-
Editing Today – another Philippic
-
LOL. No. Of course not.
What an absolute delight.
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “So the enemy for me is not faster cutting – it’s multicam and the NLE technology that makes multicam editing so much easier than it’s ever been before.”
I see what you’re saying now, and yes, perhaps you’re right. Thanks for making that more clear.
It is easier than ever to stick more cameras everywhere, and they don’t even necessarily need a crew of people to operate the one camera. A very small crew of people can operate a larger number of cameras. Also, the cost has come down as you don’t have film tools to shoot, develop, and transfer.
And I also agree with you about the 2 shot conversation, I just noted that in my last post! 🙂 This is definitely an art that sometimes gets forgotten.
There’s a scene, in Hitchcock’s North by Northwest which, for me, really highlights the art of conversation. I remember watching this scene before I really started editing, and was stuck by the number of camera positions in this one conversation that involves mostly three people (with appearances from a few more) and how much the different characters move around the room (and switch their position, therefore their posture), and how natural it all feels.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IV4IWsXkNI8
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Herb Sevush] “Not that I haven’t beaten you over the head with this too much, but that was your exact reasoning why you didn’t want FCPX multicam to deal with more than 8 angles. It’s only “bloat” when your not using a particular feature, when you’re using that feature it’s a fantastic tool, so be careful what you wish for.”
Go back and re-read my writing about that 8 angle thing ( I actually mentioned 4 angles in my iBook, IIRC. I was CRYSTAL clear that I felt that *I* couldn’t make sense out of 16 moving multicam clips and still make qualitatively correct decisions about which of those angles was the best one to cut to. I never said that nobody could.
I also said I was delighted to learn that in the X multicam implementation, there was no reason for me to have to do that, since the way it was conceived, anyone doing their multicam switching in an “after the event” environment could take their time and do additive passes – concentrating on a subset of the display first, then cutting in additional angles as required. It was, from day one, an excellent implementation of giving someone dealing with many angles a way to make the best editing decisions with ease.
And, of course, it implies absolutely nothing about how many times an editor actually chooses to switch angles. So you can certainly “cut” just as slowly in multicam as you can in single stream editing.
So the point kinda falls flat, to my thinking.
But whatever.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
OK, I’m going to read all the replies eventually, but I’ve got a class of high school seniors working on their major senior project (shooting, editing, etc) in about 15 minutes, so forgive me if I state something that’s already been said.
When it comes to editing, the only thing that matters is the story and the emotion you’re trying to get. If you’re a filmmaker, and you don’t know your story well enough, or don’t have a clear idea of what you are trying to express to your audience, those tools will at least get you something competent looking. It will, most likely, be forgotten with everything else that it looks like, but at least it won’t look like a Youtube video. However, I love the idea of these tools being available to a filmmaker who know’s what they want, shoots for it, but has the option later to discover something they didn’t know they had on the day of the shoot. That’s amazing!
I think back to a remembrance of Stanley Kubrick (I think by Spielberg) of when Kubrick was so excited that he could, through the use of technology, cut bits and pieces of dialogue together and get a performance that either better matches what he had intended, or through the wonder of experimentation, could get him something better. This is awesome!
Of course, you’re going to have people out there who, for any number of reasons, are not clear on what they want. They’ll use these multicam shoots and massive edits just tonsure that the story is told, let alone why it’s told in that manner. But isn’t that how it is with technology in general? AS new tech comes out, there is always of flood of people who get their hands on it, industry professionals cry that it’s the end of their job or how their job is done, then – because that flood of people, make a flood of crap – things normalize and the true professionals and visionaries use the tools in a way that is truly magical.
Having said all of this, I have been wondering lately… Who are the new auteurs? We have a few old ones left, Scorsese, Spielberg, Allen, Coppola, and even those guys aren’t necessarily producing at the level we may imagine their older works are at. But Who’s the next Kubrick? Kuroaswa? Bergman? Fellini? I don’t know. It’s certainly hard to tell when it’s hard to make a movie and get it into theaters that isn’t about a superhero…
As an high school instructor, trying to get my students the tools to work in our field, I try to hammer it home: story, story, story.
Me – “Whatever you want to do, does it make sense in the context of your story?”
Them – “I don’t know…”
Me – “Don’t you think you should?
Them – “Um, OK.”
Me – “You have to know your story and your emotion for every frame of your movie before you shoot. I don’t care where you put the camera, I don’t care where you edit as long as you did it for a specific reason. That’s what counts. You made the image, the edit, the complete production a certain way because of specific intent that helps communicate your story to the audience; not just because it was easy.”Winston A. Cely
Editor/Owner | Della St. Media, LLC17″ MacBook Pro | 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7
4 GB RAM | Final Cut Studio 3 | FCPX | Motion 5 | Compressor 4“If you can talk brilliantly enough about a subject, you can create the consoling illusion it has been mastered.” – Stanley Kubrick
-
I can’t believe I forgot the Coen Brothers, who edit all their own movies. My hero’s on writing, directing, and editing.
Winston A. Cely
Editor/Owner | Della St. Media, LLC17″ MacBook Pro | 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7
4 GB RAM | Final Cut Studio 3 | FCPX | Motion 5 | Compressor 4“If you can talk brilliantly enough about a subject, you can create the consoling illusion it has been mastered.” – Stanley Kubrick
-
[Bill Davis] “Go back and re-read my writing about that 8 angle thing”
From the time capsule
[Herb Sevush] “Multi-Cam essentials
1) The ability to create a multi-clip with a minimum of 25 angles, no limit would be better. ”
Wow.
I’m gonna argue directly against this idea. I don’t want to turn my laptop into your idea of a multi-cam monster. At ALL.
To me, 25 angles is at LEAST 17 too many. – at least until Thunderbolt fully implements the all optical roadmap.
Anyway, I personally I don’t want the dev team to spend a minute coding in stuff that only a tiny fraction of the users will ever really need.
https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/18336
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
From what I know of Hitchcock. He had his scenes very carefully laid out and story-boarded with each shot included and then shot them exactly that way. At least from an example of the Birds, that is how it went. Not a lot of room for editing and extra cuts.
I hate the Bourne movies with shaking camera and super fast cuts to simulate drama in the fight scenes.
Great discussion above.
-
[Herb Sevush] “I’m gonna argue directly against this idea. I don’t want to turn my laptop into your idea of a multi-cam monster. At ALL.
To me, 25 angles is at LEAST 17 too many. – at least until Thunderbolt fully implements the all optical roadmap.
Anyway, I personally I don’t want the dev team to spend a minute coding in stuff that only a tiny fraction of the users will ever really need. “
OK. I’s ME. With the 2011 view from my firewire centric suite, managing 25 angles seemed WAY too complex.
Just remind me of the date of that post? How long after X was released did I post this gem?
Cuz if the point is that some of the thinking I had when I was first learning X has —- well, insufficient? Then I’ll plead absolutely guilty.
I’ve learned a bit – AND my thinking has evolved since then. (Tho I did kinda peg my opinion to the ability to USE multicam streams affordably with the Thunderbolt reference, something we actually have now that we didn’t back then.)
So again, mea culpa. I made a woeful and ill conceived post.
Thanks for brining it to my attention.
Or as Jackson Browne sang “don’t remind me of my failures – I have not forgotten them.”
In my case, I guess I have.
Ces’t la vie.
You win.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
[Bill Davis] “Ces’t la vie.
You win.”
I was as wrong as anyone back then. I thought FCP7 would not survive new OSX updates. I didn’t believe Apple would stick to their white paper promises. I didn’t believe that Apple would build a new Mac Pro.
My reason for the post was to advise against the habit of telling coders to stop coding for things that you don’t need … yet.
Software “bloat” is often software that you don’t fully use. I find After Effects to be bloated beyond comprehension, but I realize it’s mostly because I don’t use it much. I don’t think Aindreas or Walter finds it bloated, they probably have a list of features they wish were added. Same with editing software – it’s bloat till you need it, then it’s a feature.
On the other hand, I will take the “win.”
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “On the other hand, I will take the “win.””
If you’re doing NAB this year, I’ll even pay off with a beer.
Let me know.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up