I believe a saw a video where an editshare rep was announcing their intent to make LW a open source NLE... and, that their intent was to use LW as a way to sell their other products... In effect, I believe he use the term an open source "business model"...

Now - that idea strikes me as a bit interesting.  What is interesting is that if there intent is give away LW as a loss leader to help create sales for their other products... then, you would think that the would have wanted to opened with an LW version is not just a beta/alpha version... but, a better than average beta release would make more sense.  Specially, if their intent is to help their ability to sale their other products.  Some how, I think they missed the boat.

Rest assured... I am not losing sleep over this... but, it is interesting to see how software companies perceive the market... and, how some might see a poor beta as acceptable way to introduce your product in an open source environment... but, for me it seems to be a bit off center in it's target of achieving value added to it's other products. 

Doouglas,

I believe you use QT to pre-edit your original video sources.  I use Adobe Media Encoder for pre-edit.

One of the weaknesses of using this method is that you can only do one pre-edit at at time per video source.

What I noticed about LW is that you can pretty much do the same sort of pre-edits as you would do in QT (or AME as I use) BUT... you can open numerous original video sources at one time and do all you pre-edits simultaniously while the other video source clips are open.   And, you move these around at will on you monitor thereby putting any video clip adjacent to anyother video clip while you pre-edit... sort of like a massive multicamera editing. 

From what I can tell that seem like a really good idea...

Joe

Joe M:

I believe you use QT to pre-edit your original video sources.  I use Adobe Media Encoder for pre-edit.

Hello Joe.

I use QT Pro to pre-edit MOV files from my Canon EOS only! A small part of the total material I use in editing.

Joe M:

you can open numerous original video sources at one time and do all you pre-edits simultaniously

Not quite with you on that idea Joe.
OK, opening numerous video sources I understand.
But how I could pre-edit them simultaneously - that stumps me.
Each clip needs different pre-editing points etc. How could I do different clips at the same time?

However, the material I need to pre-edit is so little that it does not take me much time.

For my workflow I am happy enough as I am doing now.

An aside about the time it takes to do things in an NLE:

If I have the choice of a process that will take 2 hours to complete vs another process that can do the same job in 10 minutes -  I would normally choose the 10 minute method.

However when I see people (not in this thread) talking about in Liquid it takes 2 keystrokes (1 second) but in MC it takes 4 Keystrokes (1.5 seconds) - I don't count that as saving time...

As I said before.... Lightworks sounded interesting and I was following the posts on it - but it is not really of any practical interest to me.

I prefer to try and develop my knowledge and my skills within MC to the full, rather than jump all over the place trying a bit of this and a bit of that.......  I think I have already seen on some other forum or thread people who are seriously considering, "I'll do that in MC, then this in Liquid and then use Lightworks to do this part etc. etc." . . . . .  not for me, thank you.

Thanks for your input. . . . . . .

Regards,
Douglas

I understand why would want to use just one editing software... but, frequently I have to use other applications because either MC can't do it at all (i.e., 3d app or compositing) or it is waaaay more easier to use a seperate application.

Perhaps the work "use simulataniously" is not exactly correct.  What I meant was you can have simultanious editable windows open.  In effect, you would have the equivalent of having multiple QT windows open with different clips. 

If you edit like I do - sometimes anywhere from 50-80 different video clips to edit for one project... while having the ability to rough edit each clip while the other clips are open and accessable for edit... then, you might see why I might it to be an advantage to rough edit many clips while each is open and can be preview and shuffled around like you would cards on a table... plus have the ability to rough edit each "card" while they "sit on the table".

Joe M:

I understand why would want to use just one editing software... but, frequently I have to use other applications because either MC can't do it at all (i.e., 3d app or compositing) or it is waaaay more easier to use a seperate application.

I'm with you Joe, and I also use other applications to help with my project.
But I am referring to the user who adds new applications as they appear on the market for 1 useful function only.
I don't believe in one application to do everything in the world of video editing.
E.g. Liquid is touted as being a wonderful complete one size fits all application.
I never saw it that way.
I saw Liquid as an excellent NLE, but all the "extras" like DVD authoring were just rudimentary extras.... written into Liquid.
I only once used the DVD authoring function.

It is one of those things in human behaviour that many of us are clamouring for the next version, the next upgrade, the next wonder tool . . . . . . but, in reality, we haven't even used those applications we already have to anything like their full capacity.

I prefer to slow down and get into using what I have to the best of my ability . . . 

By the way -  are we getting off topic?
Or . . . . .  ?

Regards,
Douglas

Joe M:

What I meant was you can have simultanious editable windows open.  In effect, you would have the equivalent of having multiple QT windows open with different clips.

To get back on topic: given the drop of the prices of NLE software, it seems that the shared storage market is more profitable than the NLE market itself, and in fact both Avid and Apple have their own shared storage products, and EditShare, the company that owns LightWorks, sells shared storage solutions; their system runs on Mandrake linux, they are already familiar with the successful open source business model and are obviously going in that direction, at least for the Lightworks. I've been a linux user for anything non-Avid since 1995 and I can tell You that the linux software is continuosly improving because it's in costant development by a large base of users/developers, hidden bugs are quickly spotted by the community, and quickly fixed by the communty; moreover, the software features what the users want, not what some marketing and engineering rocket scientists decide it is good for You and their company. The LightWorks is in beta right now, but when it'll be up to speed we'll see the software evolving at a fast pace, with new releases bringing huge improvements coming fast one after the other. Companies like Avid, Adobe, and Apple, can compete with each other on a common ground, but they cannot compete with the superior open source model as for quality of the products and speed of develoment.

Demo video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gCDFfXUcGk

Interview about why it has been released.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpf-ZR4X5oI&feature=channel

Hope that helps.

Larry Rubin:

Please consider that the content of this thread is evolving into a direction that is not in Avid's best interest. Thank you.

Wow, Larry - Let's hope that we are not getting into an area where we have to censor our own comments and exchange of information because it might not be in "Avid's best interest".  Once that starts, you will be left with folks with only one train of thought (the purple Kool-Aid drinkers) and then no one benefits.  With all the FCP vs. Avid threads we have seen, this one seems downright benign!  I have not seen anything here that is going against Avid's rules of participation.  Just my humble opine.

regards - sw

Hmmm... pop up monitors... I've never given that a thought....  Luca you may have something there...

In LW you can edit/export straight out their version of pop up monitors....  I just set an In Point and Out Point... click the copy icon... and opened up a strip view to edit or export in LW.  That would be 3 clicks of the mouse to set up for further edit or export of the IO region (only).

I need to look into AVID's pop monitors and see the differences... Perhaps, AVID has more strengths than I have yet to learn.... it would be nice if AVID can dow what I see very obvious in LW.

drbgaijin:

Joe M:

I understand why would want to use just one editing software... but, frequently I have to use other applications because either MC can't do it at all (i.e., 3d app or compositing) or it is waaaay more easier to use a seperate application.

{snip} 

By the way -  are we getting off topic?
Or . . . . .  ?

Regards,
Douglas

  I hope so... afterall, this is by definition the "Off Topic" forum... 

luca.mg:

Joe M:

What I meant was you can have simultanious editable windows open.  In effect, you would have the equivalent of having multiple QT windows open with different clips.

You can do that with MC, just enable "Pop up monitors".

To get back on topic: given the drop of the prices of NLE software, it seems that the shared storage market is more profitable than the NLE market itself, and in fact both Avid and Apple have their own shared storage products, and EditShare, the company that owns LightWorks, sells shared storage solutions; their system runs on Mandrake linux, they are already familiar with the successful open source business model and are obviously going in that direction, at least for the Lightworks. I've been a linux user for anything non-Avid since 1995 and I can tell You that the linux software is continuosly improving because it's in costant development by a large base of users/developers, hidden bugs are quickly spotted by the community, and quickly fixed by the communty; moreover, the software features what the users want, not what some marketing and engineering rocket scientists decide it is good for You and their company. The LightWorks is in beta right now, but when it'll be up to speed we'll see the software evolving at a fast pace, with new releases bringing huge improvements coming fast one after the other. Companies like Avid, Adobe, and Apple, can compete with each other on a common ground, but they cannot compete with the superior open source model as for quality of the products and speed of develoment.

You have a good insight into the open source side of the application word and you are correct on all points... but, my thoughts are this...

Does the average user of an open source application have the same expectation?

My guess would be no... and, it is from that standpoint I think LW should have approached it's first beta public version. 

BTW, base on your views about open source... I think AVID would have had a lot of simple functions added a long time ago if it would have been open source... or... they could simply pay more attention to what users have been requesting for a long time.

Joe M:

I need to look into AVID's pop monitors and see the differences... Perhaps, AVID has more strengths than I have yet to learn.... it would be nice if AVID can dow what I see very obvious in LW.

That's just my point Joe.
It takes time to learn what is hidden away inside of MC.
Always adding another application, because it seems to do something that you haven't yet discovered in MC, is not always the best way. But it is quite normal human behaviour to react like that. Jumping from one stepping stone to the other before finally slipping and falling into the river...... rather than taking a good look around and crossing by the bridge.

I watched a couple of the Lightworks links to youtube and was able to hear that what I have been suggesting all along, was actually part of the plan. Give away Lightowrks and hopefully get users hooked on buying into the expensive add ons and peripheral storage units. 

It is the reverse of usual thinking. You know - where you buy a nice new high speed Blu-Ray burner and you get a bundle including LE versions of some authoring software to get you started.
Lightworks is giving you the bundle . . . .  you need to buy the hardware. Clever.

Regards,
Douglas

drbgaijin:

Give away Lightowrks and hopefully get users hooked on buying into the expensive add ons and peripheral storage units.

What's wrong with creating a business to profit from?

You do not need editshare storage for it to work, however the LW control surface would be nice but expensive so perhaps Avid could sell loads of MC controls to LW users.

I don't see many Avid users switching to LW, but it is great for ex LW editors to get to use the system again.

However we are loosing the essence which can be (why are not and) how some

of the great features that are on such a tiny install (50mb) can't be in MC such as:

Instant Save, Easy change of the Aspect Ratio directly on clips by right clicking on them, edit while capture etc?

Why you all leave such a wonderful editor like MC to be on hold for ages and ages.

Because this is the users responsibility. Our responsibility.

NICKB:

What's wrong with creating a business to profit from?

There is nothing wrong with that Nick.

But if you take a step back and see the whole picture of what is happening.
There are a lot of moths being attracted to the flame... who are blinded by the light.
They don't see, that what they are being shown is not going to happen the way it seems . .  without a lot of extra cash that will be needed to buy, at least some of the peripherals.
A little like those who rushed into MC, because it was such a good offfer, without first checking the system requirements.

Regards,
Douglas