Free Software (made with free software) - Computerphile
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 พ.ย. 2014
- Why the Free Software Foundation say iTunes isn't free software. Matt Lee, Technical Lead at Creative Commons explains.
Swim Tracking App: • Swim Tracking App - Co...
UTF8 & the Unicode Miracle: • Characters, Symbols an...
The Kindle Text Problem: • The Kindle Text Proble...
How this film was made: • Video Editing with Fre...
A version of this film made with Avid (proprietary software): • Free Software (non fre...
This film was produced (almost) entirely with free software. The exception is that I transcoded the original footage to an easier to handle format before I started. The project has taken a week & involved me trying no less than five distros, several types of video editing software and spending hours waiting for renders which most of the time failed. I found a way of working which still took five hours to export from the editing software, in pieces, it was then pieced together by mkvmerge and uploaded.
There are some production issues with this film, such as glitchy audio and some harsh cuts, but they are partly down to my inexperience with the specific editing software and lack of patience and not necessarily purely to the software itself.
Thanks for reading this footnote - next step is to pull together a film on how I made this one! Sean
/ computerphile
/ computer_phile
This video was filmed and edited by Sean Riley.
Computer Science at the University of Nottingham: bit.ly/nottscomputer
Computerphile is a sister project to Brady Haran's Numberphile. See the full list of Brady's video projects at: bit.ly/bradychannels
I'm sure you could fix the noise after with audacity?
As a computer user I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the free software movement for the tireless efforts to counter regulatory capture by powerful software vendors. Which if unchecked would have given us a closed internet littered with toll booths.
I find it ironic that this video is promoting free software (something I'm totally in support of, by the way), but only makes it look bad via the crackling audio.
Its probably about the hardware tho.
There are several problems with free software:
1. It's much more difficult to profit from free software.
2. Related to point #1, free software tends to be lower quality than proprietary software because of lack of resources.
The best middle ground is to release proprietary software under a permissive license after it's no longer under active development.
Robo9400 Do you seriously think you can pay a development team with the pennies you'll make from ads?
***** Reality doesn't really bear that out. There is a reason open source projects haven't found a solid footing outside of the server environment.
People have been singing the praises of open-source for decades and have waxed lyrical about it taking over the work. Meanwhile it is pretty much the same place it was all those decades ago.
***** We can definitely get a reasonable idea how many people are using Linux as their primary machine by looking at web analytics. It's around 1%.
How many people actually know AVISynth is installed on their system? How many have every used it? How many major projects have been done with it? As far as I can tell it doesn't really have a serious foothold in the video space. I'm sure it's a fine project, but it illustrates what I've been saying, it doesn't compare to the close-source video editors in terms of real use.
***** Most of that is an incoherent babble, but you make some interesting points.
First you've held up AVISynth as an example of open-source software, yet have to resort of its use in proprietary software and services to demonstrate any real usage.
Second, you continually claim open-source software is so responsive in terms of development, yet say that you yourself are too busy making a living on other things to bother maintaining or improving your open-source project.
For what it is worth, I spend my work day logged into Unix boxes working with lots of open-source software. I'm perfectly well aware of where it is and what functions it serves.
David Stewart One key thing to understand is that proponents of free software don't claim that it necessarily has the most advanced features with bells and whistles. It is rather an ethical statement. If we own a machine, we should be able to decide what it should do. If you have proprietary code you can not make it do what you want (or hire a local programmer to make a change you need for your business - like build a new menu into Word), and you can't even see what the program actually does behind your back.
Linux is getting better and better but it has a bad reputation among 'average users' and most haven't even heard of it. Why? Not that much advertising, schools accept deals with Microsoft to teach MS software to kids, laptops come with preinstalled Windows, etc. And generally it's what people are used to. Changing habits needs effort and most people cannot understand much about computing or what source code is, so they think freedom is not relevant to them.
Free software also doesn't mean charity software that saints develop out of pure altruism. Sure, there is that part too, but many companies develop free software out of strategic self-interest, too.
It's all about who has the ultimate say about things that you own.
It feels like my headphones are nibbling on my right ear. Stop it! Aaaggghhh!
Free Software (non free version) - Computerphile
***** Was the camera that was originally used saving it's files using Theora and Vorbis? Otherwise, this could just be the result of poor transcoding.
YaMoonSun
I have encountered this type of audio bug a lot.
generally it is due to integer-overflows in the audio-mixing code or similar.
usual solution is to find wherever it is overflowing and add range clamping logic.
alternatively (if one can't find or fix it at the source), it is possible to write a pop-filter, which is essentially a special type of low-pass filter designed to severely attenuate high-frequency spikes while leaving most everything else intact.
wingbull2009 You shall become one with your headphones. Resistance is futile.
Wow, the audio was really bad. Had to put it into audacity, run several filters over it hoping that woul help (which it did, to some extent; no more ear-hurting crackling) and then ran the video muted and timed starting the audio in audacity to match up with the video. Luckily, got the timing perfect on just the 4th try and was able to enjoy the video.
For those wondering, I believe the most effective filter was the compressor with the knee point at default volume and with maximum flat slope (1:32 iirc), including peaks (very important), applied twice. I also used an equalizer to radically cut off the top fourth or fifth of the frequency band. I tried the noise remover and the klick-filter (twice), but am unsure whether they actually did anything. In any case, person stayed intelligible while the audio no longer sounded as if it'd grab my ear's cochlea's hair cells and break them in two.
Excellent! I would've tried the noise remover, too. But that needs a sample of a crack that is standing out on its own. Basically, a crack and silence - nothing else.
I think I would've eventually cut out one of the crack sounds, ran the noise recognition over it and fixed the whole stream with that. Should've worked, too.
Or, as it's mono anyway, just chuck away track2 as track1 is fine 😉
you can download the video file (mp4 or flv) using youtube-dl and then tell mplayer to use different file for the audio using the "-audiofile" option and then use "#" to switch to the new track while playing
Yes, I used youtube-dl to get it into audacity. But good to know about mplayer -audiofile
Just duplicate the left channel - it's only the right one with clicking.
anyone else getting a crackling sound coming form the left stereo channel?
I hear it as well.
I am, it scared me I thought my speaker was going. D:
They apologize for it immediately before the video.
It's the right channel for me
Yeah, it's part of the audio glitches he mentioned, I think.
Though, it's in my right stereo channel.
Cool interview but very poor editing... but that is definitely NOT free software editors fault as it is implied in the end of the video!! There are many free software video editors that are very capable of superior editing: Blender and KdenLive are some of the examples.
I will probably end up pointing people to this video when I need to quickly explain what I mean by 'free' software, good job!
Yeah, me too. People generally think of "gratis".
Big thumbs-up for supporting free software; especially Ubuntu, Inkscape, and GIMP (all of which I use and love
Thanks for the video, always good to have the word about FLOSS spread.
Happy to watch the free version of this video. I can easily live with some glitches during the early stages of introducing new software.
At least you picked a cool background to film this; that overpass and traffic really add to the shot's composition.
Thank you for the video. Moving over to a new platform is never easy. At first there appears to be so many tools, but nothing that does exactly what you want. It also often requires a totally different way of thinking to what you may have previously been used to, and the learning curves are initially a lot steeper with many of the free software tools. In time though you get an established work-flow, and through the use of command line tools for the pre and post processing, you end up with a collection of scripts to automate many of the tasks.
Codec support is one major issue that still plagues many of the open source editors. This is often nothing to do with the capability of the software, but often due to patent issues preventing vendors from building or distributing certain codecs. This issue alone can turn, what should be a straight forward process of opening a file, into a process that involves transcoding and various other conversion processes.
Also, I find that getting good results in a free video editing software environment requires a quite a broad understanding of video coding techniques. Concepts such as de-interlacing, field order, colourspace, chroma sub-sampling, pixel format, are all things that I didn't really pay much attention to until I started to edit video using entirely free software. Some proprietary video editing packages are able to do a very good job of working with these issues, to the point where you don't even need to be aware of them. So the free software world still has a long way to go, but there are many projects that are alive and are at a healthy pace of development.
Never give up, it's very rewarding when you get it to work.
I switched to linux early last year. At first I thought I would have a ton of trouble getting used to new software, but it was all really easy to learn. Different, but about the same learning curve as anything on windows or Mac. Currently I run Antergos, and if anyone wants to try out a nice simple distro that will let you do more as your knowledge of linux grows, I would reccomend it.
Mixed with an open source audio editor!
Ridiculous bashing. You can remove the crackling sounds with Audacity. They just didn't do it.
Replies from open source humans.
Ew! Nobody wants to cut me open and see my source.
***** I'm not amused by your lack of humour either.
***** Because they're so fundamentally different in function that there are almost no actual points of reference for comparison. You can't even make a useful comparison of quality between two things that are completely different by design.
...To be honest, it's hard for me to believe I actually have to explain this to you.
Love it!!
Been using a Mac (professionally) since 1995. Got into Linux and free software because Adobe is getting outrageous. I still have a Mac but I also have a laptop and older DELL desktop running Linux (SolydK) and GIMP.
Windows does not equal PC, back in a day a PC was a machine and you had a wide choice of ways to run it.
The best thing about free software is that you can adapt it to work even in situations it wasn't designed to work. This has allowed me to compile a lot of my favorite Linux software to run on my phone with just one copy paste for a line that initializes Android's touchpad emulation mode. Qt and Gtk run pretty good in Android but you have to make sure you set the manifest to make them persistent or they will crash a lot, memory use is very minimal.
Will be going to Radio Shack nearby in a couple days, sale on an open hardware platform we all love for it's versatility and open logic chips. The chips are pretty popular ones, probably have a bunch of their smaller variants in every computerized device you own including your car. You can make your own clones and sell them as long as you don't use their name and they give you most of what you need to know to do that on a small slip of paper with the chips.
Free software and open hardware is how things get done by people that aren't afraid to get their hands dirty. I hate how proprietary bottle machines are at work. They all jack into a serial modem which can control every function but if we tamper with the stuff, they will refuse servicing the machines or selling any more to the store. That's crazy to me, I don't even try to comprehend it. Your machines crush cans with mechanical systems, there's no secret to protect there, anyone could look inside if they asked to see it and it wasn't too busy. Not like we can all make those things that well, that should be plenty of justification for the high cost, not an enforced blackout of information.
Alan Hunter Wonderfully put! Free software keeps the hacker spirit alive.
Sorry for the late comment, but it had to be said!
I love these guys for everything they do for us.
While I appreciate the effort that went into this video, if I were in the creator's shoes I don't think I'd have released it. It inadvertently does a great job being its own counterpoint.
I applaud you for making this video with free software, as a proponent of free software I do use and look for free whenever I can. But I do have access to non free video editing tools that I will use. As the few free video tools are not up to the gimp level of usability
Why I dont use free software (mostly): "The exception is that I transcoded the original footage to an easier to handle format before I started. The project has taken a week & involved me trying no less than five distros, several types of video editing software and spending hours waiting for renders which most of the time failed. I found a way of working which still took five hours to export from the editing software, in pieces, it was then pieced together by mkvmerge and uploaded."
Brady, I'm wondering if after using free software to make this video, whether you found anything that you would want to keep using in the future?
Louis Chan hey there - that's a question for Sean who made the video, not me! It's hard to answer all the questions we get sent though... >Brady
Is iTunes still maliciously keeping you from playing formats like flac and speex even when you have the right Quicktime codec installed?
Penny Lane Yup. Use VLC instead. F-ck Apple.
TheLeftLibertarianAtheist
I wouldn't have asked if I were using iTunes or, in fact, if I were running an OS that even supports iTunes.
I haven't used iTunes since I had an ipod as a teenager... back then, it wasn't great but at least the interface was well done. I used a current version of it the other day and it seems like all they've done in the intervening years is to make it harder to do anything useful with it.
If I never use another apple product again, it will be too soon. Ever since they became fashionable, it seems like they've gotten worse and worse at making something that's actually functional.
TheLeftLibertarianAtheist VLC is great for playing anything, but terrible for organizing your music. Foobar2000 is nice (and iTunes for Mac is night and day better versus the disaster of iTunes on Windows)
Ben Rowe I'm going to have to agree with you. The iTunes of 10 years ago was way better than the iTunes of today. Now I have to click like 5 buttons to get to a list of all my music, and searching for music is a pain.
For the little bit of editing I do I mostly use VirtualDub, which is not entirely free software since changing the code is not allowed according to its licence. I will definitely look into Kdenlive, after a quick search I noticed that its GUI is a big improvement over VirtualDub.
There also is OpenShot, which is more stable in my use cases. The interface is roughly similar to Adobe Premiere.
I don't do video editing, but on my PCs, I use basically >90% free software. I went away from Windows 2000 in 2006 and started using Linux, first Kubuntu 6.10, then Debian (Etch, then Lenny) until 2009 and then Ubuntu again, now since 2012 I use Linux Mint, because I like the Cinnamon desktop environment. So the only non-free software I can currently think of on my machines is the Flash plugin. Unfortunately, that isn't true for my mobile phone (running Android). There's so much non-free stuff in Android, and even if I had flashed my phone with a custom firmware, to get the full use out of it I'd need the Google services framework, which again presses me back into having to rely on non-free software :-(
You can always use F-Droid! The benefit of not having all the google services running all the time is more battery power. A LOT MORE. There is also an APK downloader on evozi.com so you will never need the PlayStore anymore.
schmatzler I know all that and I even try to get anything I can from F-Droid instead of the Play Store. But then there are still some apps that do need those Play Services, because they use the Maps API or the method of pushing messages to the phone (i.e. TextSecure, one of the most secure messenger apps, but unfortunately infested with Google Services).
I agree, there is no real alternative to Google Maps :(
I ended up with the "Where am I?" app on F-Droid which is good for basic navigating, but no comparison.
Apart from Maps, I don't have a problem. I can always use the website. I trade that bit of comfort for more power.
Robo9400 In case of Windows vs. Mac there's nothing "more free" about Windows than Mac. Rather the other way around, since the MacOS Kernel is derived from free software (FreeBSD, I think it was).
Robo9400 I didn't know you were joking. Now it makes sense. And yes, you are also right with what you wrote about Mac - still, I think the FreeBSD Kernel is what made Hackintosh possible. Anyways, no need to reply.
Could you do a video on the differences between various free software licenses (e.g. GPL, BSD license, MIT license, etc.)?
Good video! Thanks for making it.
Great honest video Sean! TMBG FTW!
I've used free & open source software for over 5 years now on my main computer and really like it. I currently use Ubuntu for my OS. As a graphics designer, I only use GIMP and Inkscape.
I must say though, I've yet to find good, stable free video editing software for Linux, which is kind of disappointing.
Brady, how did you get in contact with this person? Is it through the university, or maybe you contacted an organization about free software?
Free software has its advantages and its limitations. And since we heard all about advantages, I'm going to mention the other. For instance, in many cases you either have no support, or the support is not free. It often comes with no or very little documentation. And it may contain nasty hidden bugs that nobody cares to fix.
I recognize two kinds of free software. There is company-sponsored free software ("companies to themselves") often paid either by paid support services or being developed as byproduct of other business, eventually with development shared between multiple large companies who all find it useful and are sponsoring it by dedicating part of time of their developers to it. This software can be usually trusted.
Then there's volunteer-originated free software, made by single person or just a small unorganized team. These are very often low quality, full of bugs, with limited or no support, undocumented limitations, and may get abandoned at random moment.
Finding a good piece of free software for any particular taks may turn out to be very hard job - you may find hundreds of projects that seem to fit the purpose, but only low percentage of them actually does, and only few of them - if any - actually work.
I ve never used video editors, but I've always been a defensor of open source technology, I think if all the code was open, the world would be far more evolved.
You are not a true programmer unless you start your counting from zero.
Haha, I thought nothing of this, I must be a true programmer too!
RisefromyourGRAVE The zeroth law of Thermodynamics have a different story. The reason that the law got its special name is that one realized until well into the 1900s that the law was needed, and that the law at a level is more fundamental than any other of laws of Thermodynamics. At that time the numbering of the three other were widely used, and it was no longer possible to rename them.
There are several languages that indexing start at one, not zero.
I have an exclusively open source machine, but the end message isn't a ringing endorsement, is it?
I think you should do a video about how people collaborate to make free software.
I use a lot of free software. I have Gimp on three machines (two PCs and a Raspberry Pi). I have no reason to use Photoshop any more.
For word processing: OpenOffice on an old PC; Abiword and Libre Office on the RPi - I like using that machine for word processing because there's no fan, so nice and quiet.
For graphics: Blender. This is the most amazing piece of free 3D software I've ever used. Difficult to learn but impressive results. You can create games. You can also edit video and sound in it, though I mainly use a paid-for editing application.
Lovely! finally
Which Open Source video editor would you recommend for Windows, which would support basic things like import/export from MP4 containers, separate audio channel for background music, video effects such as speed-up / slow-down, stitch a video from multiple clips with transitions etc.? Windowx XP's Movie Maker has all these except for MP4 support.
There is none. MP4 is a proprietary format. :/
VirtualDub can open most videos via DirectShow input driver, but doesn't natively support even MKVs. Oh actually I remembered incorrectly, some MP4 videos are supported (maybe depending on the codec).
Anyway, it doesn't support transitions between video clips, it is useful only in applying filters and encoding the output video.
To correct myself, many FLOSS video editors do have support for proprietary formats. You have to install some plugin or package to gain that feature in the program though. Good point, *****.
There are no excuses for leaving a video with faulty audio up. Take it down, fix, reupload. The Brady channels have a good reputation. Don't soil it, especially not with excuses about you not knowing how to use the programs you chose to use in the production of the video. Also, this was the best location you could find for an interview? Really?
I use Kdenlive for all of my video editing and tbh, I’ve tried several times to find another free video editing program. Kdenlive has a somewhat weird behavior sometimes, especially when dealing with 5.1 sound: all channels are shown in the audio thumbnails, but only the first two channels are used.
I love this.
Great video
Did you record it on vinyl?
You can still get Fireworks, they're just not making any new versions. The same goes for Audacity.
I like you Mr Computerphile. Very good vid. *Cheers* m8
All the audio issues are in the right channel so it might be worth removing the right channel and cloning over the left channel in it's place. Sure you'll get mono audio but the glitches are REALLY annoying on headphones.
If you could choose one piece of paid software to become free, which would it be and why?
Do you really expect me to continue the development of gimp for example if the developers of gimp suddenly decide to discontinue the development? With free software, i as a user, am equally dependent on the developers of the software as i would be with closed software like Adobe with it's Fireworks software for example.
If they decide to stop developing it, i have to live with it. Free software or not.
With free software,if you can't work on the software by yourself you stillcan pay a developper to continue working on it for you. You could even team up with other users of the software to share the costs.
With proprietary software, you are pretty much stuck.
Adrien Plazas
You theoretically could do that, but that's not very likely is it?. I would not pay a team of developers to continue developing a software just so i can keep using it, would I?
It's free software. If you don't want to do something - then don't. If you do want - then do. No one expects sh!t from you, but you are the one to face consequences of your action/non-action. Simple, isn't it?
Richard Gecko
You do not need to get personally involved. The fact that it's open source would mean some people would continue its development and you could keep using it as you did before, ignoring the fine details if you wanted. Basically, the developers would just change
Richard Gecko You should go read the history of Blender.
That program started out as a little in-house animation program. When the company closed, the community raised enough money to buy the source code and release it under the GNU GP license. They started the Blender foundation and every year, they create an open source project with the software in order to fund the continued development.
Look at Linux: most of the development is funded by gifts and sales of live cd's.
Most free and open source software projects participate in the Google Summer of Code.
If one developer stops developing the project, another will typically fill in the spot. That is the beauty of free and opensource software. The potential amount of developers that can work on the software is huge. People want to make their software better. They just need the chance to help.
If you're still not convinced, take a look at the different modding communities of games like Mount&Blade, The Elder Scrolls and Fallout series, Minecraft etc.
Those are good games in their own right, but it is the modding community that elevated them to pure awesomeness. Guess what? A lot of people never got paid a penny for their work, but many others received donations from their audience. Some people even got themselves hired as developers because of their modding work.
Audio glitches like that are easily removed with audacity, which is indeed free software
would've been really cool to see this video uploaded with creative commons xP
I don't know how you managed to screw up the audio that bad. I've listened to several podcasts that use Audacity (a free, open source program) to edit their audio and I've never heard something that bad.
At 2:36, Matt Lee claims that free software will be available into the future, and contrasts that with proprietary software which could be discontinued at any point in time.
This is a freedom that helps users with deep pockets rather than the ordinary (but eccentric) user. For example, I use a piece of free software (GPL'd) for maintaining my checkbook. When I upgrade the rest of my system, this relatively obscure software is a huge timesink for me, because I haven't chosen a popular project.
This is actually a very similar risk I face if I use proprietary checkbook software. Note the difference if I were able to pay for a developer to fix the software (find the incompatibilities with the new OS and patch them) for me: with proprietary software you typically don't have the code, and modifications aren't legal; with free software it's just a matter of money. For a individual user, this is a difference without a distinction.
I embrace the Free (aka "Libre") software movement, but pragmatically there are substantial risks whenever you decide to live digitally.
...Just a perspective to consider, not a criticism of any of the claims presented here.
Yes! Finally something on Free software. :)
The one thing I don't understand is how, with free software, anyone could make a profit. I couldn't care less about Apple or Adobe's profits, but there are countless small-time developers who have no money apart from selling their indie games or applications. If everything was free software, meaning that anyone can do what they want with it, what's to keep everyone from pirating and leaving them with nothing?
Just a thought but is there a free software bundle / suite to rival that of Adobe's extensive (and expensive too for that matter) creative suite?
I know there are separate individual programs but am just wondering is there a free suite to rival Adobe?
As our main platforms are Unixes, we generally don't do megasuites. The Unix philosophy says: one programm that fullfills one task and does it well. Exception may be LibreOffice.
Des Norman GIMP for raster graphics, Inkscape for vector graphics, Blender for animation, Audacity for audio. Nothing good for video editing, though. Real issue is that the video codecs themselves are often proprietary.
You can do quite a lot with Blender: modeling, animating, post processing and audio/video editing. Blender also comes with a game engine.
GIMP is the natural substitute for photoshop.
I think that with these two programs, you can cover most of what you need.
I think even Adobe's suite isn't big enough. They really need to improve on 3D software and digital audio workstations. Right now, Photoshop and After Effects can import 3D objects and there's a mini version of Cinema4D that comes with After Effects. Audition is barely a DAW, it just doesn't have virtual instruments.
***** haven't seen anything good for video. (I know blender is supposed to be able to do editing, but I certainly couldn't even see how to do the most basic of edits with it) - I use a 'free' (as in, you don't have to pay) editor for youtube videos, but it's not open source. And in fact the way they licence it means they could pull it entirely with only a weeks notice, rendering it unusable even by people that have it installed already... Good if you have a low income, not so great if you are into any of the other benefits open source software has
Interview this guy about his hoodie. Was he on TMBG's road crew? If so... dish.
Was the superhuman addiction to coffee amazing to behold?
TMBG love
Adobe did stop selling Photoshop, to some degree. The "Creative Cloud" subscription scheme is so unacceptable to some users that it is as though Photoshop was no longer available for sale. Another way to look at the new way to purchase Photoshop is to say that now, it has an infinite price. So Photoshop is a perfect example of unfree software and of what can go wrong with unfree software!
So since free/oss video editing seems to be a topic int he comments right now. Does anyone have a good recommendation for someone who is a long time premiere user who is not happy with CC and is looking to make the switch? Most oss/freeware options I've encountered have a terrible UI that seems more fitting to usage by a programmer than a video editor.
I'm going to use the terms gratis (no cost) and libre (having liberty) to differentiate the two meanings of "free" ...so when they say "free" software, they actually mean libre software.
So he gave iTunes as an example of software that is gratis but not libre. However, are there any examples of software that is libre but not gratis?
(When I say "not gratis" I mean "pay for all" not just accepting donations or pay for support. I also don't count software that you're theoretically supposed to pay for for commercial use only or after a trial period if there is no real enforcement/incentive to make that payment happen.)
I just have to take off my hat to this chap for wearing his TMBG hoodie. Yeah!
Its definitely worth trying a Linux operating system like Ubuntu or Debian they are easy to install plus you could even play your windows games using free software such as wine and playonlinux I have Diablo 3 running perfectly in fact I drop less frames playing on Ubuntu 14.04 than I do on windows 7!
"Free as in speech, not free as in beer" /RLS
It sounds like theres is some clicking sound in the video.
Free Software (non free version) - Computerphile
***** I should probably have read the description or the text in beginning of the video.
My workhorses have been Mozilla/SeaMonkey, vim, Open-/LibreOffice, and Ruby for over a decade, and xterm, bash and gcc for two decades. The way I use them, they're rock-solid.
Just last week, I patched the freetype2 library to have better subpixel hinting on my openSUSE 13.2 box. I've also published a patch for a semicolon bug in one of the source files of GPicView.
All this wouldn't have been possible if not for free software. I owe the community a lot, and I'm trying to pay that back in form of donations and hobbyist work.
6:23 -- oh, and kudos for producing this video with free software. A/V editing and games, for that matter, are two areas where proprietary software may have some dwindling head start.
I do my transcoding with ffmpeg on the command line, for example:
ffmpeg -f x11grab -s 512x288 -r 25 -i :0+96,208 -an -vcodec libx264 -crf 0 -preset ultrafast -threads 0 recording.mkv # - for screen-grabbing videos quick'n'dirty
ffmpeg -i recording.mkv -an -vcodec libx264 -preset slow -crf 22 -threads 0 result.mp4 # - for optimizing the recording
This is buffering at 144p, why? :(
Linux. You can get it for free. You can change it. You can distribute it (to your friends at least), and you can (sort of I guess) use it for what ever you want.
Its almost impossible to live a day without use free software. Google, facebook, in fact most of web servers run free software, complex service sites run free software because they can modify it as they needed and small ones use it because of the low costs. Android is free software (although some of the programas that vendors put in the phones aren't), IOS and OsX have A LOT of open source components. The 'problem' is that free software are in the next curve of software when it will be 'invisible'. There are some areas where proprietary are still superior (in general deskto professional softwares) but free software alternatives are good enough (and cost less) for most of the users. About the remuneration of people that work with free software, maybe will be hard to be a billionarie, but is easy to take a job to modify a software (you will receive less than to make the entire software but also you will have less work to do).
did you like FAQ the video up on purpose to show or make a point about free software?
the audio scared the heck out of me , i thought my speakers were breaking down
I just wish that there was *more* free and open source software. I use apps like GiMP, Audacity, LibreOffice, and Blender quite a bit. But I'm still looking for free versions of apps such as video editors (a la Vegas or Premiere) and video compositors (a la After Effects or HitFilm) that are anywhere near as fully featured and easy to use as the major brands.
You can use OpenShot in conjunction with MLT and Blender - it's a basic editor with some powerful features. You can't really compare it to the Adobe suite, though.
OpenShot has my highest hopes so far. If it had a Windows binary, then I would probably be using it already, at least in conjunction with Vegas. But sadly, it just doesn't yet have even close to the features that I need out of the commercial apps that I use now. Hopefully, someday. (They really need to at least integrate OpenFX support, too.)
I feel as if it is ironic that a video praising free software made in free software is worse in quality and glitchier than the same when edited in nonfree software
what do you think about the .NET core now being Open Source?
tommihommi1 Well, since DirectX is proprietary it makes no big difference if the .NET core is open or not.
***** MDX.
Beware geeks bearing gifts...
while it's Open Source, but it's not Free software - at best, it's highly patent encumbered
***** Managed DirectX.
I love the idea of free software, I use blender very often. The point is that free software is just not as good. For me photoshop works way better than gimp does (especially for painting). So free software is just not always an option.
Watching on semi-free software ^.^
Go Stallman!
Does he live under a bridge? He really likes his software being free
My experience with open source comes down to Linux. Ive used Linux for years as my main OS and only recently have I allowed my pc to be dual boot, for some gaming and work related software. Linux always feels safer, faster and more flexible... Even on Windows I go for open source software, to avoid crazy search,bars, spyware, etc. The only reason for me to use private software is to lower myself to the experience of work and academic colleagues.
what do you mean by "all the graphics have been rebuilt in gimp"
Why isn't the caption available?
i dont mind the audio that much but i mean you couldve chosen a better place to record
what free software did you use?
Follow-up video will detail it, but basically Kdenlive, GIMP and Mkvmerge in the end >Sean
never mind got to the end
***** ow you already commented before i commented this?
You can see it at 6:22. He used GIMP for the graphics and Kdenlive for the video editing.
Oh, and you've reminded me of my favorite Freedom 0 violation--in iTunes, no less:
You are not allowed to use iTunes in the development or construction of nuclear weapons. I'm not sure how that would work, but you're not allowed to do it. Apparently Apple feels very strongly about nuclear non-proliferation.
That may be caused by ITAR export limitations. It’s possibly a liability for their company.
Also it's cold out there. Are you staying outside because it is free?
*puts on blender salesman hat*
Not many people know this, but Blender (blender.org) has a video editor built in. This is in addition to all its modeling, composting and animation capabilities. Blender is "free" in the way this man describes it. I would recommend Sean or Brady give Blender a shot. You can learn the Blender VSE here: cgcookie.com/blender/category/tutorials/video-editing/
*takes off hat*
I would consider myself an open-source software proponent. I am a very content Blender user, I use GIMP, Inkscape, and a number of other "free" applications. However, I'm not a fanatic about this. I (Unfortunately) have a ton of proprietary software installed, too. I do run windows, for instance, because, for all its faults, it's easier to use than any linux distro I've tried. I of course play games and use Steam. Point is, if transitioning to opensource software is going to be a pain, I'm not going to do it. The fact remains that many pieces of opensource software are hard to use. You can go to any linux support forum and ask how to do something. 9 times out of 10, the people are going to give you a command to put in the terminal. While this may be simple and easy, it's a HUGE turnoff for people who just want to do simple things, and are used to a GUI.
You'll also see that I've used the term "Open Source" a couple times. I much prefer this term over "free." I think it's better to use words that are unambiguous. "Free" is ambiguous. The fact that he had to explain the difference between free beer and freedom speaks directly to that point. "Open Source" more accurately describes what is different about the software, the fact that the source is open to anyone to view and edit. I'm more sympathetic to the Open Source Initiative than the Free Software Foundation, as I believe OSI's beliefs are a bit more grounded in reality, whereas the FSF is a bit more fanatical and fantastical.
Anyway, I think that's enough controversial opinions for one piece.
You know he is a coder when he start his "lists the 4 freedom" as freedom 0 - 3.
No mean to start a flame war, but what license do you think is most "free"? GPL? If so, which version? BSD? MIT? MPL?
Depends on where you stand ;)
BSD license is the least restrictive if I remember correct. But I understand why GPL (version 2) was really successful.
***** Mostly because Torvalds likes it... :P
(the Linux kernel is released under GPLv2)
***** The problem these licenses have, is that free code can turn into non-free code. GPLv3 guarantees that the code always will stay free, under the same license.
TheLeftLibertarianAtheist GPLv3 also guarantees a lot of people will refuse to deal with it and can severely impair future development.
David Stewart Well, what's the point of writing free code if someone just can take it and then make the code (and changes to it) non-free? Sure, if you are okay with that, I guess that the BSD license is for you. However, I am not.
One of the reasons for using free (as in speech) desktop software is the fact that we can control its behavior and know what it does behind our backs, especially when the code repository is open for everyone to read:
mxr.mozilla.org/
This keeps everyone honest. The problem with web interfaces is that they are often controlled by a small group of people who usually change stuff behind the scenes. Also if you have developed a work flow and the web page changes / goes away there is not much you can do. As an example for the advantage of persistence: I am using software from 2002 for writing & recording music and I am productive with it. It would be very hard to find a web site from that era that hasn't completely changed.
"With more time I'm confident I could have done the film entirely with free software."
There it is. It's only free if your time is worthless. Because free software often requires a significantly larger time investment to get the same results.
That money you pay for proprietary software is for an engineer to make that product simpler for you to get your work done.
Why didn't you use PiTiVi for video editing? it's truly the best!
I like the topic, hate the sound... I am making videos in Kdenlive and I don't have any problems at all. The bad audio quality is not a good intro for OSS :(.
is brady asking questions from the bottom of a well? also that crackle in the right audio channel is distractingly awful
I get some kind of static noise,popping, while listening to this video
Namaskar gracias por la educación gracias por dar luz a la humanidad
edit with blender OMG... is it so hard?
***** could you please release a version of this video with proper sound, so we could share it with ppl?
if you share the video with a person who is not into computers enough to bare through it, it makes it harder to get the point.
also a creative commons license would be more appropriate.
pls see the video description >Sean
I love opensouce. It is the foundation of my favrat OS, Linux.
Open source and free software aren't the same thing.
Thought they were due to sharing the same values.
Linux isn't an OS, it's a kernel. Debian is an OS. Just the same, NT is a kernel, Windows is an OS.
I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're refering to as
Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it,
GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather
another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by
the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components
comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system
every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the
version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and
many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system,
developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is
just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in
the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs
that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system,
but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete
operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU
operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or
GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really
distributions of GNU/Linux!
Why use Standard TH-cam License for this? Maybe Creative Commons License :3
I usually love Computerphile videos, but the crackling is unbearable in this one, and defaces the name of free software. I appreciate that you've made an effort to learn gimp/kdenlive over Adobe CC, and I'm sure you've faced difficulties in doing so. As mentioned, video editing in open source software isn't any kind of contender to apple or adobe, yet. Thing is, I'd rather have a enjoyable video with software you're comfortable with over an attempt at software you're not, as I can see people incorrectly making the assumption that the quality of this video = the quality that open source software produces. Perhaps if you wanted to embrace open values, you could of released the video licenced as creative commons instead.
he uploaded the video to youtube which usually people need to use nonfree software to watch it.
So, how do people who make free software make a living?
Ouch... Not exactly a best showing here, guys... As much as I love open software, I don't think Sony has to worry about any serious competition to their Vegas line of video editing tools...