Best Final Cut Pro alternatives for Linux?

General system Applications
1

Hi! I used to edit with Final Cut Pro, but since it’s not available on Linux, I’m looking for a solid alternative. I need something that’s fast, has pro-level features, and offers a smooth workflow.
Any recommendations? What’s your experience with video editing on Linux?

2

I’m not very knowledgable on this, but Davinci Resolve is pretty much the only professional grade video editor that I know of and even then it is a bit weird (like you can’t edit mp4 files because Blackmagic doesn’t want to pay for the codecs or something?). I know some that like Linux, but use a Mac for video editing because the way things are on Linux is a bit weird.

1 Like
3

MP4, H.264, H.265 and AAC Support

It’s a misconception that DaVinci Resolve free does not support the MP4 container type. It is more accurate to say DaVinci Resolve free does not support decoding or encoding H.264 and H.265 video, regardless of the container type.

For example, an MP4 containing an AV1 video stream and MP3 or PCM audio stream, can be decoded by DaVinci Resolve free.

Neither DaVinci Resolve free or Studio versions support decoding or encoding of AAC audio streams.
from the arch wiki Point 3.3
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/DaVinci_Resolve

4 Likes
4

For simple to intermediate video editing, I use Kdenlive and Shotcut. Both work well. I’ve not yet given DaVinci Resolve a shot, so I can’t offer any opinions on that.

See more here: Final Cut Pro Alternatives for Linux

4 Likes
5

I professionally edit under Linux using DaVinci Resolve Studio. It is well worth the investment over the free version and you only need to pay for it once, to have perpetual access to all major future releases.

The non-free Studio version includes many quality-of-life features that the free lacks, as well as many enhancement capabilities, such as upscaling, noise reduction, de-flicker, etc. Importantly, the non-free Studio version supports H.264 and H.265 codecs, which saves a whole lot of time and disk space otherwise spent transcoding, if you deal with those formats a lot.

I will caution, to fully utilise DaVinci Resolve Studio, you need a pretty powerful dedicated GPU, ideally Nvidia, with a generous amount of VRAM. It is highly GPU optimised, and therefore dependant.

3 Likes
6

A big reason I haven’t tried it out yet

1 Like
7

When you mention a pretty powerful gpu, would the Dell XPS 7590’s NVidia GeForce GTX 1650 qualify?

8

It really depends how you intend to user DaVinci Resolve.

The GTX 1650 has 4GB of VRAM. I started using DaVinci Resolve with a GTX 970, which also had 4GB of VRAM.

I ran into issues of insufficient VRAM. Now that’s not to say you will. What you plan to do with DaVinci Resolve, and how you go about it, will really determine this. Here are two very different scenarios:

  • If you plan to use DaVinci Resolve to perform basic editing tasks, like cuts, basic transitions, minor adjustments to image and sound, I expect it’ll run very well.

  • If you plan to use DaVinci Resolve to colour grade and enhance footage, perhaps performing noise reduction, upscaling, de-flickering, applying overlay effects, or working with 4K footage or higher, then you’ll possibly run into problems with a GTX 1650 if attempting to more than just one of those things at a time.

I now use a Nvidia A4000 16GB (similar to a GTX 3070). I still manage to hit the VRAM limit from time to time, and I’ll need to adjust my workflow accordingly.

1 Like
9

Thanks! You’ve suggested a few options, so I’m sure I’ll find something that works for me.