Welcome, Guest
Username Password: Remember me
Anything that doesn't fit into any other category.
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2

TOPIC: Lightworks' competitiveness

Lightworks' competitiveness 2 weeks, 3 days ago #214327

  • wwchao1974
Comparing AVID2019 and Lightworks 2020
AVID2019 is now simplifying the tools and parameter settings on the software panel, but it is very similar to the feel of Lightworks, but Lightworks is faster, more humane, and has a better sense of experience. I think this is a good development trend, but AVID The UI interface is indeed better and more refined than Lightworks. I hope that Lightworks can cheer on and develop this very good tool. The AVID FIRST version can output 1080. This is very competitive. I hope Lightworks can Consider more preferential policies on the learning version! Don't let such a good tool lose market!
Come on! Lightworks

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 2 weeks, 3 days ago #214328

  • wwchao1974
The operation of AVID2019 timeline tools is getting closer and closer to our great Lightworks, haha!
But our Lightworks installation package is only tens of megabytes, and AVID requires several G! Oh my God!

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 2 weeks, 3 days ago #214330

  • hugly
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 23125
  • 2 weeks, 3 days ago
Yes indeed, the difference in footprints is significant. It's something like prima ballerina vs elephant.
It's better to travel well than to arrive...

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 2 weeks ago #214459

  • timzett
  • Pro User
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1455
  • 2 weeks ago
I think Lightworks is still far ahead in many ways (performance, lightweight binaries, UI, editing speed etc.)

Thinking back 30 years, the main reason for Avid becoming industry standard, IMO was just the more aggressive marketing and not its usability.

Anyway, should this thread really be in the beta forum?
Lwks x64 Beta 2020.1 revision 120537, pro license, on Windows 10

HARDWARE:
.Intel Core i7-4710HQ Quad-core 2,50 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 SDRAM
.GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M with 4 GB RAM
.Sound: Onboard (Realtek)
.Disks: 250 GB SSD internal (OS/programs), 1 TB SATA internal for source footage

CAMs: Sony PXW-X70, NEX-5n, Xiaomi Yi 1080p
Last Edit: 2 weeks ago by timzett.

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 2 weeks ago #214460

  • briandrys
  • Moderator
    Pro User
  • OFFLINE
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 9227
  • 2 weeks ago
Yes, it's too general. I'll move it into Miscellaneous.

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 1 week, 6 days ago #214500

  • jwrl
  • Moderator
    Pro User
  • OFFLINE
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 12175
  • 1 week, 6 days ago
timzett wrote:
Thinking back 30 years, the main reason for Avid becoming industry standard, IMO was just the more aggressive marketing and not its usability.

Having been there at the time, what Avid did was place systems in educational establishments at cut throat prices or even in some case free as test systems. That was something that Lightworks refused to do or was unable to do. But the inevitable happened - students who were trained on an NLE continued to use that type of NLE when they finished their training.

Avid's pricing structure at the time appeared better too, although that was more because they used to sell it as a series of modules. "You want to buy Avid? Yes sir, and it will only cost you ..." "Oh, you want to be able to digitise? Well, you'll need the capture module. That will cost you ..." "You want monitoring? Well the monitoring module will cost you ..." I think you get the picture. I used to describe it as selling a car without the optional wheels, seats or steering wheel.

Certainly in Australia where I am a Media Composer optioned to the point where it became a practical edit system was roughly the same price as a Lightworks system. However storage at the time had to be Avid hard drives, which were dramatically more expensive than the standard SCSI drives that we used on our Lightworks.

Their marketing teams were also inclined to be a little economical with the truth, too. One of the local networks here bought Media Composer because it was "better engineered". That decision was made largely on the fact that Avid appeared to provide balanced audio in and out. At the time they provided exactly the same unbalanced audio I/O that Lightworks did. However for the sake of the network demonstration the sales team arrived with a third party unbalanced to balanced converter, and it was in no way made clear to the engineers that was what had been done.
Last Edit: 1 week, 6 days ago by jwrl.

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 1 week, 6 days ago #214504

  • DNL
  • Pro User
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 554
  • 1 week, 6 days ago
Avid also got a foothold in advertising, editing 30 sec spots, and was able—sooner than LWKS—to output high res work. LWKS focused on long form work which then was onlined or negative cut. That foothold in advertising gave AVID marketers a critical window to blow smoke. AVID also capitalized on Apple mystique prevalent in advertising. The competition unfolded as historical accident, not functionality. Also, the hard drives LWKS used were built by Micropolis which had a big manufacturing run failure which didn’t help.
LenovoThinkPad P70, Xeon E3, 64 GB RAM, NVIDIA Quadro M3000M, SSD internal HD, Windows 7 Professional 64 bit.

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 1 week, 6 days ago #214507

  • wwchao1974
Any idea why Lightworks has received a lot of attention lately? Because this Oscar selection has the promotion of "The Irishman" film editor Thelma Schoonmaker, so excited。

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 1 week, 6 days ago #214511

  • jwrl
  • Moderator
    Pro User
  • OFFLINE
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 12175
  • 1 week, 6 days ago
DNL wrote:
Also, the hard drives LWKS used were built by Micropolis which had a big manufacturing run failure which didn’t help.

That may have been true for some systems, but you could source SCSI drives for external use from any manufacturer as long as they didn't do a zero recalibrate cycle while being accessed. We did just that with (I think) Toshiba drives. I don't recall what our internal media drive was at the time - possibly Seagate - but that was reliable too.
Last Edit: 1 week, 6 days ago by jwrl.

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 1 week, 6 days ago #214522

  • timzett
  • Pro User
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1455
  • 1 week, 6 days ago
wwchao1974 wrote:
Any idea why Lightworks has received a lot of attention lately? Because this Oscar selection has the promotion of "The Irishman" film editor Thelma Schoonmaker, so excited。

Every now and then a feature film comes out which was edited with Lightworks. This speaks for the product and is good for us

I am wondering who else but Thelma uses Lightworks for feature films, it would be a pity if there weren't a few other professionals in this sector.
Personally I would love to see Lightworks becoming the leading tool here. It had really deserved it - see jwrl's encompassing post.
Lwks x64 Beta 2020.1 revision 120537, pro license, on Windows 10

HARDWARE:
.Intel Core i7-4710HQ Quad-core 2,50 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 SDRAM
.GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M with 4 GB RAM
.Sound: Onboard (Realtek)
.Disks: 250 GB SSD internal (OS/programs), 1 TB SATA internal for source footage

CAMs: Sony PXW-X70, NEX-5n, Xiaomi Yi 1080p
Last Edit: 1 week, 6 days ago by timzett.

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 1 week, 6 days ago #214524

  • timzett
  • Pro User
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1455
  • 1 week, 6 days ago
jwrl wrote:
That may have been true for some systems, but you could source SCSI drives for external use from any manufacturer as long as they didn't do a zero recalibrate cycle while being accessed. We did just that with (I think) Toshiba drives. I don't recall what our internal media drive was at the time - possibly Seagate - but that was reliable too.

I also managed to use any kind of SCSI drive for a professional Roland 8-track audio system. The SCSI standard was comparably versatile by the time - compatibility was better than with many other computer interface standards.
Lwks x64 Beta 2020.1 revision 120537, pro license, on Windows 10

HARDWARE:
.Intel Core i7-4710HQ Quad-core 2,50 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 SDRAM
.GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M with 4 GB RAM
.Sound: Onboard (Realtek)
.Disks: 250 GB SSD internal (OS/programs), 1 TB SATA internal for source footage

CAMs: Sony PXW-X70, NEX-5n, Xiaomi Yi 1080p
Last Edit: 1 week, 6 days ago by timzett.

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 1 week, 6 days ago #214530

  • wwchao1974
I have been looking for a cost-effective editing software. I was born in the arts. I forgot the operation of the software and put all my attention on creativity. This is the future development trend of software! The sense of human experience is the most important!

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 1 week, 6 days ago #214537

  • timzett
  • Pro User
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1455
  • 1 week, 6 days ago
wwchao1974 wrote:
I have been looking for a cost-effective editing software...
..which reminds me I have to renew my Lightworks license in 7 days
Lwks x64 Beta 2020.1 revision 120537, pro license, on Windows 10

HARDWARE:
.Intel Core i7-4710HQ Quad-core 2,50 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 SDRAM
.GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M with 4 GB RAM
.Sound: Onboard (Realtek)
.Disks: 250 GB SSD internal (OS/programs), 1 TB SATA internal for source footage

CAMs: Sony PXW-X70, NEX-5n, Xiaomi Yi 1080p

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 1 week, 6 days ago #214540

  • wwchao1974
Haha, you can subscribe to your license after you finish your work! If you start your own company, you should buy a few sets of software, which can be regarded as supporting software development companies.

Re: Lightworks' competitiveness 1 week, 6 days ago #214541

  • timzett
  • Pro User
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1455
  • 1 week, 6 days ago
I used to run my own business in this field.

With a regular license you can (and are allowed to) run Lightworks Pro on 2 separate machines, which was always sufficient for me.

EDIT: And I cannot subscribe after finishing anything, since I am on an old saver plan, which I would lose after my current license is expired.
Lwks x64 Beta 2020.1 revision 120537, pro license, on Windows 10

HARDWARE:
.Intel Core i7-4710HQ Quad-core 2,50 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 SDRAM
.GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M with 4 GB RAM
.Sound: Onboard (Realtek)
.Disks: 250 GB SSD internal (OS/programs), 1 TB SATA internal for source footage

CAMs: Sony PXW-X70, NEX-5n, Xiaomi Yi 1080p
Last Edit: 1 week, 6 days ago by timzett.
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2
Time to create page: 0.59 seconds
Scroll To Top