can look at Remotion's code on Github (that's what we mean by source-available), the project has a custom license that doesn't grant you the permission to do anything you want with it. Remotion…

This is the one of the clearest explanations of the differences between the licenses I've seen, thanks!
Post reply on HN