Today Microsoft will release their newest version of Windows Live Movie Maker. This version allows for greater editing of videos including standard definition (4:3) videos and high definition (16:9) video support.Windows Live Movie Maker allows for direct upload to both YouTube and Facebook (though plug-ins). Users are also able to burn straight to DVD, play video on high definition (HD) televisions and save in a variety of standard and high definition resolutions - 480i, 720i, 720p and 1080p. Auto Movie allows users to easily create a video automatically in under one minute using selected images, captions, a title and soundtrack to go along with the slides.
The new Movie Maker comes with dozens of polished features over previous versions. Live Movie Maker introduces a smarter storyboard, allowing faster and easier editing than before; audio editing within the storyboard is also available. Detailed animations are included for adjusting videos and images with a range of filters and transitions.
Updated: Windows Live Movie Maker 14 is available today for download here. The download is now live, and includes today's QFE patches for the various Windows Live applications. You can download Windows Live Movie Maker separately, here.
4:3 and 16:9 represent Aspect Ratios, and not SD or HD. You can have a 4:3 HD 720p HD video.
might wanna say:
"including full screen (4:3) videos and wide screen (16:9) video support"
Wrong. 720p is a video industry standard that has, by definition, a 16:9 AR.
Today, of course, 720p usually means 16:9 (or WIDER) frame, but it doesn't work the other way around. 16:9 does NOT mean HD picture. You can have 16:9 SD video (e.g. DVDs). That's my point.
You're absolutely correct that 16:9 doesn't mean or even imply HD, but 720p is specifically defined as 16:9.
From Wikipedia:
Today, of course, 720p usually means 16:9 (or WIDER) frame, but it doesn't work the other way around. 16:9 does NOT mean HD picture. You can have 16:9 SD video (e.g. DVDs). That's my point.
720p specifications are 720 horizontal lines and 1280 vertical lines (which is 16:9). It can't be 4:3 unless you add black lines to the video itself to make it 16:9.
You can't say today 720p means that ... 720p is a standard with specifications. If the specifications are not respected then it's not 720p. And the specifications include a resolution with an aspect ration of 16:9.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/720p
480 can be letterboxed (top and bottom) to become 16:9.
As an afterthought... No offense intended, but if you want to cite something as a credible source, Wikipedia isn't really the best place, its community edited, I could go there right now and change an article to say whatever the hell I wanted it to. As a perfect (though rather extreme) example, I could change the article about the planet Earth to say it was flat, meaning that anyone could then say "Wikipedia says it is so, so it must be true..."
If there is a standard, it must be set by someone, maybe cite the website of the people who control the standard.
Last edited by lexa000 on 20 Aug 2009 - 00:09
As an afterthought... No offense intended, but if you want to cite something as a credible source, Wikipedia isn't really the best place, its community edited, I could go there right now and change an article to say whatever the hell I wanted it to. As a perfect (though rather extreme) example, I could change the article about the planet Earth to say it was flat, meaning that anyone could then say "Wikipedia says it is so, so it must be true..."
If there is a standard, it must be set by someone, maybe cite the website of the people who control the standard.
Can you post a pic of that flat earth wiki edit?
As an afterthought... No offense intended, but if you want to cite something as a credible source, Wikipedia isn't really the best place, its community edited, I could go there right now and change an article to say whatever the hell I wanted it to. As a perfect (though rather extreme) example, I could change the article about the planet Earth to say it was flat, meaning that anyone could then say "Wikipedia says it is so, so it must be true..."
If there is a standard, it must be set by someone, maybe cite the website of the people who control the standard.
Dont' be a dolt
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dolt
Damn! where are all those previous versions ?
I remember Movie maker 2.2 only the last version
Damn! where are all those previous versions ?
I remember Movie maker 2.2 only the last version
Thanks, I thought maybe I'd fallen asleep for a long, long time. Guess this is sort of like WinNT 3.1 (no 1.0, or 2.0 for those of you too young to remember)
Damn! where are all those previous versions ?
I remember Movie maker 2.2 only the last version
Thanks, I thought maybe I'd fallen asleep for a long, long time. Guess this is sort of like WinNT 3.1 (no 1.0, or 2.0 for those of you too young to remember)
I think that was done to align NT with Window/WFW's version numbering. It was odd, though.
Yes it was to align with Win 3.1. Windows for Workgroups was already at 3.11 when NT came out, and then NT 3.5 came shortly after that... I never agreed with that standard. I feel that version numbers have a specific meaning. I'm ok with names (XP, Vista, etc) however I understand why companies bypass this as I cannot count the number of times I used to hear; "Im running WIndows 97" Me: "do you mean Office 97?" "What's the difference?" So for the average user I feel that names are a better way to identify.
/rant
/rant
I don't like the names/year thing either. Names can be confusing and labeling something "X 2009" makes it sound old in January even when it's perfectly fine.
But iLife come free with every mac
But a Mac costs $$$ more than a PC, so you're still buying the software, technically.
Are you allowed to insert music clips that 'cross over' clips? Can they start in the middle of a clip? I'm not sure how this can be accomplished with a storyboard alone.
On the upside, uploading to Youtube and Facebook in HD are fantastic additions.
Not really, there isn't much else that in this area on Windows, let alone for free. I'm sure plenty will use it and not care about wmv only output.
Your comment is too glaring of an oversight.
There's a timeline.
Wrong. The "Check for New Version" button simply takes you to the download page for the Windows Live Essentials installer, which shows that the current version is already installed. It doesn't offer a patch to continue using it.
I got the same message and it sent me to a page where I could continue using the beta. This was a few days ago, the page might be different now.
Version 14???? Really? I thought we were on version 3 of movie maker.
OK, that makes sense, in a way, but even then they have artificially jumped the version numbers of many of the other apps in the suite as well.
At least that isn't as bad as jumping from version 6 (Windows Movie Maker in Vista) to version 14 (Windows Live Movie Maker), or jumping from version 8.5 for the previous version of Windows Live Messenger to version 14 for the new one. I won't even get into the insanity of calling the first version of Windows Live Mail version 12, then jumping to version 14. Windows Mail in Vista (which Windows Live Mail replaces) was version 6, as was the last version of Outlook Express.
Last edited by roadwarrior on 19 Aug 2009 - 11:52
Personally, I get caught up on occasion by Apple's OS X versions sometimes.
How? Their version numbers are simple and straightforward.
MS just didn't want the average beast to panic when he downloads Windows Live Suite 14 and find different versions of the included software.
MS needs to always keep the herd in consideration.
Microsoft jumps version 12 to 14 and skips 19...because they think '13' is unlucky number...that's why Office 2007 is ver. 12 and 2010 is ver. 14
edit-their system req screen is really confusing about this... it says xp sp2 or greater but then below it says not supported on xp... ??
What is confusing about that? All of the Windows Live tools EXCEPT Movie Maker are supported on XP.
Last edited by roadwarrior on 19 Aug 2009 - 13:05
XP already comes with a Movie Maker. Maybe this new version uses DWM or something else that's part of Vista/7 but not XP?
reference: http://www.istartedsomething.com/20090818/...latform-update/
XP is old and on the way out. Get with the times.
So Microsoft want's to promote their new OS, get over it
Should have happened 5 years back.
You haven't used much of iMove 09.
i'm so lost in the new app. They tried to make it for stupid people and I think i've made the app harder.
on the install it does not say beta
But mine crashes when I change the aspect ratio to 16:9.
Any help?
(doing that now..)
I run windows 7 Pro (64bit)
The program can't start because WLXPhotoBase.dll is missing from your computer
http://messengergeek.spaces.live.com/blog/...BDA1!3332.entry
Last edited by Jose_49 on 20 Aug 2009 - 00:21
Didn't hold up Win7 release with the code, and hopefully they can do more incremental updates as it goes.
The lack of 64-bit support is a bit baffling though ... or maybe I've missed something.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.