Professional video editing, right in the browser with WebGPU and WASM

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Licensing and “Open Source” Status

  • Initial non-commercial license drew strong criticism as incompatible with the Open Source Definition; concern it even forbade using edited videos commercially.
  • Project switched to Elastic License v2 (ELv2), which some see as an improvement but still not “open source” in the OSI sense; several call it “source available” and suggest AGPL if genuine open source is desired.
  • Multiple commenters say restrictive licensing blocks integration into commercial products (e.g., DAM systems) and reduces interest.
  • Author signals openness to further license changes, especially if community engagement grows and for clarifying commercial use of the hosted instance.

Browser/WebGPU Feasibility and Compatibility

  • Enthusiasts argue browser-based tools are great for zero‑install workflows, cross‑platform use (especially Linux and tablets), and collaboration—similar to Figma or Photopea.
  • Skeptics say browsers are a poor fit for heavy video work: buggy, uneven WebGPU support, 4 GB memory constraints, sandbox limitations, and extra complexity vs native stacks.
  • Safari and Firefox are reported as poorly supported: choppy playback, red/inverted flashes, crashes, and outright incompatibility; criticism that it effectively “only works in Chrome,” evoking the old IE-only era.
  • Some note WebGPU 1.0 exposes older‑generation GPU capabilities; others counter that most social/video workflows don’t need 8K/RAW performance and that careful architecture (WASM memory, WebCodecs, GPU buffers) mitigates limits.

Features, UX, and “Professional” Claims

  • Goal stated as “Photopea of video”: fast, familiar NLE in the browser that covers ~80% of everyday use, not full Premiere/Final Cut parity or 8K cinema.
  • Current features mentioned: text, transitions, basic property animations, some filters, timeline model similar to desktop NLEs, multiple tracks.
  • Some users successfully did basic edits (e.g., swapping audio between videos) and praised simplicity.
  • Others report missing or awkward workflows (e.g., adding separate music track from MP3, track scrolling issues) and want more: richer effects, filters, animations, transcription and text‑based editing.
  • Several argue the “professional” label is overstated given feature gaps, codec information missing from the landing page, and browser compatibility issues; others define “professional” simply as “can be used to deliver paid work.”

Plugins, Ecosystem, and Roadmap

  • Early proof‑of‑concept plugin system exists; roadmap includes a WASM‑based plugin model, but broader access (timeline transforms, speed ramps) currently has performance costs.
  • OpenFX is discussed as a reference, but browser/WGPU constraints likely require a custom plugin spec.
  • Long‑term monetization ideas: keep core engine open/source‑available while charging for cloud storage, sharing, AI editing, and collaborative features.
  • Requests appear for server‑side GPU use and integrations into existing video or asset platforms.