7 ms·

> Video editor in browser But why? YC takes up a lot of risky ventures but I really don't see video editor in browser taking off beyond a fun little toy so I d

> Video editor in browser But why? YC takes up a lot of risky ventures but I really don't see video editor in browser taking off beyond a fun little toy so I definitely get why they refused. Could you elaborate more who's your clientele? I'm very curious. Nevertheless it was a fun read!

yoshyosh 7y ago
With things like Figma changing the nature of design tools (in the browser) why don't you see a video editor in the browser taking off?
- keiferski 7y ago
  For one, the actual editing industry operates mostly offline. The amount of data is simply too large to rely on cloud apps.
  - sabbakeynejad 7y ago
    We render 4K video and all files are uploaded in the background.
    - keiferski 7y ago
      Well I’m referring to actual, professional editors (which probably aren’t your target customer anyway.) When you’re working with terabytes of video, it’s not practical to rely on an internet connection to get work done.
- kabacha 7y ago
  Let me reverse the question - why would I want something in unstable, resource heavy and non-native environment?
  - hnra 7y ago
    Maybe you own a $150 chromebook and can't run video editing software locally? I could see this being useful for youtubers without access to decent hardware.
    - workthrowaway 7y ago
      well, the $150 chromebook is not going to help you with figma either way
    - Grustaf 7y ago
      It’s still run locally isn’t it? Just in a much less optimal environment.
  - yoshyosh 7y ago
    I think it depends on what you're editing. With internet speeds continuing to increase and be widely available, people getting increasingly used to recording themselves/creating their own content, and the influencer marketing wave educating/inspiring them that they too can create, the demand for video will only continue to go up. I think people also underestimate the collaborative nature/ease of use that comes with creating video, editing it, commenting w/ colleagues, and sharing it seamlessly via a url or uploading to your intended social network. I don't think people will be making full-fledged movies anytime soon, but there's likely a lot of use cases beyond the hardcore power user that absolutely needs a native tool.
billconan 7y ago
There are photo editing browser apps that are very popular and received huge funding. Video is naturally the next thing, right?
tiborsaas 7y ago
I had a browser based video editor startup (we failed). Video editing on the desktop sucks if you are not a pro. For causal users it's like rocket science. Enabling video editing in the browser is a godsend since it takes out so much from the equation which makes it hard. There are now successful startups in this space with serious investments.
- mgsk 7y ago
  Huh? How does moving from desktop app to browser remove hard elements from the equation?
  - tiborsaas 7y ago
    Just to name a few: - installing codecs - video conversion to the right format the editor can handle - video export to the right format, size, frame rate that works on the web - navigating a complex UI with usually the most common features hidden in context menus and shortcuts
    - Grustaf 7y ago
      The first three are more or less the same thing, and could easily be handled by a native app if there’s internet. The last one seems completely unrelated to the choice between browser and desktop. If anything it is harder to make nice UI in the browser.
      - tiborsaas 7y ago
        Your point is that a native app is better than a browser app or that current solutions are good enough? By moving rendering server side, a lot of problems are solved. Casual users shouldn't install complex solutions and watch tutorials to do simple things.
        Grustaf 7y ago
        I didn’t know the rendering was done server-side, but if that saves time then that’s a plus of course. I don’t agree about installation at all, with mac app store (and probably on the PC as well) installation is a one-click affair. As to tutorials, I don’t see how the choice of platform would make it any easier to use, how do you mean? Oh, and my point was that These points don’t really seem to be arguments for a browser app. I would think that this makes most sense for casual video editing. If you can be bothered paying for a subscription you might as well get adobe or some other established, native app. Installation is trivial.
huffmsa 7y ago
Why wouldn't you out it in a browser? Saves tons on OS specific builds, works on any machine you log into. Google docs, Invision, canva, all browser based. And then, if you really want to make a desktop version, you take a shortcut and put in in electron. Which is just a browser.
- kabacha 7y ago
  Because it _sucks_ Video Editing in particular is graphically and resource heavy process. Veed doesn't even work on my browser (qutebrowser via webengine). In general web based apps are just inferior to native ones in every aspect except for "don't need to install" aspect and I don't think that many people who edit videos mind that. If you're spending hours on this might as well spend 10 minutes to install proper software, right?
  - hnra 7y ago
    This reads very similar to the classic Dropbox response. You seem pretty unaware of the technical expertise of average people.
    - krapp 7y ago
      Average people who edit videos are already doing so with existing native apps or Youtube's in-browser editing capabilities.
      - swish_bob 7y ago
        The ones who aren't _yet_ editing videos aren't.
      - huffmsa 7y ago
        What if you don't want to put it on YouTube?
        krapp 7y ago
mettamage 7y ago
The immediate benefit that I see with these types of things is: installation isn't needed. I remember this being quite a good thing for the Harvard course CS50. You don't need to download an IDE, you can just open one up in the cloud. Video editing falls in the same space, depending on one's tech savviness.
- kabacha 7y ago
  > installation isn't needed That is such a silly gimmick. Video editing is a pretty time intensive activity - if I'm spending hours on something might as well spend 5 minutes installing the app locally, right?
  - swish_bob 7y ago
    You have full local admin access, right? And a dedicated workstation that's powerful enough for the job? I'm not in the target market for this, but I can absolutely see a class of people for whom this style works completely.
  - mettamage 7y ago
    That is if you can install the app. Some people aren't tech savvy but quite internet savvy. That wouldn't be us :P But some older aunts and uncles that I know, definitely.
    - Grustaf 7y ago
      Would they pay for a subscription in order to do video editing in the browser though?
  - bcyn 7y ago
    It's not a gimmick, it's just better user experience. Look at it through the lens of an average user rather than a power user ("power user" in the context of someone who is fluent with technical aspects of computers, not the domain). I'm not arguing that the app itself has better video editing UX -- it may very well be that local apps win there. But for onboarding, no installation wins.
moeamaya 7y ago
Apps like Canva have shown that simplifying power user software and making it accessible in a browser is in fact very much a venture backable project! Even more specifically for video editor in the browser: https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/24/kapwing/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/24/kapwing/
- kabacha 7y ago
  Eh, it's a bit of a stretch to attribute success to "runs in browser". Students in my college use Canva all the time but not because it runs in the browser - because it gives you a bunch of easy templates and you put things together fast even on their questionably performing software.
bduerst 7y ago
I would honestly probably pay if they gave better controls on gif conversion. There's a ton of gif websites but they don't do longer gifs / multiple scene text editing very well.

yoshyosh 7y ago

With things like Figma changing the nature of design tools (in the browser) why don't you see a video editor in the browser taking off?

keiferski 7y ago
For one, the actual editing industry operates mostly offline. The amount of data is simply too large to rely on cloud apps.
- sabbakeynejad 7y ago
  We render 4K video and all files are uploaded in the background.
  - keiferski 7y ago
    Well I’m referring to actual, professional editors (which probably aren’t your target customer anyway.) When you’re working with terabytes of video, it’s not practical to rely on an internet connection to get work done.
kabacha 7y ago
Let me reverse the question - why would I want something in unstable, resource heavy and non-native environment?
- hnra 7y ago
  Maybe you own a $150 chromebook and can't run video editing software locally? I could see this being useful for youtubers without access to decent hardware.
  - workthrowaway 7y ago
    well, the $150 chromebook is not going to help you with figma either way
  - Grustaf 7y ago
    It’s still run locally isn’t it? Just in a much less optimal environment.
- yoshyosh 7y ago
  I think it depends on what you're editing. With internet speeds continuing to increase and be widely available, people getting increasingly used to recording themselves/creating their own content, and the influencer marketing wave educating/inspiring them that they too can create, the demand for video will only continue to go up. I think people also underestimate the collaborative nature/ease of use that comes with creating video, editing it, commenting w/ colleagues, and sharing it seamlessly via a url or uploading to your intended social network. I don't think people will be making full-fledged movies anytime soon, but there's likely a lot of use cases beyond the hardcore power user that absolutely needs a native tool.

billconan 7y ago

There are photo editing browser apps that are very popular and received huge funding. Video is naturally the next thing, right?

tiborsaas 7y ago

I had a browser based video editor startup (we failed). Video editing on the desktop sucks if you are not a pro. For causal users it's like rocket science. Enabling video editing in the browser is a godsend since it takes out so much from the equation which makes it hard. There are now successful startups in this space with serious investments.

mgsk 7y ago
Huh? How does moving from desktop app to browser remove hard elements from the equation?
- tiborsaas 7y ago
  Just to name a few: - installing codecs - video conversion to the right format the editor can handle - video export to the right format, size, frame rate that works on the web - navigating a complex UI with usually the most common features hidden in context menus and shortcuts
  - Grustaf 7y ago
    The first three are more or less the same thing, and could easily be handled by a native app if there’s internet. The last one seems completely unrelated to the choice between browser and desktop. If anything it is harder to make nice UI in the browser.
    - tiborsaas 7y ago
      Your point is that a native app is better than a browser app or that current solutions are good enough? By moving rendering server side, a lot of problems are solved. Casual users shouldn't install complex solutions and watch tutorials to do simple things.
      - Grustaf 7y ago
        I didn’t know the rendering was done server-side, but if that saves time then that’s a plus of course. I don’t agree about installation at all, with mac app store (and probably on the PC as well) installation is a one-click affair. As to tutorials, I don’t see how the choice of platform would make it any easier to use, how do you mean? Oh, and my point was that These points don’t really seem to be arguments for a browser app. I would think that this makes most sense for casual video editing. If you can be bothered paying for a subscription you might as well get adobe or some other established, native app. Installation is trivial.

huffmsa 7y ago

Why wouldn't you out it in a browser? Saves tons on OS specific builds, works on any machine you log into. Google docs, Invision, canva, all browser based. And then, if you really want to make a desktop version, you take a shortcut and put in in electron. Which is just a browser.

kabacha 7y ago
Because it _sucks_ Video Editing in particular is graphically and resource heavy process. Veed doesn't even work on my browser (qutebrowser via webengine). In general web based apps are just inferior to native ones in every aspect except for "don't need to install" aspect and I don't think that many people who edit videos mind that. If you're spending hours on this might as well spend 10 minutes to install proper software, right?
- hnra 7y ago
  This reads very similar to the classic Dropbox response. You seem pretty unaware of the technical expertise of average people.
  - krapp 7y ago
    Average people who edit videos are already doing so with existing native apps or Youtube's in-browser editing capabilities.
    - swish_bob 7y ago
      The ones who aren't _yet_ editing videos aren't.
    - huffmsa 7y ago
      What if you don't want to put it on YouTube?
      - krapp 7y ago

mettamage 7y ago

The immediate benefit that I see with these types of things is: installation isn't needed. I remember this being quite a good thing for the Harvard course CS50. You don't need to download an IDE, you can just open one up in the cloud. Video editing falls in the same space, depending on one's tech savviness.

kabacha 7y ago
> installation isn't needed That is such a silly gimmick. Video editing is a pretty time intensive activity - if I'm spending hours on something might as well spend 5 minutes installing the app locally, right?
- swish_bob 7y ago
  You have full local admin access, right? And a dedicated workstation that's powerful enough for the job? I'm not in the target market for this, but I can absolutely see a class of people for whom this style works completely.
- mettamage 7y ago
  That is if you can install the app. Some people aren't tech savvy but quite internet savvy. That wouldn't be us :P But some older aunts and uncles that I know, definitely.
  - Grustaf 7y ago
    Would they pay for a subscription in order to do video editing in the browser though?
- bcyn 7y ago
  It's not a gimmick, it's just better user experience. Look at it through the lens of an average user rather than a power user ("power user" in the context of someone who is fluent with technical aspects of computers, not the domain). I'm not arguing that the app itself has better video editing UX -- it may very well be that local apps win there. But for onboarding, no installation wins.

moeamaya 7y ago

Apps like Canva have shown that simplifying power user software and making it accessible in a browser is in fact very much a venture backable project! Even more specifically for video editor in the browser: https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/24/kapwing/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/24/kapwing/

kabacha 7y ago
Eh, it's a bit of a stretch to attribute success to "runs in browser". Students in my college use Canva all the time but not because it runs in the browser - because it gives you a bunch of easy templates and you put things together fast even on their questionably performing software.

bduerst 7y ago

I would honestly probably pay if they gave better controls on gif conversion. There's a ton of gif websites but they don't do longer gifs / multiple scene text editing very well.