Show IH: Apollodorus Video - browser-based video editor that runs locally
A few weeks ago, I made a browser-based batch image editor called Apollodorus. The idea was simple enough: pass in as many images as I want, have the same operations (crop, resize, watermark, etc) applied to all of them, and then it spits out all those images with the edits applied. Everything is done client-side too, which is good for privacy, and also good because I was worried about slow WiFi and bandwidth limits. The overall idea was simple, it worked fine in practice, and everything was good.
Then a little while ago, I wondered: could I do this with video too?
After some research, I realized the answer is "technically yes, but it's probably not a great idea." The biggest problem is how demanding it is to edit video if it's all being done client-side, especially via web frameworks like FFmpeg-wasm. From a hardware perspective, editing multiple images is extremely easy, but the same edits on multiple videos though... well, that can get really demanding. And what if it's being done on an old PC with bad specs? Or an old phone? Or a decade-old Chromebook? Would a batch video-editing tool that does everything client-side even make sense for that?
Well, I went and made it anyway. My reasoning is, being able to do client-side video editing from any device via the web is just too convenient. That's because I can't install proper video editing software on every device I use. I definitely can't even put regular ffmpeg on my computer at work because the I.T. Department would have a fit. But I can access a website and do most of what I need on there. I can access this from anywhere and since it's all done client side, I don't need to worry about slow WiFi or privacy or anything else. As long as the page loads, everything's good.
Anyway, I hope it comes in handy for other people. If you've ever needed to convert video or resize it or edit it, but don't have access to good software on whatever device you're on, then hopefully this will help out a lot.
Here's the link to the Apollodorus Video Editor: https://apollodorus.pages.dev/video
The IT department constraint you mentioned is actually the sharpest distribution insight in the whole post. "Can't install software on my work computer" is a specific, recurring problem for a large group of people: corporate marketing, comms, social media managers, anyone who does content work inside an organization with locked-down devices.
That's a much more specific persona than "people who need video editing." Most of them are actively paying for Clipchamp or using browser-based workarounds that don't work well. A client-side tool that loads anywhere and leaves no trace is genuinely useful in that context.
The hardware concern on old devices is real, but it probably matters less for that persona. Corporate machines are typically standardized. It's the older personal devices or Chromebooks where FFmpeg-wasm would struggle most.
What operations are getting the most use so far?
Internally, the resize and convert file type operations are getting the most use, though what actual customers are using, I have no idea since there's no analytics. I do hope to get actual customer feedback in the near future. :)
The privacy component makes a lot of sense here. ~
According to me, ‘runs locally’ can easily be dismissed as a technical detail, but for some people it’s actually the reason to choose the tool.
I appreciate that you guys didn’t stop at “technically possible”. This tradeoff they suffer from is very real for browser based video editing; convenience and privacy versus device performance
This leads me to believe that the sweet spot might be less about replacing desktop editors and more about those instances where it doesn’t make sense to install something.
The interesting question is likely which video tasks are light enough to feel fine on virtually any device. This might be a robust restriction on the product.
I think if people are only doing one or two operations (like resize or converting file types), the tasks will probably be light enough. That said, there's no actual limit on the amount of operations someone could do, so for all I know, there's someone out there doing 20+ operations on multiple videos just to see if they can, or because they work at a place that's surprisingly demanding and they want to see if this tool can handle the job. I'd be interested to hear from either situation.
Your real wedge is the sentence you almost threw away: "I can't put ffmpeg on my work computer because IT would have a fit." That's the whole product. Not "browser-based video editor" (crowded, and you admit client-side perf is rough), but "edit video on locked-down devices where you can't install anything." Work laptops, school Chromebooks, library PCs, wherever software is forbidden and the browser is the only door.
That reframes the perf weakness. Your buyer isn't choosing you over Premiere, they're choosing you over nothing, nothing else installs on that machine. "Slow but possible" beats "fast but blocked." The constraint you saw as weakness is who you're for.
Lead with the lockdown, not the batch. What device are people most stuck on?
There's no analytics, so I genuinely can't tell which devices most people are truly using. That said, I think most people I've talked to about it seem interested in using it on their laptops. Though with no analytics, I can only rely on customer feedback.
You don't need analytics for the question that matters. Device type matters less than why they reached for a browser tool instead of installing software. A laptop user who could install Premiere isn't your buyer, one whose IT blocks installs is. Same device, different reason.
The free version: ask people who already talk to you "what stopped you using your normal tool?" If it comes back "couldn't install anything here," you've confirmed the lockdown wedge with zero tracking. If it's "wanted something quick," that's a different product.
That also tells you where to find more, "can't install software" clusters: corporate laptops, school devices, locked-down orgs. Ask why, not just what device.
What do people say when you ask why they skipped their usual editor?
The “technically yes, but probably not a great idea” part is interesting. I’d be curious whether real usage ends up validating the convenience enough to outweigh the performance limitations.
I really hope so, though ironically since it all runs locally, I'll probably never know for sure unless people tell me.
That’s an interesting constraint — if the product can’t see usage directly, user feedback becomes much more important. Curious what kind of feedback you’re getting so far?