blind is a collection of command line video editing utilities.

Video format

blind uses a raw video format with a simple container. A file begins with an plain-text line, containing the number of frames, the width, the height, and the pixel format, all separated by a single regular blank space, without and leading or tailing white space. After this line, which ends with an LF, there is a NUL-byte followed by the 4 characters “uivf” (unportable, interim video format). This head is followed by the video frame-by-frame with row-major frames. Pixels are independently encoded, and are encoded unscaled CIE XYZ with non-premultiplied alpha and without any transfer-function, with values stored in native doubles or optionally in native floats. These two configurations are the only options, but the container format is designed so this can be changed arbitrarily in the future.


Creating videos without graphics, are you insane?

Yes, but see the rationale below!

Doesn't raw video takes up a lot of space?

Yes it does, a 4-channel pixel encoded with double takes 32 bytes. A 1280-by-720 frame with this pixel format takes 29.4912 MB (SI), which means you can only fit almost 3391 frames in 100 GB, which is about 113 seconds or 1:53 minutes with a framerate of 30 fps. Therefore, you probably do not want to store anything in this format unless you know you have room for it, or if it is very small segment of your video, which unfortunately becomes a bit of a problem when reversing a video. However, when possible, feed the resulting video directly to blind-to-video to convert it into a compressed, lossless video format, if the video is not too large, you can choose to compress it with bzip2 instead.

For what kind of video editing is blind designed?

It is designed for composing new videos. It is not designed for making small changes as this can probably be done faster with a graphical video editor or with ffmpeg which would also be much faster.

Does it support farbfeld?

Of course. If you want to use farbfeld, you can use the -f flag for blind-to-image and blind-from-image, this will cause the programs to convert directly to or from farbfeld without using convert(1).

Why doesn't blind uses encode pixels like farbfeld?

blind and farbfeld solve completely different problems. farbfeld solves to problem of storing pictures in a simply way that can easily be viewed and edited. blind does not try to solve the problem of storing videos, video takes a lot of space and need compression designed especially for video or three-dimensional raster images. Compressed video cannot be efficiently edited because compression takes too long. Instead blind solves the problem of efficiently processing video: thousands of pictures. Because blind doesn't try to create a format for storing images, therefore it's format doesn't need to be portable. Furthermore, due to legacy in television (namely, that of black-and-white television), video formats do not store values in sRGB, but rather in Y'UV, so there is next to no benefit to storing colours in sRGB.

Why doesn't blind use sRGB?

If I tell you I use CIE XYZ, you will only have two questions: “how are values stored?” and “is Y scaled to [0, 100] or [0, 1]?” When I tell you I use sRGB you have more questions: “do you support out-of-gamut colours?”, “how are values stored?”, “which scale do you use?”, and “is the transfer-function applied?”

CIE XYZ also has the advantage of having the brightness encoded in one of its parameters, Y, and obtaining the chroma requires only simply conversion to a non-standardise colour model that with the same Y-value.

Why does blind use CIE XYZ instead of CIE L*a*b*?

Because CIE L*a*b* is not linear, meaning that it requires unnecessary calculations when working with the colours.

Why does blind use CIE XYZ instead of Y'UV or YUV?

Y'UV has good performance for converting to sRGB and is has good subsampling quality, but it is not a good for editing. Y'UV is non-linear, so it has the same disadvantages as CIE L*a*b*. Y'UV does not have its transfer-function applied directly to it's parameters, instead it is a linear transformation if the sRGB with its transfer-function applied. This means that no performance is gained during conversion to or from cooked video formats by using YUV. CIE XYZ also has the advantage that it is well-known and has a one-step conversion to almost all colour models. It also have the advantages that it's parameters are named X, Y, Z, which makes it very easy to choose parameter when storing points instead of colours in a video.

Doesn't blind have any audio support?

No, it is not clear that there is actually a need for this. There are good tools for editing audio, and ffmpeg can be used to extract the audio streams from a video or add it to a video.

Is it really feasible to edit video without a GUI?

Depends on what you are doing. Many things can be done without a GUI, and some thing are easier to do without one. If you find that you need GUI it possible to combine blind with a graphical editor. Furthermore, blind could be used in by a graphical editor if one were to write a graphical editor to use blind.



You can browse its source code repository or get a copy using git with the following command:

git clone


Also make sure to check your package manager. The following distributions provide packages: