Show HN: I created an After Effects alternative

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

A solo developer has built Pikimov, a free, browser-based motion graphics and compositing tool positioned as a lightweight alternative to Adobe After Effects. Commenters are impressed by the technical feat in WebGL/JavaScript but debate trade-offs such as Chrome-only support (due to WebCodecs and file system APIs), long-term viability of web‑only tools, privacy claims alongside Google Analytics, and the lack of open source or a desktop/Electron version. Many welcome the “No AI” stance and simpler feature set for everyday creators, while professionals highlight missing advanced capabilities and urge closer UX parity with After Effects.

Overall reception and AE positioning

  • Many commenters are impressed by the depth and polish, especially for a solo dev.
  • It’s widely seen as filling a gap: a simpler, accessible motion-graphics/compositing tool without Adobe’s bloat and subscription.
  • Several stress that “alternative” doesn’t require full feature parity with After Effects; covering the most-used 10–20% of features is considered valuable.

Browser and platform support

  • Current support is Chromium-only due to reliance on WebCodecs (AudioData, VideoEncoder) and the File System Access API.
  • Firefox users are disappointed, but a Firefox media developer reports WebCodecs is almost ready there and has a partial workaround running already.
  • Safari is broadly viewed as the worst for modern APIs; no support is planned for now.

Web-only vs desktop, offline, and longevity

  • Strong split: some see web-only as a positive (easy distribution, updates, cross‑platform, PWA/offline potential).
  • Others worry about tool disappearance, network dependence, and long‑term access to project files; they advocate a downloadable/electron/native version.

Privacy, analytics, and “No AI”

  • “Privacy respected” messaging is criticized because the site uses Google Ads/Analytics.
  • The author clarifies that project data stays local; analytics are used for feature usage insight. Commenters suggest privacy‑friendlier analytics or just asking users.
  • “No AI” is seen by many as a selling point, partly in reaction to AI‑heavy UIs and recent Adobe data/AI controversies. Others argue users do value AI if it’s genuinely helpful.

Technical implementation details

  • Stack includes Ember, WebGL, modern web APIs, WebCodecs, SharedArrayBuffer, and mp4box/ffmpeg.wasm‑style tooling.
  • Discussion covers worker threads, memory limits (WASM 4 GB vs tab memory), streaming from disk, and OPFS as a safer file API than full FS access.

Features, UX, and limitations

  • Early testers praise UX but note missing pro features: higher and NTSC frame rates, custom easing/graph editor, color‑space controls, better keyframe behavior, and more AE‑like interaction patterns.
  • Some urge copying AE’s UX conventions closely to ease adoption; GIMP is cited as a cautionary tale of nonstandard UI.
  • 30 fps limit is described as temporary; app is not intended for multi‑hour feature films in a single project.