FORUMS: list search recent posts

Lightworks

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Jeremy Garchow
Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 2:32:15 pm

Now on Linux. New pricing structures with limited free version, paid "pro" version with monthly, yearly, and perpetual options. Support for AJA. OSX "coming soon".

http://www.lwks.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=98&Itemid=...

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 3:08:20 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Now on Linux."

Uhh, Jeremy, this "now" was news about 18 months ago.

[Jeremy Garchow] "OSX "coming soon"."

They have been saying this for about a year.

Seriously, I've been a registered member of their web site for almost 2 years. I think they made a serious mistake in spending their very limited resources trying to be platform independent -- better they improve the program on one platform then have it half-assed on three. As far as I can tell they have no plug-in architecture, which makes it very limited in any but an off-line scenario. Lightworks has lots of tools for feature editors, not so much for anyone else.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 3:21:44 pm

Lightworks was originally built very tightly around Windows NT. Porting it to anything else is difficult. I think the reason there's a Linux version is not necessarily because there's a market, but rather because Linux is close to Unix and therefore becomes a stepping stone for EditShare to get to MacOSX. Plus the EditShare guys know a lot about Linux as they use it in their other products.

[Herb Sevush] "Lightworks has lots of tools for feature editors, not so much for anyone else."

There isn't a single editor that does everything well. The closest to that was probably Avid DS, which is now EOL. If you look at Smoke, it's a good finishing editor and VFX tool, but not a good offline editor. Each tool has its deficiencies. So, expecting Lightworks to do everything well is probably unrealistic. The same is also true of FCP X, Premiere Pro, etc.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 3:40:03 pm

[Oliver Peters] "There isn't a single editor that does everything well."

While it's true that every NLE has it strengths and weaknesses, most of them make an attempt to be an "all-around" editor. The comparison to Smoke is the most apt - at this point Lightworks is a "niche" editor. It's strengths seems to be in collaboration and long form organization and cutting. It is very week in any kind of effects and polishing, with no ability to use plug-ins to buttress is't weaknesses and only XML to communicate with other video programs like AE.

[Oliver Peters] "Lightworks was originally built very tightly around Windows NT. Porting it to anything else is difficult."

Not only difficult, but in my opinion a waste of resources. As insular as it is what advantage does it get from being on OSX? I can almost understand Linux, where it's insularity is matched by the lack of popular programs and plug-ins that work with Linux. Making a turnkey Linux edit station has some appeal, but I just don't see the need for them to be on OSX.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 3:51:20 pm

[Herb Sevush] "what advantage does it get from being on OSX"

Marketshare. Mac OSX has a disproportionate percentage of users in the creative community than users at large. Especially film/video editors.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: Lightworks
on Feb 3, 2014 at 3:26:08 pm

Actually, Lightworks DOES have a plug-in architecture, and the API is freely available. To date, Boris is available, as well as several titlers and whatnot. Plus, the compositing architecture in LW is pretty powerful. I, for one, am quite excited to see it on OS X. I even purchased the proprietary console controller in anticipation.

Chris Conlee


Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: Lightworks
on Feb 3, 2014 at 4:34:31 pm

[Chris Conlee] " To date, Boris is available,"

On their own forum users are stating that Boris only works with the older 32 bit version of Lightworks. Are you saying that the latest 64 bit version of Lightworks now works with the Boris family (Boris, Red, Graffitti).

[Chris Conlee] " the API is freely available."

But no ADK. so go ahead and develop something if you want, but don't expect us to help or encourage you.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Feb 3, 2014 at 5:18:25 pm

[Herb Sevush] "But no ADK. so go ahead and develop something if you want, but don't expect us to help or encourage you."

You should welcome your new open source overlords...


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Lightworks
on Feb 3, 2014 at 7:16:55 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "[Herb Sevush] "But no ADK. so go ahead and develop something if you want, but don't expect us to help or encourage you."

You should welcome your new open source overlords..."



I went on at considerable length at the time that Open Source is a great model for some environments, and a terrible one for others. For this one: terrible.

Even the things open source was supposed to be best for, like web browsers, reveal the entropy at its heart: optimizing code and supporting developers isn't fun. It's WORK, and with no money to subsidize, and no managers forcing the point -- do this OR ELSE -- guess what? It doesn't get done. The inevitable state of open source software is reduced speed and stability through bloat.

Not that you can't have fun before the entropy kicks in. You can!

And of course, one way to forestall entropy is to aim low in the first place. There's certainly an extent to which there's no way to aim lower than feature film editing. LOL

Entropy is true for commercial software too, of course, but in those environments, there's incentive to periodically blow up the code base and start over. That's really the only way to do it, and there's no practical way to do that in open source.

Just for grins, I checked our browser stats. For YEARS, Firefox was #1 here, long before it was #1 on the web as a whole. Safari actually roared into a close second in less than a year, and is now 30% ahead of FF...but Chrome is now comfortably bigger than the 2 combined. (That's true on both Mac and Win, btw.) Safari and Chrome kept getting faster and more robust because there were bosses cracking whips to get unglamorous tasks done on schedule.


I also said at the time, and I'll say again here, that I have no idea how this will play out with Lightworks as the source code is turned into the wild. Maybe ES will continue to actively develop and make those subsequent changes open too. I'm just talking about the state of open source IN GENERAL: open source users have only open source users to depend on....

...although it happens that we here at Creative COW are quite fond of this particular model of support. LOL


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 4:48:04 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Porting it to anything else is difficult. I think the reason there's a Linux version is not necessarily because there's a market, but rather because Linux is close to Unix and therefore becomes a stepping stone for EditShare to get to MacOSX."

Oops. Sorry, Herb, I see Oliver has covered this already.


Return to posts index


Bob Woodhead
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 3:44:33 pm

[Herb Sevush] ". Lightworks has lots of tools for feature editors, not so much for anyone else."

!!! But isn't this the qualification bar for a truly "professional" NLE? At least, so I've heard. If it's good enough for a feature to be edited...

I humbly submit we change the forum name to: "Lightworks, No Question About It".

"Constituo, ergo sum"

Bob Woodhead / Atlanta
CMX-Quantel-Avid-FCP-Premiere-3D-AFX-Crayola
"What a long strange trip it's been...."


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 3:53:31 pm

[Bob Woodhead] "But isn't this the qualification bar for a truly "professional" NLE? At least, so I've heard. If it's good enough for a feature to be edited..."

One of the most counter intuitive aspects of our industry is that high-end feature editors are sometimes the least technologically advanced editors you can find. Feature editors were the last hold-outs for the upright moviola when the flatbeds came out and they were very late to accepting the digital NLE. While Avid's seem ubiquitous in Hollywood now, it wasn't so many years ago that most feature editors swore they would never touch them. When you can afford to hire as many assistant editors as you want, and when all EFX and audio work is outsourced to specialists, you can cut on pretty much anything that you want.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index


Tim Wilson
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 6:50:33 pm

[Herb Sevush] "One of the most counter intuitive aspects of our industry is that high-end feature editors are sometimes the least technologically advanced editors you can find. Feature editors were the last hold-outs for the upright moviola when the flatbeds came out and they were very late to accepting the digital NLE."

This is especially important to note in the context of Lightworks: its original adoption was HUGELY tied to its hardware interface. Some people say COMPLETELY tied. I don't know that that's fair...but I used to work with one of its former product managers, and he thought it was pretty dang close to the latter. He joked about developing software for people who have a fundamental distrust of software.

It's a pretty slick piece of hardware, though. Thinking about it in terms of a color correction or audio control surface, its $3000-ish price tag actually sounds quite good.





They also have a color-coded keyboard that I think would be essential, especially for anyone opting out of the controller, because that's the thing. This is a system whose sweet spot is people who don't just edit features -- but who also used to work with, and MISS working with, actual film.

This isn't meant to be the loosey goosey, hippity hoppity "Yipee ki ya motherchunker!" "I'm takin it to the MAN, man!" guerilla software that some people are making it out to be. I'm not saying that about the folks on this thread, but as you walk around the internet, it's hard to miss the cries of "Woo-hoo! Open source! Take THAT, all you A-company-holes!"

I dunno. I haven't touched it in 8 or 9 years. I have no idea how it compares to the current state of the art. I'm just observing that, every time it comes up, I ask myself, "Will 'available for Mac' include the hardware controller?," followed by, "Is it all that compelling except philosophically?" By which I mean -- sure, fun to have in the bag of tricks, but really? Change horses?

Hey, I'm all for chatting about anything that looks interesting for its own sake, and this certainly does, but I'd like to hear more about what you guys think of it it "for realz." As a wise man once said, "I will forever be the idiot in the room, but perhaps I am misconstruing the details."


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 7:13:53 pm

[Tim Wilson] "This isn't meant to be the loosey goosey, hippity hoppity "Yipee ki ya motherchunker!" "I'm takin it to the MAN, man!" guerilla software that some people are making it out to be."

Hells no. Lightworks is a potential editing front end to a vast eco system in EditShare.

http://www.editshare.com

I truly think it is Avid's only true Unity contender, even though Adobe Anywhere will probably get there one day, but only if you have an IT wing and a rack full o'CUDA.

Tugging on the age old adage, lightworks is meant to sell some hardware

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 7:25:13 pm

[Tim Wilson] "Is it all that compelling except philosophically?" By which I mean -- sure, fun to have in the bag of tricks, but really? Change horses?"

As someone who remembers Lightworks (and later Heavyworks)when it first appeared, the original appeal was that you could physically operate it like a flatbed film editor. It was designed specifically for feature editors who were being pushed towards digital but didn't want to touch a mouse or keyboard.

The appeal now is for other things. Linux, for those so inclined. An alternative to the 3As, and their 3 issues - Subscription, Stodginess, and WTF. For someone looking for a modern, perpetually licensed, traditionally tracked editor, whose parent company isn't falling apart and that is ostensibly designed for high-end broadcast and features Lightworks seems intriguing.

In my case not enough so that I would switch to it. If Editshare ever decides they want to get in on the NLE market seriously, I would think it could carve out it's own niche. At the moment it still seems like a hobby for them. Or maybe I underestimate the cost of development and overestimate Editshare's pockets.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 7:32:25 pm

[Herb Sevush] " I would think it could carve out it's own niche. At the moment it still seems like a hobby for them. Or maybe I underestimate the cost of development and overestimate Editshare's pockets."

It's certainly not a hobby, but EditShare doesn't even come close in anyone's wildest imagination to the depth of Avid's pockets - questionable as their financial status might be at this point. Maybe closer to BorisFX with Media 100. Cost can be kept low if you have a handful of talented engineers/programmers, but that also means the development path is slow.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 8:33:29 pm

[Oliver Peters] " Maybe closer to BorisFX with Media 100."

That's what I'm thinking. Both companies saw low hanging fruit that was affordable, and potentially fun, to pick up and develop, rather than what they thought would be a game changer.

EditShare doesn't need a new cheap NLE to seek storage, though. At this point, they're ALL cheap, even Smoke, relative to the market as a whole when ES first came on the scene. ES already offers a strong alternative to Unity, and afaik works as well worth other NLEs as you could hope. Their market is always going to be (oversimplifying) "everyone with more than one seat of anything," so it seems unlikely to me that Lightworks moves the needle on a single work group's worth of shared storage.

And to repeat Herb's observation, the original LW pitch was "ours has a wheel." I guess this is all doing a fine job keeping Editshare name out there, and a viable Lightworks is a laudable goal. .. but I don't see any aspect of it that will save ES' s business if it needs saving... or making the lives or livelihoods of editors at large appreciably better. Unless the lack of a wheel interface had been bringing them down, or they've been feeling the lack of a science project in their lives. That's cool. I'm on board with that. I also like talking about it.

But this is why I'm left asking, as an actual thing for the rhetorical ME, are we talking about this for any reason besides that it's fun to talk about?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 8:48:26 pm

[Tim Wilson] "But this is why I'm left asking, as an actual thing for the rhetorical ME, are we talking about this for any reason besides that it's fun to talk about?"

I think it's indicative of the fact that no one is truly happy with the current status quo of NLEs (or their companies). They all seem to lack something, so we keep looking. In all likelihood - there may never be a dominant NLE that hits all the bases like FCP "legacy" seems to have - ever again.

OTOH, when everyone is only using tablets for computing, we might all be using TouchEdit! ;-)

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 10:52:09 pm

[Tim Wilson] "EditShare doesn't need a new cheap NLE to seek storage, though. At this point, they're ALL cheap, even Smoke, relative to the market as a whole when ES first came on the scene. "

No, but perhaps they need their own NLE. If you look at EditShare's offerings:

Flow: Asset Manager
Geevs: Ingest/Playout Broadcast Servers
EditShare: Shared storage, like you say, for anything
Ark: Backup and archive

What's missing?

If Avid blows up, if Adobe's Anywhere takes off, if Final Cut Pro X never makes it out of the gate, what does EditShare have to offer to anyone?

I think it's a service that is being offered (albeit slowly) to existing and potential buyers, and perhaps a bit of insurance. They also took a fairly well known and favorably associated name, and kept it alive.

[Tim Wilson] "But this is why I'm left asking, as an actual thing for the rhetorical ME, are we talking about this for any reason besides that it's fun to talk about?"

Integrated project sharing. That's what has my ear at the moment.


Return to posts index

andy lewis
Re: Lightworks
on Feb 1, 2014 at 6:24:48 am

To paraphrase Herb:

Subscription, Stodginess, or WTF: The Debate


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 4:23:15 pm

Given Lightworks and EditShare's potential (and the entire company's tool sets), I think they may have the wherewithal to be Avid's "real" competitor. The longer Avid stagnates the more time EditShare has to evolve and stabilize.

Given development resources involved, it may be very smart for them to focus on the things an Avid feature film editor would find important (and not the things they don't).

A "late to the game" do everything editor may be stuck in "also ran" mode for a very long time with PremierePro and FCPX progressing as well.

On the other hand Avid is a slow motion behemoth beast in a high dollar niche. The NLE storage combination might be sill situated to chase after Avid's film market.



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 4:47:19 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Uhh, Jeremy, this "now" was news about 18 months ago."

Well, I must be reading it wrong as the press release says this: "This will also be the first time in Lightworks’ history that a version will be available across two different platforms (Windows and Linux). The Linux community has been very excited about Lightworks and we are proud to be releasing such a professional and powerful editing tool to their community.”

I will forever be the idiot in the room, but perhaps I am misconstruing the details.

[Herb Sevush] "They have been saying this for about a year."

Yeah, but a finished Linux version means a closer version to OSX. I believe them this time.

[Herb Sevush] "Lightworks has lots of tools for feature editors, not so much for anyone else."

And that's the crux of the issue, isn't it. I don't know if you were following the FCPX Keyer threads, but an NLE is expected to be so much more than an NLE these days.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 4:59:21 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "an NLE is expected to be so much more than an NLE these days."

Isn't that a good thing?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 5:13:59 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Isn't that a good thing?"

It seems to be a necessary thing. Jack of all trades, master of none. I don't know if this is good or bad, it just seems to be reality.

For example, look at the capability of ScreenFlow. It's kind of nutty for "just" a screen capture software. It has chroma key, closed caption, and growing file support.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 5:30:07 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Jack of all trades, master of none."

There's more to the quote: "Jack of all trades, master of none, often times better than master of one."

Of course, I'd prefer a jack of all trades, master of some.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 5:38:31 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Of course, I'd prefer a jack of all trades, master of some."

Me too. You just have to pick the trades and masters. It's not an easy task.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 5:16:01 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Isn't that a good thing?"

Not really. Better when you have different, specialized development team. One of the things I liked better in Final Cut Studio. Also why it's not good that there's no Sent To Motion in FCP X.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 5:33:20 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Not really. Better when you have different, specialized development team. One of the things I liked better in Final Cut Studio. Also why it's not good that there's no Sent To Motion in FCP X."

I kind of expect apps need to be T-shaped. Deep, narrow functionality in their own area, but broad, shallow functionality elsewhere.

Don't you expect at least a basic audio mix from your NLE, or at least rudimentary compositing, even though there are dedicated DAWs and compositors?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 6:51:06 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Don't you expect at least a basic audio mix from your NLE, or at least rudimentary compositing, even though there are dedicated DAWs and compositors?"

The operative terms are "basic" and "rudimentary". I would say yes, but my level of acceptability isn't the same as others. For example, I'm not happy with mixes in X, while others are. You can do very nice lens flare effects in X using some of the third party filters, which are largely presets. Yet, these don't come close to what you can do in Smoke, if you want very tiny control over each element of the flare, as in Smoke.

I really like the color correction in X, but for something involved, I would definitely jump over to Color or Resolve. Ironically, as much as Avid Media Composer is so NOT a finishing tool or compositor, I've done far more complex and successful composites in MC/Symphony than I have in many other tools. Go figure!

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 5:04:17 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I will forever be the idiot in the room, but perhaps I am misconstruing the details."

The Linux public beta came out last spring so maybe they mean the first non-beta version?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 5:14:47 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "The Linux public beta came out last spring so maybe they mean the first non-beta version?"

Yeah, I think this is the first "release" version for Linux as Lightworks is no longer free. It's still very cheap.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 6:02:25 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] " I think this is the first "release" version for Linux as Lightworks is no longer free. It's still very cheap."

The Pro version, at least on windows, has been around for over a year. The only new thing is now they are also offering a straight purchase -- they are the anti-Adobe, starting with a subscription and now moving to a perpetual license. And the Lite version is still free -- limited codec support, limited i/o, but quite usable for many things.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 6:10:13 pm

[Herb Sevush] "The Pro version, at least on windows, has been around for over a year."

I think the Free version had everything but codec support, and then you paid for certain codec support.

Now, it's a blanket license at a monthly, yearly, or perpetual. Monthly and yearly entitles you to major version upgrades, the buyout locks you in to wherever you bought it + any maintenance updates. To go to the next version, you pay an upgrade.

The free version is now limited to 720p@h264 exports. I think that's new, but could be wrong.

At any rate, here's the new checklist: http://www.lwks.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=102&Itemid...


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 7:00:52 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Now, it's a blanket license at a monthly, yearly, or perpetual. Monthly and yearly entitles you to major version upgrades, the buyout locks you in to wherever you bought it + any maintenance updates. To go to the next version, you pay an upgrade."

They're doomed. Don't they know Sarbanes–Oxley rules make this business model completely impossible?

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 7:20:38 pm

[David Lawrence] "They're doomed. Don't they know Sarbanes–Oxley rules make this business model completely impossible?"

Please see us in the "Lightworks, No Question About It" Forum that Bob Woodhead is leading.

In all seriousness, Lightworks won't be Editshare's money maker, but they do make it nice and easy for the user.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 10:40:53 pm

[David Lawrence] "They're doomed. Don't they know Sarbanes–Oxley rules make this business model completely impossible?"

I know you are being cheeky but... SOX doesn't apply to privately held companies.

I'd also wager that logistically one product is easier to support than a multitude of increasing interconnected products and it's not like Lightworks has been lighting up the stat sheet with new features and releases since it went open source 4 years ago. ;)


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 5:18:29 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I will forever be the idiot in the room, but perhaps I am misconstruing the details."

No, I guess it's news that it's no longer in Beta, but with Lightworks so far I haven't seen much difference between public Beta and official release. So i guess this means I am the idiot in the room - a crown I will wear with pride.

[Jeremy Garchow] " I don't know if you were following the FCPX Keyer threads ..."

Yes, with great interest.

[Jeremy Garchow] "but an NLE is expected to be so much more than an NLE these days."

This has been true for about 10 years. Even if it's only temp EFX and Audio Mix, the days of off-line quality NLEs are long gone.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 5:31:23 pm

[Herb Sevush] "This has been true for about 10 years. Even if it's only temp EFX and Audio Mix, the days of off-line quality NLEs are long gone."

Kinda? Look at the alternatives. I know you haven't really played with many NLEs software yet, but I wouldn't consider Pr, by itself, an all in one, or Avid, or even Smoke. FCP7 certainly isn't (the quality of fcp7 effects have always been pretty dismal) and FCPX isn't either. But, as you say, there does have to be certain fairly finished amount of really high quality temp capability, and sometime that temp quality can be pretty damn great.

I'm not talking about a traditional work-at-a-lower-resolution-offline, but I am talking from a quality of output stand point. Almost any NLE is capable of exporting a high quality master.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Lightworks
on Jan 30, 2014 at 6:11:44 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] " I know you haven't really played with many NLEs software yet, but I wouldn't consider Pr, by itself, an all in one, or Avid, or even Smoke. FCP7 certainly isn't (the quality of fcp7 effects have always been pretty dismal) and FCPX isn't either. But, as you say, there does have to be certain fairly finished amount of really high quality temp capability, and sometime that temp quality can be pretty damn great."

I don't expect an NLE to have all the capabilities I want, but I do expect there to be some integration with plug-ins to be able to get me there.

Between Motion, Colorista, Mercalli, Plural Eyes, and Twixtor, the FCP7 eco-system gives me all the video tools I need. Same would be true, with different combinations of plug-ins, for PPro, Avid, FCPX, Edius and Vegas -- but not with Lightworks, at least not yet. And that is a big difference. Which is why I wish they had spent their time figuring out how to work with something like Boris FX or Colorista, as opposed to trying to port it to OSX.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

John Pale
Re: Lightworks
on Feb 1, 2014 at 4:21:15 pm

Herb,
Whether it works or not, I haven't a clue ...but on the Lightworks website, under tech specs/third party it indicates support for quite a few plugins, including some of the most widely used (though not everything you mentioned)


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Lightworks
on Feb 1, 2014 at 10:38:22 pm

[John Pale] "Whether it works or not, I haven't a clue ...but on the Lightworks website, under tech specs/third party it indicates support for quite a few plugins, including some of the most widely used"

Unless things have changed in the last month or so, if you go the the Lightworks user forums you will find tons of complaints that the plug-ins don't work as listed. Part of the problem is that a lot of users seem to be of the "open source" variety and only want open source plug-ins. Boris, in all it varieties, seems to work in the 32 bit version of LWKS but not in the new 64 bit version. As for the rest, not so much. There is no published Accesory Developers Kit to help in the creation of 3rd party plug-ins and not much interest in doing so, at least from what I gather whenever I lurk on their forum.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

John Pale
Re: Lightworks
on Feb 3, 2014 at 3:21:20 pm

"Unless things have changed in the last month or so, if you go the the Lightworks user forums you will find tons of complaints that the plug-ins don't work as listed. Part of the problem is that a lot of users seem to be of the "open source" variety and only want open source plug-ins. Boris, in all it varieties, seems to work in the 32 bit version of LWKS but not in the new 64 bit version. As for the rest, not so much. There is no published Accesory Developers Kit to help in the creation of 3rd party plug-ins and not much interest in doing so, at least from what I gather whenever I lurk on their forum."

Thanks for the follow up. You obviously have looked into this more deeply.


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]