alt Hacker NewsGitframes
Comments
Info-dense, completely unreadable README.md file. Only the line "No Puppeteer, no Chromium IPC, no `page.screenshot()`" actually allowed me to figure out what this is about: creating video demos of your website (and probably other software as well) with an AI agent, rather than going through the conventional video-editing process.
It's cool that so many people are building useful tools with LLMs, but for the love of ones and zeroes, people! PLEASE write your README by hand, instead of handing it off to the LLM with no human involvement! You know how unreadable LLM prose is! Why do you make that the first thing people see when they see your repo?
Please not here. There are 20 vibe-coded "99% photoshop" projects posted every hour. It's a meme on r/vibecoding .
IMO we need less "photoshop and blender for AI", more "AI keeps getting better at video-gen, but projects need scaffolding". A `rails new my_proj` for video.
I have a project like this: it setups up a scaffolding: scripts, audio tracks, hot-reloading authoring UI, TTS/STT, sfx, music, shared-styles, beats, video composing, time-control for deterministic rendering, etc. Then you can use any web-technology to render (webGPU, Lottie, shadcn, SVG, whatever).
Gitframes seems like a confusing name, trying to piggyback off git popularity, while being unrelated.
Feels like AI hit a key point in these last releases where their ability to edit videos jumped significantly.
Someone at work recorded a demo of a new feature using Claude + https://github.com/veedstudio/open-edit
It was pretty slick and he said he only did two passes on it. Not sure what it means for Adobe, but hopefully it lights a fire under them.
I've been doing little informational videos with Opus 5.5 [1]. The jump in capability floored me the first time I saw it in action. Clearly something happened in this last generation. That particular video took it about 45 minutes and I think it spent less than a $1 on OpenRouter for the voice over / sound.
I wonder what it would make of the transcript of "Flying Logos", Homer and Associate's demo reel shown at SIGGRAPH 1989 Electronic Theater.
The year before, the committee decided demos were a no go. Peter Conn wrote Flying Logos to sneak their demo reel into the film show by turning it into a story: a client calls Flying Logos, Inc. to visualize a logo, technical vs. anticipated, imagination vs. possibility. It worked!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hIOfEiy4lc
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36751574
>Coco Conn and Paul Rother wrote this up about what they did with FORTH at HOMER & Assoc, who made some really classic music videos including Atomic Dog, and hired Charles Moore himself! Here's what Coco Conn posted about it, and some discussion and links about it that I'm including with her permission: [...]
>First shown at the 1989 Siggraph Electronic Theater to a rave response, this 3 minute humourous film went on to win several top computer graphic awards that same year including Niccograph of Japan.
>Coco: This was a show favorite at the SIGGRAPH film show that year. The year before the conference committee decided that showing demos wasn't the way to go anymore. Peter wrote Flying Logos as a way to sneak our demo reel into the show by turning it into a story. It worked and we made it into the film show.
>Don: I truly believe that in some other alternate dimension, there is a Flying Logo Heaven where the souls of dead flying logos go, where they dramatically promenade and swoop and spin around each other in pomp and pageantry to bombastic theme music. It would make a great screen saver, at least! Somewhere the Sun Logo and the SGI Logo are still dancing together.
The readme is too busy, but the video showcase is impressive [0].
I agree the framing is too arrogant though, about replacing blender etc, except if it's delegating the computing to those, because it is very complicated.
I am clearly not the target audience, but as a hobbyist that has used da vinci resolve at points i understand basically nothing of what the software actually is supposed to do
Did you show this to like one human before you shared it with the world? It would have saved you a lot of grief
Please remove git from your project's name. By your logic, every software project that uses git could have git in its name.
Definitely using it for my next promo-site which is for event that comes in one month. People be blown. Also I wonder what was used for the audio synthesis, if author reads.
here's my last work that need quite a lot of work to get where it is, but I know what I do also:
bsf.hmsu.org
works on mobile as old as iphone12
Is it me ( and my eyesight ) or is the text a bit fuzzy in their example videos?
Is it just me or the launch video sample (aside from needing an epileptic warning), is just not very good.
Why does it keep saying "in the browser," but then there's no way to see these running in the browser?
Wouldn't that be trivially easy to do?
really nice to see this! whoever builds the creative software suite with agents as first class citizens will probably win
Oh, brilliant. I can cut video with a single click and rearrange clips by dragging and dropping, but now I will have to install npm (and all of the vulnerabilities) to dick around with LLMs via a bunch of APIs.
> Photoshop-, After Effects-, and Blender-class video tools
Look, you can’t just write this. When you say something like this, you set the bar extremely high, and open yourself up to (totally fair!) criticism if Photoshop or After Effects gurus point out entire classes of use cases you aren’t handling.
If you want people to talk about what your tool is good at, you need to stop inviting comparisons to titans like this. It will take you a long long time to build something as fully featured as them, and there is plenty of room for agent-focused tools that aren’t at that immense product scale.