-
Codex – more color tools
-
[Oliver Peters] “In most projects, that’s a method that almost never really pans out when you get into edit. There are very few projects that I’ve ever edited that only used the hero take.”
If thats how you think about it – it won’t.
It’s not “only using the hero take.” at all. It’s FOCUSING your initial attention on what you saw ONCE, in the field – and preserving that instinct into the suite.
Int he X keyword system, you ALWAYS have the option to step back and re-mine everything. Extend, revert, re think. For me the keyboarding in X isn’t EVER about permanence – it’s about fluidity. It’s focus here NOW – but if that doesn’t work – to re-focus takes only seconds.
That’s nowhere near “only using” anything.
It’s certainly IS a different mindset than the way I used to work when whether I put a subclip into a particular folder or not – was the primary thinking I was conditioned to employ.
Just differing styles – related to conditioned use of different tools, I suppose.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bill Davis] “If thats how you think about it – it won’t.
“It really has nothing to do with a mindset.
For example, an in-house agency spot that i’m working on currently. The final vo was recorded. Notes of good takes were taken in the field during the vo recording session. Those notes were passed onto me to make the edit “easier.” I then placed the hero vo takes into the spot and the result was:
Creative Director: “I don’t like that read at all.”
Client: ” What about mixing in other reads for some of the lines?”So basically all on-set notes were thrown out the window once the vo was brought into edit.
An Alternate approach then:
Bring in the vo, lay it out in a sequence with waveforms showing. From the waveforms, quickly mark the in-points of all takes. this takes about two minutes.
Then bring in Creative director and client and listen to all takes and drop in on the fly to the spot.
To me this is much more realistic to how an average agency edit goes down. If I’m working solo then the on-set takes might be a good starting point but by no means would those notes get me to the finish line.
I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
– Orson Welles -
[Bill Davis] “If thats how you think about it – it won’t.”
It’s not that. It’s that I work with clients who always want to see something other than what was selected on site. Selecting on site is often inadequate, because focus is distracted. When people can finally concentrate on post, their ideas evolve and change.
I do a lot of narrative and in docu-style edits, I am always “frankenbiting”. When I edit dramatic scenes, I will often take pieces of 75% or more of the takes that were shot in order to mold the best overall performances.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
I like getting field notes because it gives me a place to start. Sure, it might change once the producer/director/client steps into the room, but I’ve gotten my first cut done faster because I built everything off the circle takes instead of having to watch each take and decided for myself. Eve if I watch each take and choose which one I think is best that doesn’t meant that the producer/director/client won’t want a different one.
I’m all about getting that rough cut done as soon as possible because you never really know what’s working and what’s not until you see it all in context and, at least for me, having good field notes helps get me there faster. I’d rather have information and not need it than need information and not have it.
I worked on a docu-series a while back that had horrible communication from the field and it slowed down post by weeks. We almost never got field notes which meant that the story producers had to watch all the footage before being able to decide on story beats, pull selects, and pass it off to the editors. Good field notes wouldn’t spend up the process immensely. Sure, if they felt something was missing they would need to go back into the raw and hunt for it, but their initial pass would happen much quicker.
-
I should add that I think where the difference in opinion lies is this: you (Bill) as a producer/director/editor, versus myself and other, who only edit. You have the luxury of making an editorial decision on site that you will then carry through in post. Because you have made that decision, you have the conviction that it is the right one. You have a vested interest emotionally. OTOH, the editor who wasn’t on location, can and should be more impartial. Hence a difference in styles and philosophies.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[greg janza] “Then bring in Creative director and client and listen to all takes and drop in on the fly to the spot.”
Why, that sounds exactly like… auditions.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Oliver Peters] “Hence a difference in styles and philosophies.
“Okay, there might be a good measure of truth in this.
We oftennthink what we expect to think – at least to a certain degree.But I’d still prefer to give everyone (client, director, and yes, me if I’m going to cut it) an iPad or iPhone on set and have everyone codify their opinions of what they saw in the on-set monitors.
I just don’t want to waste my most valuable prep time skimmering more Crap than I actually need to – not if I know everythings still at hand if I need EVERY instance of Line 15 for said potential frankenbitng.
But I agree it depends on expectations, and those are a function of both working habits AND the nature of the tech you’ve become accustomed to.
And so it goes.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Oliver Peters] “Because you have made that decision, you have the conviction that it is the right one. You have a vested interest emotionally. OTOH, the editor who wasn’t on location, can and should be more impartial. “
It sounds a bit like you’re saying the disconnected editor workflow is superior. Let me push back on that a bit. Especially with documentary-style work where accuracy and mood is important. And you might only be talking about scripted work.
I’m not sure how much “vested interest” there is, seems to me to be a bit of a canard. I do think when you experience something in real-life you are gleaning a lot more information that the editor doesn’t have access to. You seem to be suggesting this is freeing. Maybe in some cases it is, but I would say it may be more limiting.
By experiencing it in person, you have better memory for the footage/events. There is a reason why all competitors in memory competitions use a “Memory Palace”. Because our brains are designed to attach spatial cues to our memories. Editors never have any spatial information as to where this happened in relationship to where that happened.
————————–
Brett Sherman
One Man Band (If it’s video related I’ll do it!)
I work for an institution that probably does not want to be associated with my babblings here. -
[Brett Sherman] “And you might only be talking about scripted work.”
Yes, I was. That seemed to be the context of the discussion.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Brett Sherman] “Editors never have any spatial information as to where this happened in relationship to where that happened.”
Neither does the audience, and I think that goes to the point of a ‘disconnected’ editor being advantageous. If the director looks at the footage and mentally fills in gaps with his/her prior knowledge from being on set/location then that can be problematic because the audience won’t be privy to that same information. I think a primary role of the editor is to be a surrogate for the audience and being disconnected from production makes that task easier because all you know is what the footage tells you.
I’ve actually gotten a fair amount of doc work, in part, by playing up the advantages of being ‘ignorant’ coming into a project because our audience will also be ‘ignorant’ when sitting down to watch it. Many times there is an energy/magic/excitement that can happen in production that colors people’s memories, but that same energy/magic/excitement doesn’t necessarily translate into the recorded footage. And ultimately what’s recorded in the footage is the only thing that matters.
There is certainly a collaboration that needs to happen between the director and the editor to rectify the differences between “this is what I wanted to capture” vs “this is what you actually captured” and I think that process generally makes for a better end product.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up