Top
Best
New

Posted by mohebifar 15 hours ago

Professional video editing, right in the browser with WebGPU and WASM(tooscut.app)
302 points | 105 comments
aboardRat4 3 minutes ago|
I'm baffled each time people re-implement stuff from scratch instead of contributing to existing mature projects.
derodero24 14 minutes ago||
I do the same thing — Rust core compiled to both native (napi-rs) and WASM from a single codebase, different domain though. The tooling has gotten really solid for this. Curious how the perf splits between WASM compute and WebGPU for the actual video processing — in my experience the WASM overhead is small for pure computation but I/O patterns change things a lot.
wwdx 26 minutes ago||
The easiest way to on-ramp people to try it out for the first time is to write a claude code skill. This is what remotion did and I think you should do the same.
skyberrys 8 hours ago||
I used it to combine the sounds from one video with the imagery of another video. It worked easily enough. It feels really simple to use, there aren't many ways for me to make mistakes. I could easily switch to using this tool. Fyi I used Brave Browser without issue.
mohebifar 7 hours ago|
Amazing! That's really great to hear! Let me know if you ever have any issues or feature requests in the GitHub issues.
msalihb 1 hour ago||
Thats great, I really enjoy when someone try to shake the *dobe's reign
algolint 2 hours ago||
The skepticism around browser-based creative tools often ignores the massive shift that Figma brought to UI/UX design. While 8K multi-track editing might remain a native domain for a while, the vast majority of video content created today is for social media, where accessibility and collaboration speed are more valuable than maximum throughput. The fact that this leverages WebGPU and WASM shows we're finally moving past the "JavaScript is too slow" era into an "architecture matters" era for the web.
m-schuetz 2 hours ago|
I actually prefer browser-based tools. Havent installed hex editors since hexedit for web is available; Photopea covers my occasional photo/picture editing needs, google sheets/slides/docs is my main office suit, etc. It's great to not have to install things.
xrd 14 hours ago||
I've been using kdenlive and it is functional as an open source video editor. I don't know if kdenlive supports shared assets and projects, but this feels like something this project could offer and exceed expectations. Is that on the roadmap?
mohebifar 13 hours ago|
Yes, that was part of the thinking behind the licensing choice. The goal was to keep the engine itself open source, while creating opportunities to monetize adjacent offerings like cloud file management, sharing, AI editing, and other higher-level capabilities.
mohebifar 15 hours ago||
Free and open source NLE video editor powered by WGPU, WASM, WebGPU, Rust, and Tanstack Start
RobotToaster 13 hours ago||
This is absolutely not an open source license https://polyformproject.org/licenses/noncommercial/1.0.0/

It violates point 1,5 and 6 of the open source definition https://opensource.org/osd

flohofwoe 4 hours ago|||
For nitpicking like that let me do some counter-nitpicking: please write 'Open Source (OSI)', 'Open Source (TM)' or at least capitalize it as 'Open Source' so that people know where you're coming from. The commonly used 'open source' just means 'the source is in the open'. Let's not allow organizations to hijack commonly used words.
circuit10 1 hour ago||
It’s not nitpicking, the term “open source” is not usually used for this kind of thing, it would be called “shared source”

I did a poll on this on a Discord server a while ago

What does open source mean

You can view the source code: 0 votes

View + use + redistribute for any purpose: 14 votes

So no, your version of it is not the common usage

mohebifar 12 hours ago|||
You are absolutely right. I just changed the license to ELv2.
RobotToaster 5 hours ago|||
That isn't open source either.

As far as I know the most restrictive open source license is the AGPL, with a CLA that allows for commercial dual licensing.

bilekas 8 hours ago||||
ELv2 is not open source either.
guelo 7 hours ago||
It is not OSI® Open Source Definition™ approved, but it is open source for the common use of the term.
TimeBearingDown 7 hours ago|||
The accepted term is "source available".

Restrictions on usage type are not commonly accepted as open source by any community that I'm aware of.

bilekas 2 hours ago|||
I don't say it to be pedantic about the term, but there are hard restrictions on usage of this tool in commercial environments.. So it's important people are aware and don't just assume it's an open source.
throawayonthe 4 hours ago||||
if you want to call it open source, why not consider AGPL?
maxloh 11 hours ago||||
Nice change!
Imustaskforhelp 4 hours ago|||
I genuinely recommend putting something like AGPL if you wish to go towards Open Source route.
dylan604 11 hours ago|||
If you want free, Resolve will run circles around whatever open source thing you can find. No need for WGPU, it just runs the GPU.

Sadly, things like this just put a bad taste in my mouth about the whole concept of running code in a browser like this. It's buggy as hell. It doesn't run in all browsers. And I really have to ask why we think the browser is the place to run this. We've moved from Java and now to WASM in a browser, but only some browsers.

mashreghi 4 hours ago|||
Different use case. "Runs everywhere instantly" beats "installs + config" for a lot of workflows.
tim-projects 8 hours ago||||
In my experience getting it to run on my Intel gpu on Linux was not trivial. And when I did I discovered it doesn't support standard video formats making it a complete non starter.

Kdenlive is much better imho for basic edits

hrmtst93837 5 hours ago||||
Browser editing makes sense for review links, shared projects, and zero-install onboarding, but if the job is just cutting footage fast on one machine then a desktop app will smoke it and the compatibility mess buys you nothing. The browser sandbox is a decent distribution hack, yet once you stack WebGPU, WASM, codecs, file access, and browser-specific bugs on top of each other, you are rebuilding a worse native stack with extra failure modes and pretending that counts as progress. Resolve exists.
mashreghi 4 hours ago||
If your baseline is Resolve, sure. But most people aren't cutting Hollywood timelines.
vunderba 10 hours ago||||
+1 for Davinci Resolve. I used the free version for years (Windows and Mac versions) before finally picking up a copy of Studio which is still very reasonably priced and is a flat fee.
Fabricio20 10 hours ago||||
Resolve requiring an account to download is what turned me away when I needed to do a quick edit the other day. Oracle much?
windowsrookie 9 hours ago|||
Black Magic gives video editing software that actual professionals use away for free. They sell professional grade equipment that regular consumers can afford. They also offer a ton of training videos teaching you how to edit professionally....for free. A ton of independent filmmakers have started their career using Black Magic software/devices.

They are absolutely not anything like oracle.

motoxpro 10 hours ago||||
Why not just have a throwaway email account for these types of things. Opens up a lot of great software if this is a barrier for you.
nullpoint420 7 hours ago||||
I always put asdf@asdf.com and it lets me download it
ErroneousBosh 3 hours ago|||
It doesn't require an account to download.
RobotToaster 5 hours ago||||
I stopped trusting resolve after they decided to paywall reactor. Putting a paywall on plugins that users contribute for free is just shitty.
csomar 9 hours ago|||
> And I really have to ask why we think the browser is the place to run this.

This is a big barrier if you want cross-compatibility and making Linux usable for everyday people. My whole interface is a terminal and a browser. I could use/pay for something like this in the same way I use figma. I don't need an app and when I open my iPad I can access whatever I was working on.

The browser should have been the place to run all of this from the very start; but Apple/Google decided to create walled gardens for their systems.

empressplay 13 hours ago|||
I think you selected the wrong license. Your license currently as written actually forbids _using_ the software for a commercial purpose, eg if someone monetizes a video edited using your software, they are in violation of your license, which is not what you want.

Look at something like the Hashicorp BSL [1] for inspiration on crafting a license that forbids specific commercialization of the software itself.

[1] https://www.hashicorp.com/en/bsl

mohebifar 12 hours ago||
You are right. Thanks for the insights! I just changed the license to ELv2.
esafak 14 hours ago||
Any plugin plans? In case you don't know, there is a standard for it: https://openeffects.org/

Would you like to share your development experience? I suggest creating a CONTRIBUTING.md and enabling discussions if you are open to PRs.

mohebifar 14 hours ago|||
Great question! I actually have built a poc that is not released yet. It's on the roadmap. It requires some tooling for the devs building these plugins like a CLI for building the WASM binaries, bundling, manifests, etc.

The current poc still has significant performance overhead, and that overhead grows as the plugin system becomes more powerful. If plugins are only allowed to apply a WGSL shader, the performance impact is almost negligible. But features that require broader access to timeline data, such as time shifts, speed ramps, or full timeline transformations, become much more expensive and make zero-copy architectures harder to reason about.

mohebifar 6 hours ago|||
I added CONTRIBUTING.md. I also took a look at OpenFX. My current view is that supporting OFX in the browser would be hard, since the standard and its existing tooling are not designed around wgpu or browser execution. Tooscut would likely need its own plugin model rather than adopting OFX as is.

That said, I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts if you are open to contributing or discussing what a practical plugin system should look like in this environment. Please file a GitHub issue if you can

bensyverson 14 hours ago||
Really cool! It may not replace a dedicated NLE for professional editors, but I love that it's a fully functional NLE that you could drop into an existing web app that handles video.
mohebifar 14 hours ago|
Yes, but the goal is to become the photopea of video editing. Something quick that you can launch via web that can support 80% of the day to day use cases.
jofzar 4 hours ago|||
Good goal, I love photopea for this exact reason. I have no need for photoshop anymore (which I had purely for quick edits) I would love the equivalent for video
bensyverson 13 hours ago|||
Nice. It feels like mobile is the natural place for it—how feasible is that today?
xnx 13 hours ago|
How does this compare to https://omniclip.app/ ?
Saris 1 hour ago||
I had not used either before reading this thread, but omniclip has an odd interface, it's very unfamiliar to me compared to a standard NLE, and the loading time was quite long (maybe just HN load?).
mohebifar 12 hours ago||
Seems interesting. I had not seen Omniclip specifically. But like most web-based NLEs I've seen, its UX feels unfamiliar. My goal was to build a desktop-grade professional editor that feels familiar to editors like Premiere Pro, DaVinci Resolve, and Final Cut Pro, rather than reinventing the editing experience.
More comments...