The divide between technical and artistic is never so evident as it is in open source software. Virtually all open source tools of significance are technically oriented. Browsers. Backend website software. Debuggers. The next big debate over opening the web is currently taking place around audio and video. But unlike so many other open web concepts, most people online wouldn’t think that OGG was anything but the nickname for a hot new R&B artist.
Why is this? Because there are no competitive open source tools for creating open graphics, audio and video. What is out there is inferior to the crappy freeware editors that come with most operating systems. Artistry for the Web is currently locked in the clutches of prohibitively expensive proprietary software like Photoshop, Premeier, ProTools, and Ableton.
Editing graphics without an expensive tool is a nightmare. The Mac OS, for example, will give you all the tools you need to perform basic editing and manipulation of images, but tools such as resizing, cropping, color adjustment, or adding text are typically segregated between different freeware apps. Windows at least comes with Paint, probably the best freeware editor out there. But it’s only for Windows. Paintbrush, a free app that calls itself a Mac-based clone of MS Paint, has functionality is so limited and its accuracy of brush stroke so vague that I deleted it after one day of use. When cloning, they must have forgotten to copy half the DNA. The only commonly known open source graphics editor out there is GIMP, which is extremely non-spectacular. Its lack of native portability to Mac guarantees its insignificance as an open source visual editor. Until it can compete with PhotoShop, only the desperate will use it.
Ableton is to audio editing today what Internet Explorer was to Web browsing in 1999. It’s a limited, clunky, mess, but nobody knows any better because they haven’t woken up to the idea that they could put a lot more fun and functionality into creation of new music, mashing up existing music, or DJing. Its massive sticker price ($900 for the premium edition), cluttered and intimidating user interface, and lack of self-evident navigation makes this product a massive functionality fail, despite its slick look and powerful capabilities. It’s the best thing out there. Because it’s the only thing out there. And because they don’t operate in an open community environment, there isn’t a way for me to tell them that it’s idiotic that the program’s navigation lacks simple features like click and drag, tabbed browsing, or right click options. Or maybe even just a way to put notes on a blank piece of sheet music.
Until there is an open source project that creates free and open tools that help people create open video and audio, ain’t nobody gonna give two sticks about either of those things. Firefox did something incredible for Web browsers — it rattled IE’s monopoly and showed the Web that you could do more and put the power of technology back in the hands of the users, not funnel them through an expensive and restricting tunnel of technology.
Digital creativity is still locked in that tunnel. Adobe and Ableton’s products are as non-customizable as they are prohibitively expensive. These proprietary options keep the power of creating art and music in the hands of only those who can afford to create it. And there isn’t anybody out there in the Open Source world looking to tackle these dominant monsters the same way Firefox took down IE.
Until an open source project creates free and open tools that give people a way to create open audio, video, and graphics with free, open tools, nobody’s going to care about pushing open audio and video for the Web. Why should they? That would cut into the total industry dominance of artistic creation. The success of WordPress gives me hope that eventually there may be this kind of project, but I still worry that there’s too much of a gap between the sort of people who know what an open source music mixer should look like and the sort of people with the technical known-how to create that software. We need some way to teach music to coders, or to teach musicians to code. But until then, music and video won’t be what it could be.
on Aug 18th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
The thing is, the average Joe shouldn’t really care much about open video and audio. So long as they can hear and see things why should it matter to them? The question is how can you have open source audio and video content creating products without widely accepted open audio and video formats? Open source products work when they are useful, if all they can create is content no-one other than the creator can see then they aren’t useful.
The other problem is the differing psyches between people who like to create music and people who like to code. Open source needs people who are enthusiastic about what they are building to the point that they will often do it in their spare time for free. It doesn’t surprise me that very few coders are interested enough to build these tools. And I don’t believe you can teach music to coders, or musicians to code, not and have them be passionate enough about both. Some of the right people do exist, it is just a matter of finding them and giving them the incentive and direction they need.
on Aug 19th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Audacity is a great free and powerful audio editor.
Jashaka is a cross platform video editor. i havent had reason to use it yet, but journalists often use it.