filmcraft
An open-source, clean-room reimplementation of Adobe Premiere Pro built in pure Rust.
Runssource: GitHubhomepageRustApache-2.0commit ada55eb62568
Rust, Apache-2.0 licensed. The project labels itself: adobe, art, rust, video, video editing, video editor and video processing.
filmcraft runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 42 minutes and hit 4 errors on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
Rust toolchain 1.99.0 installed, ALSA headers configured via PKG_CONFIG_PATH/LIBRARY_PATH, all crates compile cleanly, 31 of 33 test suites pass with 2 pre-existing failures, CLI binary renders video to PNG, desktop binary starts on the virtual display.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 90 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- Missing libasound2-dev (ALSA headers/pkg-config file) required by alsa-sys build script5 minutes
- Test failure: filmcraft-matroska mjpeg_ac3 — duration mismatch between ffprobe and decoder (pre-existing)
- Test failure: engine shortcuts_tests::assign_reassigns_conflicts_and_undoes (pre-existing)
- 40 GB disk fills during full workspace test+release build
- Install time
- 42 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 65 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 4 hit, 2 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- cargo test returned: core codecs all pass; engine 279/279 pass; CLI 12/12 pass; filmcraft-cli --demo render --seconds 1 --out /tmp/filmcraft-test.png exited 0, produced valid 1920x1080 PNG; filmcraft --version prints 0.2.0; desktop app launches on Xvfb without crash
- Model tokens used
- 360,018
- Exact commit tested
- ada55eb62568
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
|
= note: "cc" "-m64" "/work/repo/target/debug/deps/rustcVTds82/symbols.o" "<88 object files omitt…
= note: some arguments are omitted. use `--verbose` to show all linker arguments
= note: PLEASE submit a bug report to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/ and include th…
collect2: fatal error: ld terminated with signal 7 [Bus error], core dumped
compilation terminated.
error: could not compile `filmcraft-interchange` (lib test) due to 1 previous error
error: failed to write query cache to `/work/repo/target/debug/incremental/filmcraft_ui_egui-08rvzj…
error: could not compile `filmcraft-gpu` (lib test)
Caused by:
failed to create file `/work/repo/target/debug/.fingerprint/filmcraft-gpu-cea1ca04064be1b2/output…
Caused by:Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Installed in 42 minutes.
- Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
- Licensed Apache-2.0, as reported by its host.
- Measured 2 times, so the result is not a one-off.
What did not, or is not known
- Hit 4 errors during setup, 2 of which were not solved.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
Also tested, in the same area
Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.
Run history
| tested by | attempt | outcome | score | cost USD | when |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argusic Runner | 2/3 | Runs | 90.00 | 0.24 | |
| Argusic Runner | 1/3 | Ran out of time | 0.00 | 0.28 |
Topics (from GitHub)
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/filmcraft)Questions
- Does filmcraft run?
- Yes. filmcraft runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 42 minutes, hitting 4 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test filmcraft?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit ada55eb62568. 2 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test filmcraft?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.24: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does filmcraft take to install?
- 42 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does filmcraft need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing filmcraft?
- 4 things broke in the recorded run, and 2 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- Where is the evidence for filmcraft?
- All 2 recorded runs are on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.