Hi Linux users,
I decided to find out why people are raving about Shotcut, and it’s a great project.
Running Linux Mint 22.1 on an AMD Ryzen 9, I started with the Flatpak v25.05.11, but it became unresponsive more than once after my first long editing sessions. Switching to the much older Ubuntu APT v24.02.05 .29, it seems to be more stable.
Can anyone share their experiences with the versions and which one I should be using?
Thanks in advance.
I also run Linux Mint. AppImage works great. I use it so I can easily run older versions of Shotcut when revisiting older project files. The portable tar also works, but is extra steps unless debugging something.
Also, get the files from Shotcut.org or from the GitHub repo. The Ubuntu packages are unofficial, unsupported, and sometimes buggy from a bad build process.
All recent official versions have been great for me, although I don’t have Flatpak experience.
It’s my first time using AppImage, and see it’s a containerized package just like Flatpak. This AppImage is buttery smooth and has not crashed. It’s v25.05.11 for reference.
LinuxMint 22.1, I use flatpak version, because it is the only version that works stably and sees hardware codecs vaapi (I don’t know why, but any other versions do not see my integrated intel video card). I have no complaints about the work of flatpak, it works correctly and always the newest version. Here, I’m waiting for the new 25.07 
I’m seeing 25.07.26 in Flathub now and 25.05.11 on the AppImage, so I will try the Flatpak again, as I like that LM offers to update the Flatpaks.
Try working in the flatpak version. If it works for you without problems, I recommend using it, since in Linux Mint flatpak applications can be updated automatically and you do not have to download anything separately when a new version of shotcut is available, the system will do everything itself.
Something to consider for workflow, though… if someone needs three months to edit a video (i.e., major documentary involving focus groups), an automatic Shotcut upgrade is not necessarily a good thing. The new version may introduce unexpected problems or new behaviors to an older project file. An extreme past example is when WebVfx was removed, and a future extreme example might be when Glaxnimate is no longer bundled (if that is still the plan). Therefore, any in-progress project that depended on those toolkits at that time would break mid-project. The only way to finish those projects would be by having a good backup of the project file, and then down-grading the Shotcut version to stay the same. It is often an unnecessary risk to upgrade in the middle of a major project. This is a significant benefit of the AppImage files… different long-running projects can be in different versions, and the version of Shotcut that is needed for each project can be easily stored and started.
To be fair to the developers, they work hard to ensure backward compatibility and do a great job. But if you’re an editor in a demanding environment, you are still ultimately responsible for all processes, risks, and results, not the developers. AppImage is a great way to manage those risks.
If your production requirements are not as long-term or mission-critical, then versioning may not be a concern. But it’s still good to know the advantages and disadvantages of each method. Regardless of the method, having good backups of the project files is paramount.
AppImage is also more contained and portable. You can run it on a friend’s computer from a flash drive and leave no trace that you were there. AppImage can even run in a no-network LiveUSB session if you want to test a new Linux distro. Flatpak can’t do that.
Choose what works for you, of course. Since you mentioned AppImage was new to you, I wanted to provide some background on its unique features and selling points.
That was where I was going with this…
Since this is a simple project, and a week ago I would never have thought to edit anything until I watched Kevin Stratvert’s video on Shotcut, I will open a new, more focused thread on what I’m aiming for.
I do appreciate the forum members’ for their willingness to help a newbie.
Thanks.
Just use what is convenient for you personally. I find flatpak convenient, it is the most stable for me. I have nothing against other application formats, each has its own advantages and disadvantages. On my capricious laptop, the flatpak version showed the best speed and stability.
The plan and hope is to continue to include the glaxnimate plugin for the engine but not to bundle the Glaxnimate UI tool when it is next released since it adds KDE dependencies. Hopefully the backend code for the plugin is still Qt-only. It will be a separate download available from KDE. That provides project compatibility with a smaller download/install for Shotcut, esp. for those who do not use it.
Thanks for the clarification.
I have Linux Mint with Cinnamon window manager. Does Glaxnimate require KDE dependencies, or can it use Qt-only?
Glaxnimate is currently Qt only and comes bundled with Shotcut including Flatpak, which you access through either: New Animation or the Mask: Draw filter.
A footnote to the thread: Flatpak 25.07.26 has worked flawlessly since making this post. I have kept the AppImages, just in case.
This topic was automatically closed after 90 days. New replies are no longer allowed.