Talk:VirtualDub

Input plugins

Why the reference to the support of input plugins was removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.191.202 (talk) 23:57, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Avery Lee

Does Avery Lee have a home page? Is there biographical info published somewhere? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.169.152.24 (talk • contribs) 03:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

http://www.virtualdub.org/contact.html -Grossmisconduct (talk) 22:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Not a free replacement for proper video editing software

Editor User:Thumperward reverted my following recent addition:

However, crossfading of audio and video is not supported by VirtualDub, nor are wipe effects supported, so it is not possible to do even a basic soft fade transistion from one video clip to another. Clip-to-clip transistions in VirtualDub are always sudden and abrupt, making it unsuitable as a complete replacement for video editors such as Adobe Premiere, iMovie, or Windows Movie Maker.

Thumperward's stated reason for removing this text is:

this is personal commentary and isn't appropriate. virtuasldub explicitly claims not to be a replacement for authoring apps anyway, so it's unclear why one would think it was

My reply is that while virtualdub may state that in its documentation, this article does not make light of that detail. Instead this article says right in the first paragraph that this is video editing software, which by all normal definitions of the term, will include typical and common capabilities like wiping and fading. The fact that it does not means that it either isn't a video editing program in the normal sense, or that the lack of fading/wiping should be explicitly stated somewhere as I have tried to include as above.

Going on and on about all these cool filter effects but not mentioning the fading/wiping issue gives the reader of this article a false impression about the capabilities of the software. I believe the text should be added back but am trying to avoid an edit war and instead discuss this civilly. DMahalko (talk) 10:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to discussion. The point is that the filters etc. can be referenced by reliable sources. The omission of other features could only be sourced by a review of the application which claimed to expect such features.

The basic issue here is that the article fails to adequately define VirtualDub's scope at the start. It is a linear video editor - it is designed for the processing of single video streams. It is not a composition tool. This distinction should be made clear at the start of the article, referenced to VirtualDub's documentation, and then the issue of general editing ignored in the article itself as irrelevant.

I'll try to work on improving the article's focus on this issue. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

release

Please update this article - the last release of this software is 1.8.3 . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.139.152.106 (talk) 21:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Forks

Can someone put the old Forks information back? I had nearly forgotten that the MPEG2 fork had support for ASF again. Useful to know, that.69.11.4.75 (talk) 04:38, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

VirtualDubMod outdated?

a comparisson between the last version of mod, and the current version of VirtualDub would be welcome --TiagoTiago (talk) 13:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Batch mode

VirtualDub has a useful batch mode worth mentioning. There a checkbox to add a job for later processing during save-as. This can also be done by creating "before" and "after" folders, chucking your uncompressed/unprocessed videos into "before" and running virtualdub with the -b command line switch and the two directories: VirtualDub -b before after

(Or, better yet, just open a fresh virtualdub, set your audio/video compression settings, and then go to F4, Edit->Process Directory) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.175.89.242 (talk) 00:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Very handy for tons of FRAPS videos, etc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.20.111 (talk) 17:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Missing Features?

"but lacks features common to dedicated video editing software" - This text appears in the article, but links to the feature list of VirtualDub, rather than a supposed referenced "lacking common feature list". Opening for discussion before removal. Chopper Dave (talk) 05:32, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Hm, didn't see this until now, but it is true. In for example Sony Vegas you can cut pieces of video and rearrange them by dragging and dropping. Also adding of effects is very easy. Both things can not be done in VDub, but as the page says: "It is designed to process linear video streams" -- Sander (talk) 03:15, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

VirtualDub Features

Well, VirtualDub does offer a batch processing mode, which I find very handy for processing a group of video files. This is an important and essential feature of the software and I think it should be talked about on the wiki page.

On the input side, and natively, VirtualDub is indeed limited to reading AVI files using only the built in functionality. But, VirtualDub is certainly NOT limited to AVI files. There are many "input plugins" available for virtually ANY video file format, from AVI to FLV to MP4 to MKV, you name it; as long as an appropriate codec is also installed on the system. I think the main wiki page saying VirtualDub is limited to AVI files is inaccurate and misleading. I think something should be said about how it is extended via 'input plugins' to virtually any video file format.

On the output side, and natively, VirtualDub only supports the output of AVI files. But on the menu, VirtualDub also has a "Export | Using External encoder" option. One can configure external video, audio, multiplexer "encoder sets" which neatly wrap any particular encoder/muxer with a custom command line specific for that encoder/muxer. This feature also works with the batch processor. For example, one can use ffmpeg (a popular open source codec library) and mkvmerge (a popular open source multiplexer) to encode nearly any video stream format and nearly any audio stream format and then multiplex them into an MKV (Matroska) file. However, ANY command line codec/muxer that can accept input from "stdin" can be used. I think the main wiki page should mention this "export using an external encoder" feature.

VirtualDub can also accept direct video streams from a frame server, like AVISynth. Thus, with the combination of AVISynth and VirtualDub, one has an open source, free, essentially fully featured (all be it command line driven), non-linear video editing solution.

On the support side, I think something should be said about how support is obtained for the program. There is a large body of developers and enthusiasts for VirtualDub. Like all open source software, the source code is available and developers are encouraged to debug and extend the code base. Both developers and non-developers can find quite a bit of support through the "Unofficial" VirtualDub support forum: http://forums.virtualdub.org/. For example, there are long and comprehensive topic threads on using the external encoder option, plugin and filter development and so forth.

Patrick (talk) 14:49, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Dear User:Codename_Lisa, what does it take to keep VirtualDuB safe from your notability attack?

VirtualDuB was a milestone in Open Source Developement in the ancient Era of DV-Video, when internet had just been invented. Is your attack supposed to be motivational towards improvement of the article? Cleaning up History will not make you more notable. So what IS your intention? (hint:I do not really expect your answer to be helpful here) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.241.138.176 (talk) 01:31, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello, sweetum!

I think the word you are looking for is "improvements", not "attack". After all, I improved the article a lot.[1][2]

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 01:43, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

It's ridiculous to question the notability of VDub. Millions of people have been using it during its update lifespan from c. 2000-2013 (which makes it comparable in scope and lifecycle to Windows XP, the release dates of Windows OSs that VDub has been written and updated for (Windows 95 allthrough to Windows 10) spans twenty years, many people still keep using it on a daily basis, its original author never said that its development would be discontinued after 2013 (see below, he even said that development to ensure full Windows 10 compatibility is still on-going), and new forks are still actively maintained and updated (see below). To question the notability of VDub is as ridiculous as trying to question the notability of Windows XP. --79.242.219.119 (talk) 04:18, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Please read WP:Notability. Not one of the things you mention addresses the question of whether VirtualDub is notable. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:47, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

I beg your pardon: Millions of users constitute "lack of notability"? Again, it's as ridiculous as questioning the notability of Windows XP. Plus, you've unconsensually removed notable content regarding VDub's age/lifecycle and its active mods, which is unacceptable as it has nothing to do with our question at hand. --79.242.219.119 (talk) 05:07, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I went googling for further points of notability for VDub beyond long lifespan and a user base in the millions. And BTW, you are mistaken to be rejecting the Unofficial VirtualDub Support Forums and SourceForge as a reputable sources as Wikipedia:Notability (software) makes special exceptions for Usenet and forum posts in case of open-source software such as VDub, especially if they are official announcements by creators. According to Wikipedia:Notability (software), VDub is definitely notable, as per the following points:

• External third-party print guides for it exist (calling it "the leading free Open Source video capture and processing tool"): [3], which alone makes VDub notable for Wikipedia already, see Wikipedia:Notability (software)

• It is recommended for use by reputable professional computer and tech magazines, guides, and reviewers such as: PC World: [4], nextmedia's PC & Tech Authority: [5], PC Perspective: [6] (recommended for its low overhead), PC Perspective [7], digital service publisher AfterDawn: [8], technologies guide website MakeTechEasier: [9], freeware and open source software review site Ghacks: [10], and Speed Demos Archive: [11]. All of these constitute further points of notability as according to Wikipedia:Notability (software).

• It is also recommended by third-party professional video production studios: [12], video-game developer Valve Corporation: [13], the creators of Wine (software): [14], and the Windows package manager Chocolatey: [15] (the disclaimer at the top relates only to the latest VDub release from when it was still in beta mode).

• VDub has its own entries on Softpedia [16], Webopedia [17], VideoHelp [18], and Doom9 [19].

• There are hundreds of third-party plug-ins for VDub: [20], [21], [22], [23], [24] and [25] (the two cithraidt.de URLs formerly were a project of the University of Technology of Kaiserslautern where these VDub plug-ins were originally hosted), including by professional software companies: [26], [27], [28]. This fact alone establishes notability on a grand scale.

• There is even a VDub plug-in for professional video-editing software Adobe Premiere Pro and Sony Vegas to use VDub filters in them: [29], establishing further notability. --79.242.219.119 (talk) 06:34, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

As VDub meets multiple official WP software notability criteria, I've been bold and reverted the last edit. I will now add the sources to the article. --79.242.219.119 (talk) 06:51, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

I don't know if you realize it, but you're confusing an essay on software notability (an essay is the personal opinion of one or more Wikipedia editors) with a guideline about notability (a guideline represents widely accepted practices Wikipedia editors are expected to follow). I'm glad you found that book about VirtualDub -- it helps establish its notability and I had forgotten about it -- but the idea that a doom9 forum or a Softpedia entry or hundreds of plug-ins somehow help to establish notability is laughable. And Wikipedia doesn't have a notability guideline for software, let alone "official criteria". — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 07:11, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Third-party plug-ins establish notability, as they demonstrate wide use, acceptance, and popularity as a standard tool, especially in case of hundreds of third-party plug-ins for one single program. We are talking about a level of popularity for third-party plug-in programmers close to that of Adobe products here. And the essay I've linked may not be an official all-Wikipedia guideline on any topic whatsoever under the sun, but it is a set of advices specifically for articles within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Software. --79.242.219.119 (talk) 07:35, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and the Doom9 entry I've linked is not part of the forum but of the official site. --79.242.219.119 (talk) 08:35, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

BTW, I find it interesting that for years and to this day you've allowed a link to the Unofficial VirtualDub Support Forums as an appropriate source for the statement that it's closed, but not when it's a link to an official announcement by the tool's creator. --79.242.219.119 (talk) 09:51, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Does anyone happen to know why there were no new releases for years?

I assume the project has gone into inactivity, but does anyone happen to know WHY? The project was very active ~10 years ago or so. 2A02:8388:1600:C80:BE5F:F4FF:FECD:7CB2 (talk) 19:47, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

For what it's worth, here's Avery Lee aka Phaeton's official 2015 announcement as to why he's closing his own VDub forum, where he partly also goes into detail a little as to why his VDub development has slowed down after the 2013 release: [30] He can obviously still be contacted via email about VDub, in 2015 he guaranteed that VDub would work on Windows 10 and if there would be any issues about Windows 10 compatibility, he's willing to fix those in a new release, but looks like he's not gonna any do more than that, although he's still regularly using his own program for daily routines. On the other hand, he nowhere says there that VDub would be officially canceled, in fact he even says he hopes others will take it up as it's open source. --79.242.219.119 (talk) 16:52, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Handbrake as an alleged "successor", forums, and forks

It's BS to call HandBrake a "successor" to VDub. The main function of VDub is filtering, with capturing second, while all HandBrake does is conversion/transcoding, making it much more a "successor" or rival for other simple converters such as SUPER or XMedia Recode.

BTW, I'd like to see an official announcement that VDub is truly discontinued. In his last official post on it in 2015 [31], Avery aka Phaeton said that development by himself has only slowed down after 2013, he's willing to fix any upcoming Windows 10 compatibility issues, and that he wishes other people would take it up since it's open source. In fact, forks *ARE* stil being developed and updated (see below). Another fact that I'd call definitely noteworthy for the article is that not only do people still use VDub but they're also still developing filters aka plugins for it. Speaking of which, the most active forum on VDub and its plugins to this day is Doom9, here's its relevant sub-forum that could be linked in the article: [32]

Even though it was officially called the "Unofficial VDub Forum" until its closure in March 2015, next to Avery's own blogsite and Doom9 it used to be the main hub for VDub's development for over a decade and was also owned, maintained, and administrated by Avery under the nick of Phaeton, so maybe we could link to the version archived by Wayback for documentation? [33] After the close of the original "Unofficial" VDub forum, some members have started the Really Unofficial VirtualDub Forums at [34], with the latest posts (related to Windows 10 workarounds for the Quicktime plugin) dating to July 2016.

Also, it's not true that VirtualDubMod development ended for good in 2005 or 2006. Further development on VirtualDubMod by Chattama happened in 2008: [35] (his version/fork seems to be called "VirtualDub+"), and by bcn_246 at least as late as December 2012: [36] Another fork that remained in maintenance up until March 2015 was VirtualDub2mpgtx that basically was a combination of VDub with a tool called mpgtx: [37] It was basically to edit specifically MPEG-1 files.

Finally, there's a new VDub mod started in or before April 2015 that's still in maintenance and updated regularly well into the 4K and UHD era, and that's VirtualDub FilterMod: [38] Here's its updates and development thread on Doom9 still alive and kicking in mid-February 2017: [39]

Lastly, the article would greatly benefit from a remark about the start of VDub's lifetime in the lead and in the infobox. In any case, Avery first uploaded a version on SourceForge on August 20th, 2000: [40] --79.242.219.119 (talk) 17:52, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

On second thought, I think this article could also benefit of a graphic displaying the development of VDub's forks over the years similar to that found in our OpenOffice.org article: [41]. --79.242.219.119 (talk) 05:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)