Are you able to take a voiceover as an input, and then place the footage so that it matches what's talked about in the voiceover in each moment?
Launch HN: Cardboard (YC W26) – Agentic video editor
61–70 of 89 posts
Re: Launch HN: Cardboard (YC W26) – Agentic video editor
#62Congrats on the launch, great work! I played around on a sample video and it worked great. I wanted to undo one AI edit but couldn't find if there is undo button.
Thanks so much, glad it worked well!
There is an undo button — it's on the bottom right of each user message in the chat. That said, sounds like it wasn't obvious enough, so I'll rethink the UX there for sure!
Re: Launch HN: Cardboard (YC W26) – Agentic video editor
#63Are you able to take a voiceover as an input, and then place the footage so that it matches what's talked about in the voiceover in each moment?
Yes! That's actually one of our favorite use cases. Check out the SF Vlog example project at demo.usecardboard.com, it covers exactly this!
Re: Launch HN: Cardboard (YC W26) – Agentic video editor
#64This is a crazy question, but I would like to know how close I can get to the following:
I would like to:
- upload a bunch of surf footage
- let it sort through the surfers
- pick the three longest waves surfed by each surfer
- create a montage grouped by surfer, ordered by shortest to longest wave for that surfer.
Thank you!
Re: Launch HN: Cardboard (YC W26) – Agentic video editor
#65[dead]
Re: Launch HN: Cardboard (YC W26) – Agentic video editor
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
- On Remotion, yeah, not sure it's the right fit, but honestly the sheer capability of models at writing code these days has surprised me. Funnily enough, this is how I used to make small graphics for videos 2-3 years back when I knew nothing about After Effects. We've been eager to experiment with this for a while, just have to prioritize other user requests for now. Will definitely try a few approaches and see what…
> On Remotion, yeah, not sure it's the right fit, but honestly the sheer capability of models at writing code these days has surprised me. Just to clarify I still think code-driven graphics is the correct approach, but in my case I opted for a different library with a more powerful imperative API. > Also noticed they have an experimental client-side rendering version built on mediabunny Yes, I've tried it out, it was…
> Totally understand the appeal and immediacy of a browser app, I was lured in by that too. For what it's worth I've reported showstopping WebCodecs issues in Chromium and there's basically no indication they'll get fixed on a predictable timeline.
Interestingly I have the exact opposite experience, I've reported issues both in the WebCodecs specification and the Chromium implementation, in all cases they were fixed within weeks. Simply though reports on public bug trackers and it wasn't really a major issue in any instance.
> Another issue I ran into that I just remembered is animating text on canvas. It's basically impossible to get pixel-perfect anti-aliased text animation using a canvas. I would have to dig up the exact details but it was something to do with how browsers handle sub-pixel positioning for canvas text, so there was always some jitter when animating. This coupled with the aforementioned WebCodecs issues led me to conclude that professional-quality video rendering is not currently possible in the browser environment. Aliasing, jitter and artifacts are immediately perceptible and are the type of thing that users have zero tolerance for (speaking from experience).
We're doing SOTA quality video rendering with WebCodecs + Chromium with millions of videos produced daily, or near SOTA if you consider subpixel AA a requirement for text. In general for pixel perfection of text, especially across different browsers and operating systems, you can't just use text elements in DOM or in canvas context, instead text needs to be rasterized to vector shapes and rendered as such. Honestly not sure about potential jittering when animating text, but we've never had any complaints about anything regarding text animations and users are very often comparing our video exports with videos produced in Adobe AE or similar.
Re: Launch HN: Cardboard (YC W26) – Agentic video editor
#67[dead]
Re: Launch HN: Cardboard (YC W26) – Agentic video editor
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
- On Remotion, yeah, not sure it's the right fit, but honestly the sheer capability of models at writing code these days has surprised me. Funnily enough, this is how I used to make small graphics for videos 2-3 years back when I knew nothing about After Effects. We've been eager to experiment with this for a while, just have to prioritize other user requests for now. Will definitely try a few approaches and see what…
> On Remotion, yeah, not sure it's the right fit, but honestly the sheer capability of models at writing code these days has surprised me. Just to clarify I still think code-driven graphics is the correct approach, but in my case I opted for a different library with a more powerful imperative API. > Also noticed they have an experimental client-side rendering version built on mediabunny Yes, I've tried it out, it was…
> in my case I opted for a different library with a more powerful imperative API.
would you mind sharing the name?
Re: Launch HN: Cardboard (YC W26) – Agentic video editor
#69Beautiful site!
Re: Launch HN: Cardboard (YC W26) – Agentic video editor
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
> On Remotion, yeah, not sure it's the right fit, but honestly the sheer capability of models at writing code these days has surprised me. Just to clarify I still think code-driven graphics is the correct approach, but in my case I opted for a different library with a more powerful imperative API. > Also noticed they have an experimental client-side rendering version built on mediabunny Yes, I've tried it out, it was…
> Totally understand the appeal and immediacy of a browser app, I was lured in by that too. For what it's worth I've reported showstopping WebCodecs issues in Chromium and there's basically no indication they'll get fixed on a predictable timeline. Interestingly I have the exact opposite experience, I've reported issues both in the WebCodecs specification and the Chromium implementation, in all cases they were fixed…
> Interestingly I have the exact opposite experience, I've reported issues both in the WebCodecs specification and the Chromium implementation, in all cases they were fixed within weeks. Simply though reports on public bug trackers and it wasn't really a major issue in any instance.
That's fair, they are responsive most of the time. I do have one major rendering issue in particular I've been waiting on with no movement for months, so I might be biased.
> We're doing SOTA quality video rendering with WebCodecs + Chromium with millions of videos produced daily, or near SOTA if you consider subpixel AA a requirement for text. In general for pixel perfection of text, especially across different browsers and operating systems, you can't just use text elements in DOM or in canvas context, instead text needs to be rasterized to vector shapes and rendered as such. Honestly not sure about potential jittering when animating text, but we've never had any complaints about anything regarding text animations and users are very often comparing our video exports with videos produced in Adobe AE or similar.
So you use a library that takes in text and vectorizes it to canvas shapes? That could work in theory, do you have a demo of this?