Live data from Hacker News

OpenShot 4.0 – Open-source video editor

openshot.org

121–130 of 148 posts

Re: OpenShot 4.0 – Open-source video editor

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't work on open source but it could be: - Good design requires user interviews, which are less common in open source - The sorts of people who are most attracted to open source work are programmers, not designers - Open source software can get popular even with bad design; closed source software with bad design fails and shuts down

Designers have it really hard in free software because good design is about understanding the big picture, knowing what to leave out, have product vision to follow. That's tough to do in environment where goal is to make everyone happy and the biggest say have programmers who are developing the thing who are usually not interested in design, inexperienced in design or have their personal very specific product vision.

I think you definitely identified the issue well. Changing the design of an existing project, especially if you're not already involved in the project is a daunting task. You have to try and convince a core group of users that the design is going to be better to entice new users. But the problem is that those core group of developers likely don't care that the UI isn't up to par, and likely don't want it to change.

I even remember having this problem personally when trying to improve designs of webpages at my workplace. We had many of our technical users still using the command line for their mail, and even for browsing some webpages. Their whole workflow was stuck in the command line and they've been doing it that way for 20+ years. Trying to change things to improve the experience for others was like pulling teeth. They would retort the classic "Why change it? It works the way it is, no need to change it". Which to a degree I can understand. Some websites out there really do change their UI's for completely silly reasons and sometimes even lose functionality because of it.

At least this is one positive thing coming from AI driven development. People can actually make some pretty decent UI's without having to know as much about good UI design. AI can try to utilize the "best practice" standards and make a UI that often looks much better than most devs could make. There are some downsides of course, such as the fact that almost every new website nowadays looks the same, since Claude seems to have one style it always goes with. But maybe that tradeoff is okay.

Re: OpenShot 4.0 – Open-source video editor

#122

I tried openshot, shotcut and kdenlive. They all felt rather cheap. Flowblade was a nice surprise tho.

My goto has been Shotcut, it's main advantage is high resolution support without having to pay extra compared to something like Lightworks (which has a better UI for sure, but I'm not paying...).

Re: OpenShot 4.0 – Open-source video editor

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t help but laugh at this, it’s like a comedy skit with two people with different European accents accusing each other of being American.

Meanwhile, the brightest engineer they know left to work for a startup in San Francisco.

Oh no! He took some bad peptides at a party and now has $500k in medical fees

Re: OpenShot 4.0 – Open-source video editor

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least we can agree in our mutual disdain towards american way of thinking *shaking hands*

I can’t help but laugh at this, it’s like a comedy skit with two people with different European accents accusing each other of being American.

We need an attestation platform so you can prove non-american-ness.

Cheers from Canada

Re: OpenShot 4.0 – Open-source video editor

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's FLOSS (GPLv3). There are very few free software video editors. Another good one is kdenlive, which a few years back I liked better that OpenShot.

This does not answer my question, I need something that can do thing , not how it is licensed. I have used Kdenlive, and it's nowhere near either of these functionality-wise, and struggles with big files.

After Adobe's licensing/subscription shenanigans, I would have expected the license to be more salient in folks' minds.

Re: OpenShot 4.0 – Open-source video editor

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you publish to platforms like YT, DaVinci Resolve can actually prepare your audio so it remains intact during their compression shenanigans. I don't know of any FOSS programs that can automatically handle it cleanly. =3

What do you mean? Like it can export audio to a separate file?

Provides a simple baked workflow to normalize audio in a manner that survives YT encoding. Warning for headphone users, the tutorial has examples of what not to do. =3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYFbOKDgSbw

Re: OpenShot 4.0 – Open-source video editor

#129
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> shouldn't we focus on human accessibility first? This is the big question for designers, how much of the future of software will be human-oriented UIs vs a human typing into a chat window (or as a temporary bridge, telling an agent to operate existing GUIs). For now I believe agent-driven software is still pretty niche, something for highly technical users, but that will change as it mainstreams. Early adopters dem…

a chat window is actually HORRIBLE for many tasks. i really strongly hope this isn't what the future of software looks like there is just no way a chat interface could replace a non-linear video editor gui

It's not a replacement for sure. There's no way it could be a full replacement for visual UIs.

Re: OpenShot 4.0 – Open-source video editor

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a chat window is actually HORRIBLE for many tasks. i really strongly hope this isn't what the future of software looks like there is just no way a chat interface could replace a non-linear video editor gui

> a chat window is actually HORRIBLE for many tasks. i really strongly hope this isn't what the future of software looks like I strongly concur - I don't want to "tell" the app to level the audio between several clips only to have it level everything to 0 and then take five minutes to undo etc

Everyone always views it through the current UX when I say stuff like this. The way I see it is we're in the DOS/UNIX era of LLMs where you're just staring at an empty text input box, it's slow, breaks often, GUI integrations are non-existent or primitive, etc.
Post reply on HN