Some of the features: multi-track timeline, frame accurate seek, MP4 export, audio, video, image, and text tracks, and a WebGL backed canvas where available. It also works on mobile.
Under the hood, WebCodecs handles frame decode for timeline playback and scrubbing, which is what makes seeking responsive since decode runs on the hardware decoder when the browser supports it. FFmpeg compiled to WebAssembly handles final encode, format conversion, and anything WebCodecs does not cover. Rendering goes through Pixi.js on a WebGL canvas, with a software fallback when WebGL is not available. Projects live in IndexedDB and the heavy work runs in Web Workers so the UI stays responsive during exports.
Happy to answer technical questions about the tradeoffs involved in keeping the whole pipeline client-side. Any feedback welcome.
elpocko•1h ago
FFmpeg's license is the LGPL 2.1. VidStudio looks like closed source software, I couldn't see any indication that it's free software. You're distributing this software to run in the client's browser. I'm not a lawyer but I think you're in breach of the terms of the LGPL.
https://www.ffmpeg.org/legal.html
senko•58m ago
However, some popular codecs use GPL, which, if enabled, would require to distribute the rest of the code under it as well.
elpocko•41m ago
Anyway, OP doesn't do most of the things FFmpeg lists under their "License Compliance Checklist".
trinix912•18m ago
Legitimately asking, which points and how are they expected to handle it for this type of app (assuming they want to keep it closed source)? As far as I understand it they just need to credit the libraries?
elpocko•9m ago
actionfromafar•4m ago
prhn•42m ago
- Provide links to the source of the version of ffmpeg you used in your code
- User should be able to replace the ffmpeg libs with his own compatible builds if you're using dynamically linked libs. For statically linked libs, you need to provide the tools to re-link against a compatible build.
I went through an LGPL review recently so some of this is fresh in my memory, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
xixixao•5m ago
CodesInChaos•41m ago
Different isolates might even be enough to satisfy GPL, similar to how you can invoke FFmpeg as a command line tool from a closed application. Though that feels like legally shaky ground.
kolx•31m ago
freedomben•27m ago
netdevphoenix•21m ago
Mmmm...potential commercialisation? Always find it curious that people expect to get source code for free in ways that they don't do for other work (ask George Martin to release his drafts and notes).
freedomben•15m ago
Hence why I asked the question... And not everybody does everything for commercial reasons, so it would be dumb to assume that and therefore not ask the question.
> Always find it curious that people expect to get source code for free in ways that they don't do for other work (ask George Martin to release his drafts and notes).
Where in my question did you get that I expect to get source code for free in ways that I don't for other work?
But regardless, you do know that open source is a common thing right? People open source things all the time, especially on HN.
Also OP already says they don't do any uploading of your videos to the cloud, so this thing already runs local-only. It's not like there is a shortage of video editors around (including ... open source video editors)
mbesto•12m ago
kolx•5m ago