Help
Post your comments for Review: Corel VideoStudio X6 eases creative video production here
Page 1 of 1
Review: Corel Videostudio X6 Eases Creative Video Production
#2
166mhz 
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 03-May 13
Posted 03 May 2013 - 02:23 PM
Pinnacle user might recognize the layout because it was bought by Corel. The only diff is the main video screen are placed on the left side while the client screen data is placed on the right side. On the Pinnacle version the screen is on the right and the client's data is on the left. All other functions looks to remain the same. The new black background here is cool.
BTW- Pinnacle is by no means a weak program. I still use Studio version 14 as my main app. And I'm sure this Corel program is still a quality program as well but with updated features that I'm sure includes updated codecs and other behind the scene improvements.
BTW- Pinnacle is by no means a weak program. I still use Studio version 14 as my main app. And I'm sure this Corel program is still a quality program as well but with updated features that I'm sure includes updated codecs and other behind the scene improvements.
#3
Annon
- Member
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 15-November 12
Posted 04 May 2013 - 06:43 PM
166mhz said:
Pinnacle user might recognize the layout because it was bought by Corel. The only diff is the main video screen are placed on the left side while the client screen data is placed on the right side. On the Pinnacle version the screen is on the right and the client's data is on the left. All other functions looks to remain the same. The new black background here is cool. BTW- Pinnacle is by no means a weak program. I still use Studio version 14 as my main app. And I'm sure this Corel program is still a quality program as well but with updated features that I'm sure includes updated codecs and other behind the scene improvements.
You’re too optimistic, what are the crash statistics? And bug report statistics?
#4
PorkyRottenham
- Member
-
- Group: New Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: 25-April 13
Posted 11 May 2013 - 01:00 AM
I'm currently evaluating this software. It took me half an hour to figure out how to publish a file, because it's not called publish, export, output, or any other descriptive word. They called it Share, which suggests social networking.
Reducing the audio volume level on an imported clip also took some detective work. Like Share, the way to do it just wasn't obvious. Overall, the UI leaves something to be desired.
Readability suffers due to the white-on-black approach, which seems to be mandatory in all video editors today. Yeah it's really "cool," as the previous post says, but an option to switch it into "normal" mode would have been welcome.
The documentation is near-worthless, as is the norm in software today. If that weren't the case, deciphering the UI would have been much easier.
On the plus side, the program is stable and rock-solid. This cannot be taken for granted in today's "users do the QA for us" world. Because of this, and because of the overall low quality of most of the other entry level video editors I evaluated, and because I was forced to grade on the curve, I rate it highly.
This program and others in its class all tend to follow the "for cretins only" approach to UI design. Even a moderately configurable interface, which today's product management people haven't hit on yet, would make this program a standout.
Reducing the audio volume level on an imported clip also took some detective work. Like Share, the way to do it just wasn't obvious. Overall, the UI leaves something to be desired.
Readability suffers due to the white-on-black approach, which seems to be mandatory in all video editors today. Yeah it's really "cool," as the previous post says, but an option to switch it into "normal" mode would have been welcome.
The documentation is near-worthless, as is the norm in software today. If that weren't the case, deciphering the UI would have been much easier.
On the plus side, the program is stable and rock-solid. This cannot be taken for granted in today's "users do the QA for us" world. Because of this, and because of the overall low quality of most of the other entry level video editors I evaluated, and because I was forced to grade on the curve, I rate it highly.
This program and others in its class all tend to follow the "for cretins only" approach to UI design. Even a moderately configurable interface, which today's product management people haven't hit on yet, would make this program a standout.
Share this topic:
Page 1 of 1