Why is there no LIGHTWORKS forum?

dvxhutch

dvxhutch

Well-known member
Hey guys,

I've recently been using the great FREE NLE, LIGHTWORKS, which can be downloaded here (windows only at this stage):

http://www.lightworksbeta.com/

I was wondering why there's no forum dedicated to Lightworks? It has been used on BATMAN, PULP FICTION, KING'S SPEECH, THE DEPARTED...this is DA BOMB!!!

Anyone else using it?
 
I looked at a few tutorials on youtube and find the interface and workflow a bit awkward - to say the least.
But I don´t try to judge a book by it´s cover, what would you say is an advantage on Lightworks over Premiere?

Frank
 
It's awkward because it's different than any other NLE interface.

It's not like going from FCP7 to Premiere. Lightworks was originally designed by and for flatbed film editors and emulates the way a KEM machine works. They even sell an edit controller that's inspired by the KEM controller. I haven't fully gotten into it myself, but from what I hear once you learn it, the greatest strength is speed and intuition.
 
If there's a significant user base, we can look at adding it. But if there isn't going to be much traffic, then it's not really worth it.
 
Lightworks is exciting, but I still don't know if it's really going to catch fire or just be a passing fad. That's the trouble with trying to do any major software package as open source.

BTW, the version of Lightworks that was used on any movie past the last two years (did Batman and Pulp Fiction really use Lightworks?) is quite different than what you are going to download today.
 
Just so that you know, the version used to edit the Oscar-winning "The King's Speech" and the Oscar-nominated 3D fantasy "Hugo" is virtually identical to the current free version, which has been downloaded by a quarter of a million people, with an additional 500 downloading it every day. The release of the full Windows version is very close, with Linux and Mac versions to follow.

The main difference in the workflow is that instead of marking "In", "Out" and then <edit> you mark a point with the playhead, and then place the playhead where the out point would have been, and edit from there, without making an "out" point. This reduces the number of operations required to make a single edit, but is just one example of a workflow that is radically different, with a reasonably steep learning curve, but which is also extremely fast.

The new version will be either free, with restricted codec support, or available with a membership fee of $60 per year, and will include professional codecs (but DNxHD is a small additional one-off payment because of licensing conditions) and other features such as a GPU-accelerated Title tool with real-time preview, and built-in project sharing for multiple users. There is an educational price of $30 per seat.

Lightworks is not a passing fad. It's a well-resourced and supported Hollywood-strength NLE that has been thoroughly modernized and has a growing team of full-time, salaried developers.
 
David Shapton said:
The new version will be either free, with restricted codec support, or available with a membership fee of $60 per year, and will include professional codecs (but DNxHD is a small additional one-off payment because of licensing conditions) and other features such as a GPU-accelerated Title tool with real-time preview, and built-in project sharing for multiple users. There is an educational price of $30 per seat.
Click to expand...

As with Adobe's Creative Cloud, I have no interest in a adding a tool to my primary workflow that will force me to upgrade if I simply want to keep using it (aka subscription-based licensing). I want to buy software and use it as I please, when I please.

Please consider adding a one-time purchasing option.
 
@ Jive. We might do that, but, at $60 per year (not per month - like some of our competitors!) ... what's the issue? We are a business and have to pay for this development. We want to always have a free version for people who either can't afford anything or just want to dabble, but if it's your primary work tool, then surely it's not unreasonable to expect you to pay for it: it's one of the most powerful editors on the planet, and $60 is less than I spend per month on Skinny Lattes. :D
 
Jive said:
As with Adobe's Creative Cloud, I have no interest in a adding a tool to my primary workflow that will force me to upgrade if I simply want to keep using it (aka subscription-based licensing). I want to buy software and use it as I please, when I please.
Click to expand...

Does the subscription plan require you to upgrade to each new release? Or can users continue paying $60/month for an older version?
 
David Shapton said:
@ Jive. We might do that, but, at $60 per year (not per month - like some of our competitors!) ... what's the issue? We are a business and have to pay for this development. We want to always have a free version for people who either can't afford anything or just want to dabble, but if it's your primary work tool, then surely it's not unreasonable to expect you to pay for it: it's one of the most powerful editors on the planet, and $60 is less than I spend per month on Skinny Lattes. :D
Click to expand...

As I said, I don't simply want you to give me professional software, I am more than willing to pay. What I don't agree with is the software vendor dictating how long I can use the software before I need to upgrade. As an annual fee, the subscription cost is more like a mandatory upgrade every single year. If a tool does a job and I paid for it, why should I need to pay again if the features that are added are not necessary or desired? You can't please everyone with every new version and I may not see features that warrant an upgrade for several versions. As a user, I vote with my wallet, so why should I pay for features that I don't want? This is the reality of software development.

It's not a question of how cheap it is, it's about control over my tools. Software makers come and go and I am very hesitant to invest any time into integrating a tool into my workflow that may simply stop working one day because the licensing server went down.

As a developer myself, I fully understand the draw of a subscription-based model for sustained income. However, from an end-user's perspective that model is simply not ideal for all situations.
 
David Saraceno said:
Also, what is the anticipated release date for the Mac version?
Click to expand...

We don't have a date yet. Here's what we have to do first:

On 28th May, we're releasing the finished Windows version (Lightworks has always been a Windows App - well, actually it started under DOS!). Then we're going to put extra resources into finishing the Linux version, shown here in a Pre-Alpha technology demonstration. The Mac and Linux versions have a lot in common, so much of the work that goes into Linux will bring the Mac version forward.

So, no timescale yet, but we're taking on developers all the time (some from the other NLEs!) and we're aware of the demand - so we'll push this through as quickly as we can consistent with keeping the quality as high as it needs to be to be able to make Oscar-winning productions on this software.
 
@Jive and @hgf4,

I think what you are saying is not unreasonable, but it just doesn't fit our model. It's really a practical issue: if we were to have a version that you could simply "buy", then we'd still have to maintain it - fix bugs, etc; so we'd be maintaining an additional codebase. This would add to the cost for everyone, or would make the "buy once" version disproportionately expensive.

The reason that we're developing and making Lightworks available in the first place is because Editshare is a successful company and we want to put something back into the industry. This is our business model with Lighworks: We love it. We think it's an incredible application that deserves its place at the head of the table. Some of the best movies ever have been created with it: Pulp Fiction, and more recently The Kings Speech and Hugo (using Lightworks' stereoscopic timeline). Most of the other well-known NLEs have never been used to make Hollywood movies. But we have a resonsibility to the heritige of the software and to our users (a quarter of a million people have downloaded the Beta version) and we would always take steps to make sure that the software is never "orphaned". We sell equipment and software to national broadcasters and we know how to support professionals.

We've brought Lightworks completely up to date with Multicore, 64 bit (out soon) and a new Media Engine with real-time Long-GOP performance. It will be the first high-end NLE that runs on Linux, OS X and Windows.

We want it to be available to everyone. So there's a free version with almost all the features intact apart from certain codecs that cost us money to license - so we can't give them away - and there's the Pro version, with very low running costs.

We could have chosen the "Pay-quite-a-lot-of-money-once" model but that would make the Pro software inaccessible to a lot of people. We wanted the lowest-possible barrier to entry that is consistent with being able to drive the software forward.

The industry these days is different: new technologies are coming out almost every day. The rate of change is changing - upwards. New codecs, new resolutions and new techniques. With a yearly payment, we can keep everyone bang up to date. This is the direction the whole industry is going in, and of course it won't suit everyone. There are valid argments on both sides, but this is the choice we think is right for us and Lightworks.

Thanks for the feedback.
 
The subscription software model feels too much like renting to me. You keep paying or you eventually have to give it back.

I hate renting, and am highly unlikely to ever "subscribe" to software.


Even when you "subscribe" to a magazine, you don't need to return the issues that they mail you when you decide to end your subscription.


I can see paying periodically for "upgrade protection," but if you need to stop using the software when you stop paying, count me out.

I might check out the free version once it is released for the Mac, but unless there is a pay-once option, I would not consider paying to use the software, no matter what features it has to offer.
 
OK, well you're entitled to that view. As I said, it doesn't seem cost effective to sell it in a Pay-Once configuration. To do so would raise the cost to everyone else for a vanishingly small number who want a pay-once model. Most people are flexible enough to recognise that this is the biggest NLE bargain of all time ( it's software that is used to make Oscar-winning films) and that $60 a year is a trivial amount to pay for that. If you don't want to pay, there's still the free version.

BTW - The way we buy the Codec licenses is on a per-year basis; we actually would have to charge 10 x this amount if we bought them for permenant (ie non-renewable) use.

You can buy 3 year's use up front. In this business, it would be very unusual to keep the same software for longer than that.
 
Last edited:
Let's say you use Lightworks for the next 10 years! That is $600 spread over 10 YEARS! What if I tell you that if you pay a once off fee of $600 and for the next 10 years you have the software that is always updated...for free. But after 10 years, unfortunately you will not receive any new updates or bug fixes on the software, not will you be able to use any proprietary codecs. I think that sounds awesome! But considering me, I can't afford $600 with the exchange rate down here in South Africa....paying $60/annum...now that is my cup of tea.

However, I am bias when it comes to open source projects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top