Linux Debian support - video editing?

Author

video editing?

nobody

2007-12-09, 7:11 pm

How far along has Linux gotten with video editing apps? Do we have
any really good apps that are *intuitive* and powerful?

I'd be perfectly willing to pay for good software.....

John Hasler

2007-12-09, 7:11 pm

nobody writes:
> Do we have any really good apps that are *intuitive* and powerful?

There is no such thing as intuitive software.
--
John Hasler

ray

2007-12-10, 1:17 am

On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 18:27:17 -0600, John Hasler wrote:

> nobody writes:
>
> There is no such thing as intuitive software.

Yes and no. No, there is no perfectly inutitive software for everyone on
the planet. Yes, there is some software which is intuitive enough that
anyone with a decent grasp of what is to be done can get by without much
additional help.

John Hasler

2007-12-10, 1:17 am

I wrote:
> There is no such thing as intuitive software.

ray writes:
> Yes and no. No, there is no perfectly inutitive software for everyone on
> the planet. Yes, there is some software which is intuitive enough that
> anyone with a decent grasp of what is to be done can get by without much
> additional help.

An original definition of "intuitive".
--
John Hasler

nobody

2007-12-10, 1:17 am

John Hasler wrote:

> nobody writes:
>
> There is no such thing as intuitive software.

Your reply is not helpful. If you do not have sufficient knowledge of
the subject then perhaps silence would be the best course of action.

ray

2007-12-10, 1:12 pm

On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:23:22 -0600, John Hasler wrote:

> I wrote:
>
> ray writes:
>
> An original definition of "intuitive".

Intuitive is relative. What is intuitive to one person is not necessarily
to another.

Rodney

2007-12-10, 1:12 pm

On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:46:27 -0600, nobody wrote:

> John Hasler wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Your reply is not helpful. If you do not have sufficient knowledge of
> the subject then perhaps silence would be the best course of action.

Nobody, you seemed to miss his point, a point about which he is correct.
There is a fallacy in your reply, the fact that you do not understand
does not indicate anything about his knowledge of the subject. In
addition, snippy replies (which we all see) don't encourage others to
offer help.

Actually, your question wasn't crafted in a manner to obtain the best
answers and, from the begining, is one that often degenerates into
another, 'my favorite program is best', debate. For more information
about asking effective questions in newsgroups please see:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

When I read your question I wonder who the "we" to which you refer is
supposed to be. I am also not sure what you mean by "intuitive", people
oftem mean 'easy for me to learn' by that but, as people's experience and
training and intelligence differ, easy to learn is relative. An example: A
lot of times people coming from a Windows background find that the
differences in Open Source software are hard for them at first. That is
not necessarily because pushing the "start" button in order to shut down
the computer is more intuitive, just that it is more familiar. Admittedly,
that was a bit of an extreme example to make the point.

You probably want me to shut up too since I am not answering your question
but, as advice, I would suggest asking in one of the video newsgroups.
Probably a lot more video editing experts hanging out there.

Rodney

2007-12-10, 1:12 pm

On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 18:15:43 -0600, nobody wrote:

> How far along has Linux gotten with video editing apps? Do we have any
> really good apps that are *intuitive* and powerful?
>
> I'd be perfectly willing to pay for good software.....

By the way nobody, are you really the owner of nobody.com? If not, it is
usually considered rude to use that address which could attract spam or
otherwise use resources of the mailserver at that address. It is an actual
used domain.

SteveSch

2007-12-10, 1:12 pm

On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 18:15:43 -0600, nobody wrote:

> How far along has Linux gotten with video editing apps? Do we have any
> really good apps that are *intuitive* and powerful?
>
> I'd be perfectly willing to pay for good software.....

What exactly are you trying to do.

I use Avidemux for simple cuts.

Maniactor is supposed to be a very good commercial program but I have
never used it.

When I am dealing with dv from my camcorder I use Kino for simple edits.

There is a live cd with Cinelerra on it. From what I have read it is as
far from intuitive as you can get but extremely powerful.

Steve

Hadron

2007-12-10, 1:12 pm

Rodney <me@127.0.0.1> writes:

> On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 18:15:43 -0600, nobody wrote:
>
>
> By the way nobody, are you really the owner of nobody.com? If not, it is
> usually considered rude to use that address which could attract spam or
> otherwise use resources of the mailserver at that address. It is an actual
> used domain.
>

And so is 127.0.0.1 smarty pants. Like just about every recipient of
your post near enough.

Side note - it was perfectly obvious to anyone wishing to help just what
the OP meant be "intuitive" - even if it does means *slightly* different
things for some clever people. As for you having no clue to what he was
talking about then you clearly missed the bit about "video editing".

nobody

2007-12-10, 1:12 pm

SteveSch wrote:

>
> What exactly are you trying to do.
>
> I use Avidemux for simple cuts.
>
> Maniactor is supposed to be a very good commercial program but I
> have never used it.
>
> When I am dealing with dv from my camcorder I use Kino for simple
> edits.
>
> There is a live cd with Cinelerra on it. From what I have read it is
> as far from intuitive as you can get but extremely powerful.
>
> Steve

I need to do fades, cut-n-spice, add background music and other basic
stuff. Want to input AVI's from my security system and input from a
camcorder (not yet bought).

Thanks for the info ....

John Hasler

2007-12-10, 1:12 pm

Hadron writes:
> And so is 127.0.0.1 smarty pants.

That is not a domain.

> ...it was perfectly obvious to anyone wishing to help just what the OP
> meant be "intuitive"

"Intuitive" almost always means "Works just like whatever I am already
familiar with". If he would say what video editing software he is familiar
with someone might be able to point him toward something similar.
--
John Hasler

Allodoxaphobia

2007-12-10, 7:12 pm

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:10:13 -0700, ray wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:23:22 -0600, John Hasler wrote:
>
>
> Intuitive is relative. What is intuitive to one person is not necessarily
> to another.

Defense Exhibit 1: `gimp` :-)

Edmund

2007-12-11, 7:14 am

ray wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:23:22 -0600, John Hasler wrote:
>
>
> Intuitive is relative. What is intuitive to one person is not necessarily
> to another.

Thats right, to be more accurate, what is perfectly
intuitive for normal people, is unthinkable for
programmers :-)

Edmund

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Rodney

2007-12-11, 7:14 am

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:23:22 +0100, Hadron wrote:

[edit]
> And so is 127.0.0.1 smarty pants. Like just about every recipient
of your post near enough.
>

Think about it a bit more deeply, Hadron. My munged address doesn't point
at some innocent third party's server.

> Side note - it was perfectly obvious to anyone wishing to help just what
> the OP meant be "intuitive" - even if it does means *slightly* different
> things for some clever people. As for you having no clue to what he was
> talking about then you clearly missed the bit about "video editing".

Here in newsgroups we interface with people the world over and even though
this is a English Language group many people who's first language is not
English come for help. It is most helpful for the most people if one is
clear and organised with their questions. That's why I suggested reading
the smart questions document, it mentions the most effective ways to ask
questions and receive help and hints about what may be counterproductive.

If one was open to it, my answer could have been helpful.

TomB

2007-12-11, 7:14 am

nobody wrote:

> I need to do fades, cut-n-spice, add background music and other basic
> stuff. Want to input AVI's from my security system and input from a
> camcorder (not yet bought).
>
> Thanks for the info ....

Try kdenlive. Nice little proggie. For very basic editing I use Kino.
Very easy.

Edmund

2007-12-11, 7:14 am

Edmund

2007-12-11, 7:12 pm

Mark South

2007-12-11, 7:12 pm

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:26:40 +0100, Edmund wrote:

>
> Thats right, to be more accurate, what is perfectly
> intuitive for normal people, is unthinkable for
> programmers

It was mildly amusing the first time, but now I'm bored of reading it.

ray

2007-12-11, 7:12 pm

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:26:40 +0100, Edmund wrote:

> ray wrote:
>
> Thats right, to be more accurate, what is perfectly
> intuitive for normal people, is unthinkable for
> programmers :-)

More vice versa, I think.

>
> Edmund

Edmund

2007-12-12, 7:14 am

Edmund

2007-12-12, 7:14 am

sk8r-365

2007-12-12, 1:13 pm

Horton heard a Who named Edmund saying:
> Thats right, to be more accurate,
<snip>

What's that, 5 times now? Edmond, you're now on restriction for 30 days
in my kill file - congrats!, other than MI5 you're the only other one
there.
--
sk8r-365
The U.S. government is destroying our freedoms daily
but are themselves enjoying "liberties" at our expense!

Edmund

2007-12-12, 1:13 pm

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:13:58 +0100, Mark South wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:26:40 +0100, Edmund wrote:
>
>
> It was mildly amusing the first time, but now I'm bored of reading it.

Sorry my ISP is giving me problems with newsgroups
every now and then. I tried to post it with another
provider ( teranews ) and this one failed to post it
too. My Icedove newsreader only reported once it was
posted.

Edmund

jellybean stonerfish

2007-12-13, 1:16 am

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:10:59 -0600, sk8r-365 wrote:

> Horton heard a Who named Edmund saying:
> <snip>
>
> What's that, 5 times now? Edmond, you're now on restriction for 30 days
> in my kill file - congrats!, other than MI5 you're the only other one
> there.

I have noticed that someone, perhaps the govenment, is trying to silence
M15victim. They don't want us to know.

sk8r-365

2007-12-13, 1:16 am

Horton heard a Who named jellybean stonerfish saying:
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:10:59 -0600, sk8r-365 wrote:
>
> I have noticed that someone, perhaps the govenment, is trying to silence
> M15victim. They don't want us to know.

I'm not for silencing him worldwide. I've never fully read a post by
M15. His posts are spammed and OT, so I silence him where it's proper
- on my computer.

--
sk8r-365
The U.S. government is destroying our freedoms daily
but are themselves enjoying "liberties" at our expense!

Ulrich Gierschner

2007-12-15, 7:12 pm

SteveSch wrote:

> There is a live cd with Cinelerra on it. From what I have read it is as
> far from intuitive as you can get but extremely powerful.

I wouldn't say 'FAR' from intuitive, but it's not as easy to use at it could
be. Nevertheless, after a using cinelerra for about three years 'til now,
the learning curve is still rising everytime.

BTW: It's really funny if you 'think' you know what you can do and by
incidentaly do something rather stupid you learn some new ways of video
editing:-)

I like cinelerra much more than the adobe software - not only because it's
way cheaper, but because cinelerra *works* nearly perfectly, if you know to
avoid getting trapped by a software bug...

--
panic("esp_handle: current_SC == penguin within interrupt!");
linux-2.2.16/drivers/scsi/esp.c

Ulrich Gierschner

2007-12-15, 7:12 pm

Rodney wrote:

> [edit]
> of your post near enough.
>
> Think about it a bit more deeply, Hadron. My munged address doesn't point
> at some innocent third party's server.

neither is it an email address though.... 127.0.0.1 isn't a FQDN and will
never be.

--
Zapp: You win again, gravity!

Rodney

2007-12-16, 7:14 am

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 20:18:48 +0100, Ulrich Gierschner wrote:

> Rodney wrote:
>
>
> neither is it an email address though.... 127.0.0.1 isn't a FQDN and will
> never be.

Yes Ulrich, it isn't a FQDN, it isn't a domain name at all, it's
a non-routable IP address. However, that <foo@127.0.0.1> doesn't point
to an address is the point exactly. One may not want to use a valid email
address in order to avoid their address being harvested, or for whatever
other reason, but it can be considered rude to use one that belongs to
someone else which might cause their address to be harvested and/or
spammed. If someone harvests <127.0.0.1> and tries to send to it...

Hadron

2007-12-16, 1:13 pm

Rodney <me@127.0.0.1> writes:

> On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 20:18:48 +0100, Ulrich Gierschner wrote:
>
>
> Yes Ulrich, it isn't a FQDN, it isn't a domain name at all, it's
> a non-routable IP address. However, that <foo@127.0.0.1> doesn't point
> to an address is the point exactly. One may not want to use a valid email
> address in order to avoid their address being harvested, or for whatever
> other reason, but it can be considered rude to use one that belongs to
> someone else which might cause their address to be harvested and/or
> spammed. If someone harvests <127.0.0.1> and tries to send to it...

The point is simple enough : you have a fake that causes errors and
resends if someone replies to it. If you're going to lecture people then
get your own house in order first.

Bob Cox

2007-12-16, 1:13 pm

In article <pan.2007.12.16.12.26.52.600108@127.0.0.1>,
Rodney <me@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> Yes Ulrich, it isn't a FQDN, it isn't a domain name at all, it's
> a non-routable IP address. However, that <foo@127.0.0.1> doesn't point
> to an address is the point exactly. One may not want to use a valid email
> address in order to avoid their address being harvested, or for whatever
> other reason, but it can be considered rude to use one that belongs to
> someone else which might cause their address to be harvested and/or
> spammed. If someone harvests <127.0.0.1> and tries to send to it...

Perhaps the point being made is that <foo@127.0.0.1> is a invalid email
address, unlike <foo@[127.0.0.1]> which *is* valid and equivalent to
foo@localhost.

--
Bob Cox. Stoke Gifford, near Bristol, UK. http://pippin.co.uk/
Registered user #445000 with the Linux Counter: http://counter.li.org/
Debian on NSLU2 Slug: http://bobcox.com/slug/

Rodney

2007-12-17, 7:16 am

[edit]
> The point is simple enough : you have a fake that causes errors and
> resends if someone replies to it. If you're going to lecture people then
> get your own house in order first.

The point actually is simple enough, it can be considered rude to use a
valid domain name in your email address if you do not have authorisation
to use that domain name's email server. That's what I wrote, that's what I
meant. I don't really see that as a lecture. YMMV.

s. keeling

2007-12-19, 1:17 am

Rodney <me@127.0.0.1>:
> [edit]
>
> The point actually is simple enough, it can be considered rude to use a
> valid domain name in your email address if you do not have authorisation
> to use that domain name's email server. That's what I wrote, that's what I
> meant. I don't really see that as a lecture. YMMV.

In Robert's Rules, that's considered "Point of Order, your Honour."
You've done nothing wrong.

--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292
- - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html Please, don't Cc: me.