movie maker - loud and proud!

Scintilla · Post by **Scintilla** » Fri Apr 02, 2004 1:13 pm

Rage_Sasami wrote: I have to admit WMM is pretty good but the only effects it has is fading plus it freezes a lot.

You might want to get WMM2; it's got a whole bunch more effects, some of which can be useful.

Sushi2 · Post by **Sushi2** » Fri Apr 02, 2004 2:39 pm

Castor Troy wrote:Join my WMM contest

Wow I never thought I would see the day when someone would actually organise a contest like that.

pen-pen2002 · Post by **pen-pen2002** » Fri Apr 02, 2004 3:33 pm

Personally I don't discriminate between file types as long as I can play them. Sure there usually not as high quality as videos made with other codecs but then again I'm not a quality fanatic or anything. I also follow the K.I.S.S school of video making so I think a perfectly good video can be made with just fades (Not any video but a lot of them.) Also I think it serves a valuable service to the AMV comunity as it gets many new creators to get up and try, and then maybe later they will upgrade when they are more skilled. Basically it can make good videos and it's a good learning tool.

Arigatomina · Post by **Arigatomina** » Fri Apr 02, 2004 4:39 pm

No matter what version of wmm you use, you are *not* limited to distributing your video as a wmv file. You can get better quality in an mpg if you just convert the video, and even better quality if you use xvid.

I don't know why people think you *have* to use wmv if you're working with wmm. I've never *had* to distribute a video in wmv format, and I've been using wmm for about a year now. With version 1.0 you just convert the avi file in any of 30 or so free avi-to-mpg converters you can find on a google search. With version 2.0 you either do the same with the dv-avi option, or use Vdub and tmpgenc.

As for effects, yeah, wmm is limited, but who'd want a video full of the same effects you see in every other video anyway? Experiment a little, play with VirtualDub, a picture editing program (even mspaint can do wonders if you play with it). I still say the only real limits wmm puts on a person is the lack of frame accuracy (which you can get around by doing your cuts in Vdub), and the single video track (major limitation - the big problem I see with the program).

I don't use wmm because I'm too cheap to buy Premiere, or because I'm too moral to download an illegal copy from someone - I use it because I know it, and I like what I can do with it. I don't see any reason to buy or steal a high tech program when I know I can get what I want out of the program I already have.

genestarwind21122 · Post by **genestarwind21122** » Fri Apr 02, 2004 4:42 pm

Yes wmm can be quite descent take a look at one of my earlier works from a year ago called Shrine of the Goddess:

http://www.animemusicvideos.org/members ... hp?v=16630

Cyanna · Post by **Cyanna** » Fri Apr 02, 2004 6:15 pm

Due to a low budget and the fact that I make AMV's from a laptop, all of my vids were made in WMM. I can't say I'm really ashamed of them either.

But there are a few ways around the wmv part. You can download my vids as mpegs.

WMM2 is MUCH better then WMM in my personal opinion. You can do a lot more with it for a free program.

(However as much as I would love to, I can't enter the contest....one has some Jasc Animation Studio/PSP thrown in and I deleted the footage from the other to make more space....no more timeline to take screenshots)

Maverick-Rubik · Post by **Maverick-Rubik** » Fri Apr 02, 2004 6:43 pm

While we're talking about WMM videos, I might as well show you how good they can be if you try hard enough (and pimp out sexy_no_jutsu's video simultaneously).

http://animemusicvideos.org/members/mem ... hp?v=23890

Zarxrax · Post by **Zarxrax** » Fri Apr 02, 2004 6:56 pm

I think that's one of the best damn vids I've ever seen made in WMM O.O

Pyle · Post by **Pyle** » Wed Apr 07, 2004 1:49 am

Zarxrax wrote:
SnhKnives wrote:.WMM can actually be decent, the editor just had to know what they are doing. Mainly for people who A) are morala nd dont want to pirate and B) cant afford big name software.

I dont see a whole lot of flaw in it. As long as you are intellegent enough to manipulate the program, the quality issue isnt that bad...
2nded The reason WMM gets a bad rap mostly, is because 99% of the videos made in it suck ass. Trying to find the 1% of gems out of the huge pile of crap is a task that many are up to. Not to say that videos made in other software can't be crap either. But when you get into other software, the ratio of crap to good videos is more like 80-90%.

Good videos can certainly be made in WMM... though the software is very limiting to the creators imagination.

Hey that is just mean. All of my vids have been made with Windows Movie Maker, and I haven't gotten a single bad op on them...and none of my star ratings are below 3.3.

Zarxrax · Post by **Zarxrax** » Wed Apr 07, 2004 7:03 am

Pyle wrote:
Zarxrax wrote:
SnhKnives wrote:.WMM can actually be decent, the editor just had to know what they are doing. Mainly for people who A) are morala nd dont want to pirate and B) cant afford big name software.

I dont see a whole lot of flaw in it. As long as you are intellegent enough to manipulate the program, the quality issue isnt that bad...
2nded The reason WMM gets a bad rap mostly, is because 99% of the videos made in it suck ass. Trying to find the 1% of gems out of the huge pile of crap is a task that many are up to. Not to say that videos made in other software can't be crap either. But when you get into other software, the ratio of crap to good videos is more like 80-90%.

Good videos can certainly be made in WMM... though the software is very limiting to the creators imagination.
Hey that is just mean. All of my vids have been made with Windows Movie Maker, and I haven't gotten a single bad op on them...and none of my star ratings are below 3.3.

Did I say your vids sucked?