[HN Gopher] Apple introduces new version of iMovie featuring Sto...
___________________________________________________________________
Apple introduces new version of iMovie featuring Storyboards and
Magic Movie
Author : todsacerdoti
Score : 186 points
Date : 2022-04-12 17:06 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| shostack wrote:
| Can I work with 2.7k 60fps HEVC videos from my GoPro in it yet?
| Or is that still busted?
|
| I jumped through endless hoops getting DaVinci Resolve's free
| version setup because I didn't want to degrade my video quality.
| bdlowery wrote:
| Why not just Buy Final Cut Pro or screenflow? I'd rather pay
| $149 (screenflow) for for a product that just works vs wasting
| hours of my time trying to get something setup.
| kranke155 wrote:
| Resolve is fine and it's free. I work in the moving pictures
| industry and Resolve has been used at some step for 99% of
| the films you see out there.
| throwmeariver1 wrote:
| What hoops are there to jump through besides the forced
| registration? It's a one click installer.
| shostack wrote:
| Mostly learning curve and time to render optimized previews
| (considerable).
|
| My needs are very lightweight and perfect for the iMovie use
| case beyond it's inability to handle what I consider not
| uncommon quality with today's rise of higher resolutions and
| frame rates.
| ArchOversight wrote:
| Sounds like you are in the best position to give it a shot and
| see if it works. You have source material, you have iMove...
| uuyi wrote:
| I love how Apple just releases these things out of the blue. If
| it was Microsoft they'd be crowing about it loudly on blogs for 6
| months before then underdeliver a broken pile of crap.
| haunter wrote:
| I don't get this unnecessary flak against MS? Like what's the
| point? Totally not relevant, they don't even have a similar
| product on the level of iMovie
| n8cpdx wrote:
| Were you not burned by the many iterations of Windows Live
| Movie Maker? It was a 16-year product.
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Movie_Maker
|
| Here's Microsoft's Windows blog post about ClipChamp, their
| latest attempt: https://blogs.windows.com/windows-
| insider/2022/03/09/announc...
| seabriez wrote:
| This has been on Windows since like Windows 8. Probably before
| that since I haven't been tracking it. But I remmember I used
| to make these types of movies with storyboards years ago.
| lostgame wrote:
| iMovie is not on Windows. AFAIK it has never been, unlike
| Logic.
| torstenvl wrote:
| This is great and all, but it's been years and I'm still waiting
| for rebooted QuickTime to catch up to QuickTime 7 Pro.
| galad87 wrote:
| It mostly did. It can open image sequences, trim, cut, export,
| merge, remove audio or video tracks, display the timecode
| track. Cutting a piece of a movie is a bit cumbersome, but it
| can be done (move to the first time, edit -> split clip, move
| to a second time and split again, and then delete the clip in
| the "show clip" mode).
| djxfade wrote:
| It's a shame it doesn't support third party codecs anymore.
| That makes it almost useless for all but a few supported
| formats.
| gnicholas wrote:
| FYI: iPhone/iPad only, not MacOS. I have tried editing movies on
| my mobile devices in the past but the experience was never great.
| Even just trimming a clip in Photos is difficult with the touch
| interface.
| mattl wrote:
| iMovie 3.0 for Mac OS X came out almost 20 years ago.
|
| iMovie for Mac OS X is 10.3 now.
| brimble wrote:
| I believe the poster meant the release with these features is
| iOS-only (for now, anyway).
| mattl wrote:
| Yeah the release is confusing iMovie 3.0
|
| I wish Apple would just let all its numbers in a row
| (including Numbers)
| brimble wrote:
| If they're not planning on unifying much of their
| desktop/mobile dual-platform stuff as soon as the M1 is
| sufficiently widespread (so, another 5ish years, when the
| last of the x86 machines are aging out of active
| support?), I'd be pretty surprised.
| xnx wrote:
| After trying ~10 different Android apps (all of them pretty
| bad), I've been very pleased with CapCut (from Tiktok).
| uuyi wrote:
| I'm using lumafusion on my iPad Pro without any problems.
| wenc wrote:
| Thanks for the recommendation. I've used iMovie for years for
| simple movie editing on my iPad but recently I found myself
| needing something just a tiny bit more sophisticated.
|
| I just bought Luma Fusion ($40) and so far it feels intuitive
| but I can already tell it has more controls than iMovie --
| the ones I wished iMovie had (like quick audio fixes and
| equalizer). This is super useful because I can't run Audacity
| on an iPad and sometimes I just need quick audio fixes done.
| armadsen wrote:
| I'm an engineer on LumaFusion, and one of my specialities
| is audio. If you run into things that could be better, let
| us know. support@luma-touch.com (real humans read every
| email, we're a small team).
| [deleted]
| scanr wrote:
| It doesn't look like it can make vertical videos in the iPhone
| app yet which is a little disappointing.
|
| I've been looking for a simple video editing app for a family
| member who needs to post short form videos to social media.
|
| Fortunately there are alternatives. Clips looks pretty good.
| Other suggestions welcome.
|
| Just seems like a useful feature for iMovie to have.
| mung wrote:
| My god it's tragic that vertical video has become a legitimate
| format when it really just arose from people holding their
| phones wrong.
| derefr wrote:
| "Holding their phones wrong" -- you mean, holding a
| rectangular affordance ergonomically in their hands?
|
| The odd thing to me is that you can't just tell your
| vertically-oriented phone to produce landscape video. The
| imaging sensor is square.
| smortaz wrote:
| yes it's quite bizarre that key functionalities are split
| between the built in Editor and iMovie. almost all videos have
| to be done using both. doing vertical videos + text is very
| awkward.
| armadsen wrote:
| LumaFusion is the obvious step up from iMovie. It's _much_ more
| powerful than iMovie, but aims to also be very approachable for
| complete beginners.
|
| Disclaimer: My day job is as an engineer working on LumaFusion.
| wunderflix wrote:
| We've developed a simple video camera app. We focus on parents
| who are beginners in creating videos like most people. And: we
| only do vertical videos.
|
| https://www.wunderflix.com/en/
|
| PS: let me know what you think if you give it a try!
| savolai wrote:
| Wow, this is the one feature I expected would be the raison
| d'etre for an update of iMovie. Now it's still useless. That's
| really odd.
| [deleted]
| nobrains wrote:
| 1) Rotate the video to landscape in Photos app.
|
| 2) Import that video in iMovie and do all the editing you need
| to do.
|
| 3) Export the final video.
|
| 4) Rotate the final video back to portrait in Photo app.
| andruby wrote:
| I assume that would break the orientation of text insertions?
| jdironman wrote:
| Aren't they hard-coded into frames?
| vimy wrote:
| > Availability iMovie 3.0, including the new Storyboards and
| Magic Movie features, is available today as a free update on the
| App Store for devices running iOS 15.2 or later and iPadOS 15.2
| or later.
|
| Not for Mac?
| Shadonototra wrote:
| You can run iOS/iPad apps natively on every Mac since the
| switch to ARM
| gumby wrote:
| _Some_ iOS apps. The dev has to enable it when submitting to
| the iOS App Store.
| djxfade wrote:
| Only if the developer has flagged that it is supported.
| olah_1 wrote:
| The old Windows Movie Maker was the best. So straightforward. No
| nonsense trying to "help" you. Just give me a basic timeline
| system please!
| lekevicius wrote:
| This is the part of Apple that I love. iLife, enabling creativity
| with great results out of the box.
|
| Even makes me forget, for a second, that they still run a
| monopoly on kid casino in form of an App Store.
| basisword wrote:
| iLife was fantastic. It was the main selling point in
| convincing me to buy a Mac. When I was younger (before I could
| afford to buy a Mac) I would watch the iLife updates each year
| so jealous given the lack of comparative software on Windows at
| the time.
|
| Edit: Just had a flashback to iWeb. That was really great. Such
| a simple way for a kid to build and publish a website before
| things like Wix (which are still nowhere near as easy to use).
| breakfastduck wrote:
| I remember submitting countless work in school, magazines,
| websites etc that were all done using iLife. It was so easy
| to produce stuff that looked fantastic. iWeb in particular
| was brilliant for kids.
| freecodyx wrote:
| I personally use apple keynotes to produce videos. It's a
| powerful tool, and just yesterday i was wondering why imovie was
| lacking so much features. And that is what i like about apple,
| they target consumers, not professionals
| auggierose wrote:
| Is there a good way to blend in your face during a slideshow? I
| am using a third-party app for that now, and then use QuickTime
| Player to record the screen. It works, but it is a little bit
| more convoluted than I expected.
| killerdhmo wrote:
| Live Video? https://support.apple.com/guide/keynote/add-live-
| video-tan6a...
| [deleted]
| whatever1 wrote:
| Who is the target user for this? All video editing happens within
| the TikTok app nowadays.
| killerdhmo wrote:
| Would it surprise you to know that not everyone is editing or
| making (or even consuming) TikTok videos?
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| Apple will probably add more and more features to iMovie than
| porting over Final Cut Pro.
| laurent92 wrote:
| Maybe Youtubers, as soon as you want to do something barely
| elaborate. Sometimes free tools don't benefit the user, but
| their audience ;)
| lesgobrandon wrote:
| npunt wrote:
| The cool part about iMovie and Garageband is they're basically a
| more approachable UI layer to Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro. They
| share a lot of the same core code, and teach you the same
| concepts just without the fiddly pro bits.
|
| I love that bifurcation because it really makes the pro apps more
| approachable without compromising their usefulness (pro apps
| require info density, consumer apps avoid it), and it allows
| their power be scaled down to iPhone and iPad.
|
| I wish more software was made this way!
| dmarcos wrote:
| Apple has been always about empowering creatives. They have
| world-class camera hardware and editing software. It always made
| sense to me that at some point they would close the circle and
| try to compete against YouTube. They instead went with Apple TV+
| that feels more like yet another streaming platform and doesn't
| leverage many of other Apple's strengths and costumer base. Apple
| seems to have low tolerance for content they cannot tightly
| control. YouTube reactive style curation and permission-less
| publication probably feels alien and scary to them.
| foobarian wrote:
| > YouTube reactive style curation and permission-less
| publication probably feels alien and scary to them.
|
| Now that you put it this way, I'd bet no established enterprise
| would have what it takes to start something like YouTube now.
| Heck I doubt even Google would be able to given the amount of
| "doing things by the book" these kinds of orgs require.
| spoonjim wrote:
| Apple stands for a tightly curated user experience overall.
| Want that weird app? No. Want user-generated content? No. Want
| to isntall some weird software to make your home screen swipe
| up-and-down rather than left-to-right? No.
|
| For desktop computing I would find it frustrating (and use a
| Windows box with a ton of malware/weirdware on it) but for my
| phone I prefer it this way.
| dagmx wrote:
| I don't think Apple has any interest in social networks (and
| that's effectively what YouTube is these days)
|
| The risk to reward ratio for the brand itself is not something
| they'd want to undertake.
|
| You see it all the time with other tech stories. If Apple does
| something bad or is even associated with something bad, that is
| standard across other tech companies too, the news articles
| will focus on Apple.
|
| Imagine that with user posted comments. Google can get away
| with it because they have YouTube under a separate brand, and
| they've established that it's looser. Apple would never want to
| do it as a separate brand if they can help it (beats and
| FileMaker not withstanding because they existed prior) and the
| amount of vitriol that the brand would receive over any
| contentious content would negate any benefit.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| > YouTube reactive style curation and permission-less
| publication probably feels alien and scary to them.
|
| And to everyone else. Who wants to deal with the headache of
| moderating PR liability of moderating all the crap that gets
| uploaded?
| alsetmusic wrote:
| Just in time for a video project I've been considering. Oh,
| wait... for iPad and iPhone. Not at all how I want to cut
| together ~100 video files stored on my Mac and NAS. C'mon,
| Apple...
|
| When people diagnose Apple's software business as wilting, that's
| no joke.
| scyzoryk_xyz wrote:
| Well, you could just do a YT tutorial and do it with DaVinci
| Resolve.
|
| Apple is clearly thinking about the kind of user here who
| doesn't know what a "Mac with NAS" is. Someone who maybe
| doesn't even know how to get video files from their iOS device
| into their Mac.
| killerdhmo wrote:
| iMovie exists on a Mac? And there's Final Cut Pro?
| jackomelon wrote:
| These features probably aren't for you and your use case, and
| that's okay.
| etchalon wrote:
| I love that iMovie just keeps existing.
| Tsiklon wrote:
| I think Apple see iMovie and GarageBand as the entry point into
| funnelling interested users towards Final Cut and Logic Pro
| when they're ready to reach for something more capable
| Angostura wrote:
| They are also the reason that Macs turn up in secondary
| schools in the UK
| spoonjim wrote:
| Not just Final Cut and Logic Pro, but the Apple ecosystem
| itself. I've long lusted after Google Pixel's camera quality
| but the three reasons I will never switch are iMessage,
| GarageBand, and iMovie. My literal 4 year old son can use
| iMovie on the iPad and it is a great way for us to construct
| family memories (I load in the clips and then he decides the
| order, the music, and the editing)
| Y-bar wrote:
| Yup, and I am still a bit salty Apple discontinued Aperture,
| which was to iPhoto as Final Cut Pro is to iMovie. I am
| paying for Lightroom Classic and there are still UI
| idiosyncrasies that makes no sense to me that just clicked in
| Aperture (Lightroom CC? Let's not even talk about that
| version...)
| spacedcowboy wrote:
| As someone who designed the replacement database layer
| (that literally improved the speed of access by an order of
| magnitude, after I promised the VP it would do in an off-
| the-cuff meeting, and my director face-palmed at hearing me
| say it) and then managed the new graphics engine team, I
| feel your pain.
|
| Aperture was fundamentally too small a market for Apple to
| justify keeping a 'pro-app' team working on it. The concept
| was a high-cost semi-pro feature-set, and the market soon
| decided it cost too much and the price had to fall. Once
| that ball started rolling, the doom was set.
|
| Still, I went on to do more interesting things at Apple -
| the latest being writing the client<-->server team bridge
| for 'Hide My Email' to let apps like Safari and Mail
| integrate into the server-side anonymous-email-mapping-to-
| a-known-address facility. Lots of cool tech in there, under
| the skin.
| kranke155 wrote:
| The reason why I love apple is exactly because the tech
| is there, but "under the skin".
|
| They are probably using ML or AI whatever to get this new
| Magic Movie thing working. But that's not their press
| release, unlike Google which would be parroting this as a
| major tech thing. Apple goes for the human.
| Ancapistani wrote:
| Me too.
|
| I'm using Lightroom CC, because I'd migrated away from
| Lightroom Classic several years before.
|
| I can't begin to understand why things like "open selected
| images as layers in Photoshop" _still_ isn't possible in
| Lightroom CC. It works really well on my iPad Pro, though,
| and gives me 90%+ of the features I need for my workflow
| there. I just wish they provided an accessible scripting
| environment that I could use to automate things.
| webmobdev wrote:
| DarkTable - https://www.darktable.org/ - is a free and
| opensource alternative to Lightroom but the UI takes some
| time getting used to.
| Dracophoenix wrote:
| What stopped you from sticking with Classic or moving to
| Davinci Resolve?
| c0nsumer wrote:
| Resolve? How is that a replacement for Lightroom Classic?
|
| I've been looking at CaptureOne myself as a
| replacement...
| Dracophoenix wrote:
| My mistake
| modoc wrote:
| Do it. CaptureOne is the only thing I've found after
| Aperture that I like. Still miss Aperture, but CaptureOne
| is great, and they improve it frequently.
| bayindirh wrote:
| I really miss Aperture. It was a very nice piece of
| software, however I'm using Darktable in these days, and
| it's seriously no slouch either.
| cactus2093 wrote:
| I honestly don't understand their strategy with Final Cut and
| Logic Pro. These apps can't make very much money, they are a
| suspiciously good value and they never upsell you on
| anything. Logic Pro cost like $300 over a decade ago, it
| still costs $300 today, and all major updates in that time
| have been free for existing users. Compare that to a
| competitor like Ableton Live which has cost like $800 since
| Ableton Suite 8 and major upgrades have come out every 3-5
| years and cost a few hundred dollars to upgrade. Or compare
| it to Pro Tools which now costs $300 for 1 year of a
| subscription license.
|
| So it really doesn't seem like funneling Garage Band users to
| Logic is a very high priority for Apple. More likely Garage
| Band and maybe even Logic Pro are loss leaders to show that
| the mac is a platform for creatives.
|
| On a related note I never understood why they killed off
| Aperture which was beloved by many photographers, why didn't
| they keep a similar upgrade path from the free Photos app ->
| Aperture like they did for Garage Band -> Logic Pro? Seems
| like another indication that they really don't like to be in
| the pro software business, they are only there reluctantly at
| this point.
| whazor wrote:
| Final cut pro supposedly has around 2.5 Million users. Many
| of them buy expensive Macs and other Apple products. The
| software uses the latest features from Apple's hardware,
| which gives users an incentive to keep upgrading.
|
| I think they keep the software more affordable to attract
| new (starting out) users. Then eventually they will
| hopefully go for a Mac studio or something.
|
| Another question you could ask: why not make these pro
| tools free? I am guessing that they are using the income as
| an internal development budget. Should be sufficient to
| afford the development I think.
| jkestner wrote:
| The pro apps are probably paying for themselves, but their
| purpose is to sell hardware, both directly because you want
| that functionality, and to serve as a benchmark for other
| pro apps especially when you have shiny new silicon to take
| advantage of.
| spideymans wrote:
| 1. FCP sells Apple hardware.
|
| 2. It's also a "halo" product. A showcase of what Apple's
| computers are capable of.
| avar wrote:
| It probably has a small dedicated team, and the sales
| revenue easily covers their salaries and any overhead.
|
| I don't get why niche programs like that within larger
| companies are the exception.
| dlivingston wrote:
| You also can't discount how effective they are as marketing
| tools to signal "Apple is the computer company for artists
| and creatives".
| adammenges wrote:
| Yeah that's fair too
| adammenges wrote:
| Yeah maybe, I think most other companies tho would recognize
| that all of that is such a small part of their business and
| cut it off.
|
| I'm so happy Apple doesn't.
| spoonjim wrote:
| Yes, this is one of the ways Apple succeeds -- by being
| able to make management decisions like spending money on
| GarageBand and iMovie that would get cut in any other type
| of typical Corporate America VP structure.
| rchaud wrote:
| So who made the call to kill iWeb? Or other iLife
| products that disappeared?
| savoytruffle wrote:
| Alas for Aperture
| michelb wrote:
| Apps like iMovie, pages, numbers etc are 'required' to have
| people switch to the mac, so you don't have to pay for
| thirdparty apps to do basic stuff with all your media. It's
| really nice that these apps are also quite powerful to the
| average user. It ties the whole experience together.
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| I suspect that iMovie still sells Macs. Maybe not
| singlehandedly, but it's an important factor.
|
| I don't want to say "there's nothing like iMovie available for
| PC's", because I frankly suspect there is these days--but I
| don't think there's anything normal people _know about_ as many
| of them know about iMovie.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-04-12 23:00 UTC)