Author Topic: Video Editing software - Any recommendations? (Read 57441 times)

NigelH · « **Reply #50 on:** June 13, 2012, 04:39 PM »

I used Serif MoviePlus X5 recently and was fairly pleased
The manual is here movieplus5.pdf

As a paid option, you can find it for as low as $33 shipped (USA of course)

IainB · « **Reply #51 on:** June 13, 2012, 08:09 PM »

I have found that the market offers plenty of options for what looks like good video editing software.
However, from experience, it pays to try it out ("suck-it-and-see") before you can establish whether it is good for your requirements.
I say that because we often don't usually have a clear or definitive list of our peculiar requirements when we start out, and each person's requirements could be different. So if you ask them "What video editing software would you recommend?", you will get a wide response that might not be of much use in practice.

For example, being completely new to the field of video cameras, I was wanting to be able to take decent HD (High Definition) family video, and last year I chanced across a good starter video camera - a Sony HDRCX110 Handycam Camcorder at a bargain price. It was a half-priced, new refurbished product. (I usually prefer to buy refurbished new technology products at half price than at new retail prices). The Camcorder can take HD video - 1920 x 1080 standard. I used the video editing software that came with the camera, and it did a great job, but I felt it might be a bit limited in features.
So I tried another video editor - I think it was the Microsoft Live media video editor, or something, and it did a great job and was easy to use, except that it reduced the whole video to a lower definition/resolution standard - which probably makes it useless for my purposes. So I continue to use the video editing software that came with the camera, and which gets free updates by Sony from time to time.

So, one of my requirements - a new and mandatory one - could be defined as "Video editing software must be able to input, edit and output HD 1920 x 1080 standard without loss/degradation."

Do you think you might have those sorts of - as yet undiscovered/undefined - peculiar requirements?
If you do, then I would recommend that you try out as many video editors as you can, and that will probably help you to "discover" what it is that you actually need, as opposed to being in the self-constraint of what you or other people think you might need.

Renegade · « **Reply #52 on:** June 13, 2012, 11:09 PM »

So, one of my requirements - a new and mandatory one - could be defined as "Video editing software must be able to input, edit and output HD 1920 x 1080 standard without loss/degradation."
-IainB (June 13, 2012, 08:09 PM)

This is a pretty hefty requirement. The video camera (or source) that you're using MUST record in raw video and be lossless to start. If not, all is lost. That is, most video cameras use some kind of compression because video is simply ungodly large on disk. But once you have that, you likely need a dedicated video disk for the massive files from the camera/source.

I haven't checked, but I find it unlikely that most consumer level video editing suites would process raw video simply because most consumer level cameras use compression.

I would check out Media Chance though. Roman (the owner) is detail-oriented, and my guess is that he'd go that route. (I haven't checked though.) Otherwise, check other professional-level software first to see what they do, then search again for any possible cheaper software that will do the same.

4wd · « **Reply #53 on:** June 14, 2012, 01:32 AM »

So, one of my requirements - a new and mandatory one - could be defined as "Video editing software must be able to input, edit and output HD 1920 x 1080 standard without loss/degradation."
-IainB (June 13, 2012, 08:09 PM)

This is a pretty hefty requirement.
-Renegade (June 13, 2012, 11:09 PM)

It isn't, AviDemux has had this ability for at least a couple of years, VideoReDo, (mainly MPEG2), has had it for longer, VirtualDub can do it and I think Vegas also can do it.

Re-encoding will only happen if:

a filter has been applied to the video, (ie. colour changes, resolution transformations, etc),
a cut has not occurred on a key frame, or
you are changing the output format, eg. H.264 -> MPEG2.

If it's all a simple cut/join edit and a cut doesn't not occur on a key frame then only the section between the last key frame and the next will be encoded. In my case, that's one key frame every, at most, 250 frames - so any section that needs to be re-encoded won't be longer than 10 seconds, (PAL = 25fps). I always try to make cuts on key frames so there isn't any need to re-encode but sometimes it can't be helped.

The two basic rules to minimise re-encoding, (assuming your program can do smart-rendering):

output format = input format, (this means codec, resolution, frame rate, etc)
no video transformations, (no cropping, resizing, filters)

You can muck around as you like with the audio.

IainB · « **Reply #54 on:** June 14, 2012, 02:54 AM »

This is a pretty hefty requirement...
-Renegade (June 13, 2012, 11:09 PM)

Well, I am a rank amateur, so maybe I should have referred to the .m2ts format, which is the file extension of the video files that are transferred from the camera to disk.

The software that I use and that came with the camera and handles the .m2ts video files is PMB (Picture Motion Browser).

4wd · « **Reply #55 on:** June 14, 2012, 05:14 AM »

MPEG2 Transport Stream - Either VideoReDo, Womble or TMPGEnc will do frame accurate editing and, providing you save to an MPEG2 format (Program/Transport/Individual stream), ~~lossless saving~~ smart rendering, (only re-encode what's absolutely necessary).

AviDemux should also be able handle frame accurate/lossless cut/join but I find it more suited to MPEG4-ASP AVI editing and use VideoReDo TV Suite H.264 for all my DVB-T, (MPEG2TS), recordings and quick rough edit of my Sony Camcorder output, (MPEG2), before running it through Vegas.

tslim · « **Reply #56 on:** June 14, 2012, 07:02 AM »

Just in case you may be interested too, for Video repairing tool, my latest finding is:
The greatest video repair tool up to date = KMPlayer + Fraps.
-tslim (June 13, 2012, 07:46 AM)

Is this better than using KMPlayer's built-in video capture? It's probably a couple of years since I used this method and can't remember too well how it worked. I think it must have been okay, otherwise I wouldn't have used it.
-nudone (June 13, 2012, 11:24 AM)

Yes, definitely!

My recent experience with a partially corrupted rmvb movie: if I capture it with KMPlayer's built-in function, in the resultant movie, its audio and video has gap (i.e. the audio track does not align correctly with the video track), but the funny thing is KMplayer can play the original rmvb movie without the mis-align problem. So, if I capture it with Fraps, I can avoid the mis-align problem.

I have tested a few time with other movie files (of various format), it seems that KMPlayer can't really output a well-aligned movie. i.e. Don't hope to use it as a video converter.

nudone · « **Reply #57 on:** June 14, 2012, 09:41 AM »

Just in case you may be interested too, for Video repairing tool, my latest finding is:
The greatest video repair tool up to date = KMPlayer + Fraps.
-tslim (June 13, 2012, 07:46 AM)

Is this better than using KMPlayer's built-in video capture? It's probably a couple of years since I used this method and can't remember too well how it worked. I think it must have been okay, otherwise I wouldn't have used it.
-nudone (June 13, 2012, 11:24 AM)
Yes, definitely!

My recent experience with a partially corrupted rmvb movie: if I capture it with KMPlayer's built-in function, in the resultant movie, its audio and video has gap (i.e. the audio track does not align correctly with the video track), but the funny thing is KMplayer can play the original rmvb movie without the mis-align problem. So, if I capture it with Fraps, I can avoid the mis-align problem.

I have tested a few time with other movie files (of various format), it seems that KMPlayer can't really output a well-aligned movie. i.e. Don't hope to use it as a video converter.
-tslim (June 14, 2012, 07:02 AM)

Thanks for describing the problem. I'll definitely use the Fraps method next time.

superboyac · « **Reply #58 on:** June 14, 2012, 03:05 PM »

IainB raises a good point. After trying out dozens of programs, I've nailed the features I really want and it is lacking in MOST of the software out there:
1) Accept inputs from most formats and containers (avi, mp4, mkv, mt2s, etc.)
2) Be able to seek through (scrub?) the file easily without crashing the software

You will find that most of the common programs (Premeire, Power Director, Vegas) are extremely particular about what can be input into it. Like to the point where it's ridiculous. basically, if you're not pulling it straight off of the camera, it's a huge headache. You will easily spend hours trying to figure out how to pull a normal web downloaded avi or mp4 into these programs.

And even when it does work, trying to navigate around the file with the seekbar is a pain and often will cause problems like crashes and memory issues. So the explanation of that is usually "well, those are compressed files so it can't do it. You need to use uncompressed video for smooth seeking." Hogwash! That's a load of nonsense. Firstly, uncompressed video is another pain in the ass, as it turns a 5 minute 10MB file into a gargantuan 2 GB affair. Secondly, it's nonsense. You're telling me we have the processing power to play Call of Duty 4, but we're going to struggle with editing a 1080p mp4 file? Not true, i don't buy it for a second.

Another peeve of mine (even though I have a good solution for it) is lossless cutting and joining of video. because these programs have very limited output formats, they will never be able to do a simple lossless cut or joining of video. That means when you're ready to output, there's going to be re-encoding and all that taking place, which means further degradation of video, longer output procedure (what should take seconds will take several minutes or hours), and it's very likely the output will be a larger file than the original file, with less quality and audio sync issues. Just a huge headache.

The solution to simple cutting/joing is SolveigMM. It's a great piece of cheap software that does the job brilliantly. Once in a while it will struggle with a particular format, but they keep getting better at it, and it's one of the few that is easy to use and actually works. The other option is to turn to those funky videohelp tools like avidemux, virtualdub, etc. which tend to make a mountain out of a molehill, but at least they work.

That's a pretty good summary of my video editing experiences.

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #59 on:** June 14, 2012, 04:51 PM »

You will find that most of the common programs (Premeire, Power Director, Vegas) are extremely particular about what can be input into it. Like to the point where it's ridiculous. basically, if you're not pulling it straight off of the camera, it's a huge headache.
-superboyac (June 14, 2012, 03:05 PM)

Isn't that the point though -those three titles are very specific - they edit video from camera. That is what they are designed for and that is what they do best.

They were never designed to drag in YouTuibe clips or XviD files - and actually they are the better for it.

superboyac · « **Reply #60 on:** June 14, 2012, 05:55 PM »

You will find that most of the common programs (Premeire, Power Director, Vegas) are extremely particular about what can be input into it. Like to the point where it's ridiculous. basically, if you're not pulling it straight off of the camera, it's a huge headache.
-superboyac (June 14, 2012, 03:05 PM)

Isn't that the point though -those three titles are very specific - they edit video from camera. That is what they are designed for and that is what they do best.

They were never designed to drag in YouTuibe clips or XviD files - and actually they are the better for it.
-Carol Haynes (June 14, 2012, 04:51 PM)

I'm sorry Carol, that doesn't seem to make sense to me. How can they be better for it? The program can stay exactly the same, just the formats you can pull in are different. What's the difference between a format stored on a video camera and a format stored on a file? Nothing needs to change, not even the buttons or interface of the program.

Let's say a program was able to process a mt2s file dragged into it. OK. Now, what if it also supported an mp4 file dragged into it? What's the difference? How can limiting it be better? Would ACDSee be a better program if it only could open jpg files and not png files?

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #61 on:** June 14, 2012, 08:36 PM »

I'm sorry Carol, that doesn't seem to make sense to me. How can they be better for it?
-superboyac (June 14, 2012, 05:55 PM)

Because the programs are optimised to use high quality source material and are designed for a specific purpose.

I suppose they could add a whole pile of codecs they can load but the majority of their market don't want/need that support and it just adds bloat.

If you want to add lossy video sources you can convert it using something like VirtualDub or TMPGEnc and then import it. Premier and Vegas only seem to recode output when absolutely necessary so you shouldn't add further degradation.

4wd · « **Reply #62 on:** June 14, 2012, 09:17 PM »

Well, I am a rank amateur, so maybe I should have referred to the .m2ts format, which is the file extension of the video files that are transferred from the camera to disk.
The software that I use and that came with the camera and handles the .m2ts video files is PMB (Picture Motion Browser).
-IainB (June 14, 2012, 02:54 AM)

Before investing any time in trying different editing software could you run MediaInfo over one of the files to see what it really is ?

Camera manufacturers have very weird interpretations of standards, ie. it should be MPEG2 Transport Stream but being HD it might be AVC + AAC within a M2TS container, (don't know why they can't put it into an MP4 container like normal people....but then, it is Sony).

4wd · « **Reply #63 on:** June 14, 2012, 09:29 PM »

because these programs have very limited output formats, they will never be able to do a simple lossless cut or joining of video. That means when you're ready to output, there's going to be re-encoding and all that taking place, which means further degradation of video, longer output procedure (what should take seconds will take several minutes or hours), and it's very likely the output will be a larger file than the original file, with less quality and audio sync issues.
-superboyac (June 14, 2012, 03:05 PM)

Not true, (at least as far as Vegas), I've been able to output in whatever I like since v5, (if I had a VfW codec, it could handle it - and with ffdshow that's a lot of formats), and if Vegas didn't allow, then running it through a simple frameserver to a program that could added, at most, 2 minutes to the process.

superboyac · « **Reply #64 on:** June 14, 2012, 10:08 PM »

because these programs have very limited output formats, they will never be able to do a simple lossless cut or joining of video. That means when you're ready to output, there's going to be re-encoding and all that taking place, which means further degradation of video, longer output procedure (what should take seconds will take several minutes or hours), and it's very likely the output will be a larger file than the original file, with less quality and audio sync issues.
-superboyac (June 14, 2012, 03:05 PM)

Not true, (at least as far as Vegas), I've been able to output in whatever I like since v5, (if I had a VfW codec, it could handle it - and with ffdshow that's a lot of formats), and if Vegas didn't allow, then running it through a simple frameserver to a program that could added, at most, 2 minutes to the process.
-4wd (June 14, 2012, 09:29 PM)

You're telling me that you've been able to edit an mp4 file (standard avc+aac) in Vegas with both the audio and video working? And you can chop it up and save the segments without re-encoding (lossless)? xvid/divx avi?

4wd · « **Reply #65 on:** June 14, 2012, 11:28 PM »

You're telling me that you've been able to edit an mp4 file (standard avc+aac) in Vegas with both the audio and video working?
-superboyac (June 14, 2012, 10:08 PM)

Yes, Vegas is what I use to make sure audio and video is in sync since some other editors can de-sync them and that's usually because they've used VBR audio.

And you can chop it up and save the segments without re-encoding (lossless)?

Sorry, I was addressing your comment of limited output formats and included too much quote. Vegas' output formats are limited by the codecs available. But it does do smart-rendering of video when the input is in the one of the formats is was designed to work with. It's an NLE, you're trying to compare it with a simple video splicer.

And unless all your video edits are going to occur on a key frame, (for at least MPEG2 or MPEG4-ASP/AVC compression), there is no such thing as a lossless video editor. At best it will smart-render, at worst it will render it all - but even then, (IIRC), as long as your not changing anything, good encoders will seek to minimise any recompression by recognising already compressed frames.

tslim · « **Reply #66 on:** June 15, 2012, 01:11 AM »

Hi superboyac,

My experience in all those video editors and converters tells me, normally it is the "support of output formats" that actually impose limitation on them, not the inputs format. Let's say your system is able to play video format "A" (that means the required codec is already installed) and even if it is not listed among the supported input formats you can still attempt to load a format "A" video, just select "All files" type in the open file dialog, chances is the video file will be loaded and you can go on edit or convert it. i.e. forget about the file extension, a good video editing program shouldn't rely on that to determine actual video format.

The above is at least true for TMpegEnc and AVS programs that i have used before.

Jibz · « **Reply #67 on:** June 15, 2012, 01:17 AM »

I'm with Carol on this one -- the programs whose only purpose is to support almost all video formats are having a hard enough time doing just that, I would rather software like Vegas focused on making editing as pleasant as possible

.

You can't really compare it with image formats, since most of those are fairly simple. There is no end to the crazy stuff these video container formats can contain -- just look at the fact that you need a program like MediaInfo to guess what a file contains and what you might need to be able to play it.

IainB · « **Reply #68 on:** June 15, 2012, 11:25 AM »

Before investing any time in trying different editing software could you run MediaInfo over one of the files to see what it really is ?
-4wd (June 14, 2012, 09:17 PM)

Just did this. Here's a screenshot of the MediaInfo window. Is that enough?
MediaInfo of m2ts file.png

4wd · « **Reply #69 on:** June 15, 2012, 09:09 PM »

Just did this. Here's a screenshot of the MediaInfo window. Is that enough?
-IainB (June 15, 2012, 11:25 AM)

MPEG4-AVC + AC-3, yet a different mix to ones I've normally seen. Also, it's not true HD, it's what they call HDV^w - the playback device knows to stretch the picture to fill the full 1920x1080 display.

BTW, I thought you were in NZ, which is PAL?

Those files should be at 25fps for maximum compatibility with existing equipment otherwise for playback on old DVDs/TVs you'll need to change the framerate - if that's never going to happen then it's not a problem but it does show that refurbished stock can come from anywhere.

As to editing programs, it really is a simple choice of what you would like to do and what you need to do it.

An NLE, (Vegas, Premiere, etc), will give you filters, transformations, transitions, effects, multiple output formats (including 3D anaglyph), multiple audio tracks, video overlay, etc, etc.

Or, if you just want to slice and dice, (as SB does), with no change in format, (ie. minimal recompression), then there a number of programs that can do it - VideoReDo TV Suite H.264, SolveigMM for example, both paid software. There's also VirtualDub, AviDemux (free), the latest beta versions seem to handle AC-3, (can try it doing this, you'll need to set the output container to something else, try MP4). There's probably more but these are the ones I know of off the top of my head.

There are programs that fall somewhere in between, (both AviDemux and VirtualDub), not the full-on facilities of a NLE but will do basic filtering and transformations. AviDemux has most of the filters already inbuilt whereas VirtualDub you can just add them as you need them.

The only time audio is likely to get out of sync with video is if the file contains variable bitrate audio, which is non-standard, but that shouldn't be a worry for files from the camera.

So....what do you want to do with your video

IainB · « **Reply #70 on:** June 16, 2012, 05:41 AM »

@4wd:
PAL: I'm in NZ, yes. PAL does not seem to be a mandatory standard here nowadays, as a lot of kit supports dual PAL/NTSC, but you are probably right - a refurbished product could have come from anywhere. I have purchased two other Sony products at approx. 50% discount:

A set of new/refurbished wireless headphones. They came with a Sony 110V AC PSU, so were probably from US - Japan is 100V AC, I think). The vendor recalled the headphones as they had the wrong PSU AC rating for NZ (should be 240V AC), but I had checked that they worked OK with a spare 240V AC PSU of the same DC output, and asked for the refund of the cost of a PSU as I wanted to keep the headphones (they are very good). No problem.
A new (not refurbished) Cybershot camera that came with a Japanese-only handbook, so it was probably obvious where that came from.

By the way, refurbished tech products in NZ seem to generally come with a 6-month warranty, as opposed to the usual obligatory (by law) 12-month minimum warranty. However a very nice refurbished DELL laptop that I got for my daughter had a 12-month warranty. Good on DELL for that!

What I wanted to do with the video: I have already done it. Basically cutting bits out, and splicing it back together. It seemed a bit constipated with the de facto software, but at least it works without any apparent visible loss.