Video editor

balanga

Son of Beastie

Reaction score: 120
Messages: 2,913

Any recommendations for editing a video?

I'm just looking for something straightforward - all I want to do is save a small part of an MP4 file.
 

scottro

Daemon

Reaction score: 493
Messages: 1,398

For something that simple, you could use ffmpeg.
Code:
ffmpeg -ss <where you start> -i <input video> -t <time in seconds> out.mp4
or whatever format you want for the video. The -ss for start goes in front of -i for input because it works more quickly--if you do -i then -ss it looks through the whole video trying to find where to start, I believe.
 

ronaldlees

Aspiring Daemon

Reaction score: 314
Messages: 750

I am very fond of graphics/blender for this purpose. It's especially good for color grading, because it allows the use of curves (easy to drag around). Splicing videos is also quite easy/good. But, it only inputs/outputs in mjpeg with the default config on FreeBSD, so you'd need to move your vids to MJPEG somehow. MJPEG is slightly higher quality than MP4, and is all I use anymore. I only purchase cameras that can do that video format.
 

olli@

Well-Known Member
Developer

Reaction score: 280
Messages: 319

I am very fond of graphics/blender for this purpose. It's especially good for color grading, because it allows the use of curves (easy to drag around). Splicing videos is also quite easy/good. But, it only inputs/outputs in mjpeg with the default config on FreeBSD, so you'd need to move your vids to MJPEG somehow. MJPEG is slightly higher quality than MP4, and is all I use anymore. I only purchase cameras that can do that video format.
Note that MJPEG is nothing more than a concatenation of JPEG images. That means it does not make use of temporal redundancy, so it has very poor compression. MJPEG might be ok for editing (but you might even consider using a lossless format for this purpose), but when saving the final video it's better to use a real video codec like h.264 (a.k.a. MPEG4 AVC). It should also be noted that some hardware players don't support MJPEG because it's rather uncommon.

Regarding quality: That depends entirely on the encoding settings. An MJPEG file is not higher quality per-se. All of these video codecs are lossy, i.e. they remove a certain amount of information, depending on the quality / compression settings. In fact, if you store the same video clip as MJPEG and as MPEG4 with the same compression (i.e. same file size), the quality of the MJPEG one will be abysmal. And if you tune the encoder settings so that the quality is roughly the same, then then MPEG4 file will be considerably smaller (like a fraction of the size of the MJPEG file).
 

ronaldlees

Aspiring Daemon

Reaction score: 314
Messages: 750

... And if you tune the encoder settings so that the quality is roughly the same, then then MPEG4 file will be considerably smaller (like a fraction of the size of the MJPEG file).
I agree that the file sizes get to be enormous when using MJPEG. But, I use large disks and then don't worry about it too much. Also, I tend to shoot short clips and then concatenate them all into a video, so in the field I don't worry too much about filling a smaller SD drive. Plus, I carry lots of spares. With today's huge hard drives, I don't see the size thing as all that bad.

I know I get better color dynamic range from videos that were originally shot in MJPEG versus any other format except raw. This is easy to discover when you're editing marginal videos, where poor lighting already limits the spectrum available in the shots. MJPEG goes to pot less quickly in such cases, and I can "pull" bad histograms into shape without losing as much detail. But ...

I agree that for exporting the final clips, if there's going to be any www uploading going on (i.e. Google) - then some kind of compressed format is necessary. I have uploaded MJPEGs to Youtube (Sometimes I can't believe how much data Google will take (no matter how long it takes to upload LOL)).

Also - MJPEGs are less encumbered, from the free software point of view.
 

daeron

Member


Messages: 46

The multimedia/avidemux port is effectively dead until somebody does a port for avidemux-qt5 which builds successfully but seems to need port work to function with avidemux-plugins.
KDE4 ports have been deprecated by the KDE-FreeBSD team and will be removed at the end of 2018.
 

daeron

Member


Messages: 46

The point is that avidemux seems to be the only port that has been left hanging on a defunc qt4, every other port seems to be qt5 ready for when qt4 will be removed.
Unfortunately I don't know of any port that comes close to matching the avidemux GUIs for letting people slice video files as easily with the user's choice of copy or encoding options... for the past year i've been forced to do my video work on MS-windows where I can use avidemux.
 

SirDice

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator

Reaction score: 7,558
Messages: 30,273

Sony Vegas - best piece of software that I ever used.
Does it run on FreeBSD? I suspect not, as it's Windows only software. We have nothing against Windows (some of use do but that's a different discussion) but we generally frown at suggesting Windows applications on a FreeBSD forum.
 

christhegeek

Member

Reaction score: 4
Messages: 41

i can't import media they crash after i try importing, shotcut,kdenlive,cinellera tested and don't work at all !
this is bad for this project
 

daeron

Member


Messages: 46

i can't import media they crash after i try importing, shotcut,kdenlive,cinellera tested and don't work at all !
this is bad for this project
Openshot, kdenlive, cinellera (current) tested and all still work on 12-Stable (amd64), still import various media types. There were problems with shotcut a few weeks ago.
Update 9/April built current Shotcut (shotcut-19.02.28_1) and now it also seems to be working.
 
Last edited:
Top