by Guillaume Choquette

It’s all about perception, at least according to this rendition. And speaking of renditions, the last image is of a visual effect being rendered, translating to “Editors actually sit and wait too often for the machine to complete the edit.” True.

There are other of these cartoons floating around – on producers, writers, etc. In fact, another one’s coming up in the next blog and kicks off a three part series. So stay tuned.

Less great news: For the past three weeks I’ve been writing the index – a tedious task that has meant that blogs (and other things in my life) have been less frequent. However…

Indexing is a lot like editing

…I’ve discovered. When deciding what terms to index I think about how a reader will look up things up in the book. Will s/he look up “click track?” which has only two entries. Or will “track, clik do?” This parallels how an editor constantly stands in for the audience, deciding what to show them next. Ralph Winters, A.C.E., whose pictures included Gaslight, The Pink Panther, 10, and Victor Victoria stated, “You’ve got to learn where the audience’s eye is going to be.”

Second parallel

You can’t create an index entry like this:

3-D, 9, 27, 55, 65, 72, 111, 113, 173, 176, 180-182, 195, 235-236, 282, 336, 347, 355-357, 404, 407.  These are too many pages for a reader to wade through to find the exact info they need. You have to break the wad of page numbers up with modifiers like this:

3-D, 27, 111, 113, 173, 347, 404, 407; disk finish, 355-357; editing, 9, 176, 180-182, 195; and sound, 282, 336; VFX, 55, 235-236; and workflow, 65, 72

And in the case of editing, you can’t bore or frustrate your audience or they will not recommend your show.

Director-editor Edward Dmytryk writes in his classic, ever-reprinted book: On Film Editing, An Introduction to the Art of Film Construction:  “… cutting should always be con­ceived to show the viewer what he should see at every point in the film. Sometimes it is what the viewer, whether or not he is aware of it, wants to see; some­times it is what the viewer, whether or not he likes it at the moment, should see; and some­times (quite often, really) it is what the director and/or cutter manipulate him.”

Third parallel

Indexing seems to go on forever, one word leading to another. For example “sound”: Should I also include “audio?” How about “track?” And how to handle “video tracks”? The choices are endless; one indexed word leading to another. I jump around, doing easy words to break up those like “editing” and “sound” that demand more thought. It’s endless, and yet, just like editing, someday soon I will make the last edit, er, refine the last entry. And get to blog and think about something else. See you soon, I hope!

I’ve known Herb since Ediflex revolutionized editing – making tape nonlinear – in the mid-80s. A former editor who began on film, he’s worked for Avid, Lightworks, then Avid again and a host of other Hollywood post production companies and hosted a weekly editor’s salon at a restaurant in Tinsel town for decades. Herb connects people and has always got his finger on the pulse. So I will be interested to see how the site takes off and grows.

Try it out and let me and PPP know what you think.

Examining an Editor’s Head

Writer Gavin Edwards did an intelligent job of getting inside the mind of an editor, explaining how we make editing decisions, observe rhythm, keep aware of the audience’s focus will be, compress time, and consider continuity.

Edwards also touched on crossing the line and modern style editing, with a great joke from Fincher about split screens. The director joked that he wanted to install a klaxon in the cutting room to “Stop them before they split again!”

I grew up on the NY Times and still get the Sunday edition with the weekly magazine section so was gratified to see an in-depth examination of how editors approach scenes and the whole. Admittedly, the article reminded me of my book, Film Editing 101: Great Cuts Every Filmmaker and Movie Lover Must Know where I pierce the veil on nearly 50 types of cuts editors make, including time compression (as well as expansion) and crossing the line and look at why an editor would make a certain type of cut and how it affects the audience.

Find the Best Editing System objectively compares no cost systems (Blender, Lightworks) to low cost systems (FORScene, FCP X) to high end babies (FCP, Premiere Pro, Avid). In addition to list price, you can compare operating systems by nine easily clickable, filterable, and sortable criteria including category, (consumer, prosumer, professional, or high end movie production), features (VFX, 3-D, color correction, storyboarding, etc.), and hard drive space required.

James Resetco, in business development for Find The Best, emailed me regarding their new tool: “All of our information is completely objective and human-curated to ensure accuracy as well as relevance.” Their writer, Thomas Samph added, “Between the brand name big hitters and the lesser known software sets, you’ll need to decide what features are best for your needs. With video editing software, quantity doesn’t always mean quality: expensive doesn’t always mean better.“

Find the Best also offers other free comparison tools – all in the form of database charts – for sound editing systems, digital cameras, cloud computing, and more.

Check out their tools and tell them and/or Joy what you think. FYI: This is not a paid advertisement. If Joy ever decides to takemoney for advertising, you’ll be the first to know.

Facing the Footage: How to avoid frustration and wasted time by editing confidently from the first frame

It makes no difference if you’re cutting digitally, directly on film, or on whatever format arises in the future: Whenever you edit a piece, you must confront the shot material.  Doc, drama, music video, promo, comedy – no matter the genre – you must carve out a meaningful story from the footage you receive. As the editor you must be the magician that delivers the rabbit from the hat in a way that absorbs the audience and fulfills the director’s vision. So where do you start?

To begin

But you gotta know the territory.
Charlie, a salesman, The Music Man

To begin, you’ve got to know your raw material in order to have an idea of how you’re going to edit it. View the footage for the scene and make mental and/or written notes about shots, lines, angles, or editing ideas. Keep field logs handy and know where each scene’s clips and bins are so you can quickly locate shots and not lose your train of thought during the heat of editing. Review any notes you took when screening dailies or that you received from the director. The late Dede Allen, editor of Bonnie and Clyde, The Breakfast Club, and other memorable features explained that: “If you have a great deal of coverage, you really can’t just go plowing through the whole thing; you’d never remember all of it… I make massive notes which I have if I need them, but I memorize the material so thoroughly that I seldom even look at my notes.”

Read the script or outline
Scripted show
You’ve already read the script but now you have the real, filmed version of a scene along. You also have the “lined pages” (set notes and shot descriptions) for the scene that the script supervisor labored over for your benefit. Familiarize yourself with both.

As you approach cutting the scene, you want to be familiar with it as well as the scenes before and after it. Since you usually edit a show out of sequence, it’s important to be clear on what the scene is about. Ask yourself: What led to this scene? What does this scene lead to?

Documentary, reality, or other non-scripted show
Review the paper cut and keep it and your logs of the shots handy as you edit. Since a non-scripted show typically has fewer guidelines than a scripted show, your editing will have a major impact on its content and structure. Initially you will be the one who decides what the audience sees and learns and when they see it and learn it, so you want to know your shots and laser in on the story you’re creating from them.

Know your audience, purpose, and motivation
Before starting to edit, you need to know the purpose of the project you’re editing and who will be seeing it. Is it a training film for navy recruits or a cereal commercial aimed at kids? Is it a muckraking documentary on the food industry or a drama about Navaho code talkers in World War II? You get the idea.
Motivating a cut

Just as you must be clear of the purpose for each scene, so you must be clear of the purpose for each cut. “Each cut should be motivated” is an oft-repeated caveat in editing. Each cut should advance the story, the action, the flow, the thought process of your show. Don’t put a shot in solely because it looks nice, seems cool, or is arty. A cut should link to the cut before and after it, knitting the story together, cut by cut.

Michael has worked in Hollywood and other places, producing Hardware Wars, and many other shows and documentaries on his spiritual journey to Tibet, Peru, and Bali. He’s a terrific person whom I revere. These excerpts from his article show why.

OCCUPY HOLLYWOOD!
by Michael Wiese

As people all over the globe challenge the underpinnings and practices of banks, stock brokers, and politicians, those of us in media can do our part by challenging the destructive and morally vacant — almost invisible by its pervasiveness — vast meta-program that drives the Hollywood mindset and its output. It’s clear to those who look deeply that the very quality of human life on the planet is dependent upon storytellers (that’s right — you and me) to step up and transform the story mythos of our community.

Michael Wiese

Mythos is defined as “the characteristic spirit of a culture, era, or community as seen in its beliefs and aspirations.” Hollywood media is one of the largest U.S. exports. Embedded in so-called entertainment are American materialist values that are sold worldwide. More and more people fall under its spell so that now billions of people in India, China, and Africa have been taught to crave the consumerist lifestyle they have enjoyed for decades in American television programs and films…Most of us accept what we are told rather than examine things through our own experience. We have been taught not to trust ourselves.

• To an extraterrestrial observer, the purpose of human life would appear to be to sell things to one another. Perpetual consumerism drives over consumption and over-production. Planned obsolescence creates massive landfills…If the goal is to sell us more of everything, then the result is burgeoning personal debt, obesity, and an insatiable need to acquire more than your neighbor, creating alienation and competition rather than cooperation.

• We live in a world where the dominant force is male-driven. It’s aggressive, competitive, war-mongering, resource exploiting, and based on “may the toughest guy win,” “get it while you can,” “me first” philosophies. It is really any wonder why things are as they are? What’s missing is the female-oriented mythos based on nurturing, cooperation, preservation, and compassion. In the male-dominated media industry hierarchy, only 17% of its executives are female. (If the natural world utilized only 17% of its feminine energies, all life forms would be extinct by now.)

• It’s no surprise that most films, television, news, and commercials are violent, and sexual, and marginalize women in an attempt to convince us to buy more things we don’t need. Our diet of television news generates fear. Videogames teach children killing skills and disregard for life. Commercials and magazines have subverted sexuality (which can be a path to ecstatic divine states) into a kind of bait-and-switch game to flog their products.

• We have become slaves caught in habitual behaviors linked to our electronic machines. None of this is news to you or me. We are aware we are deep in the muck. We know it and we try to keep it at bay, hoping and praying that there will be a technological solution. Surely, someone will invent something. Maybe there will be a new Apple App that will fix it all. We shirk responsibility because we feel powerless to do anything. That’s where the change must come. What is needed is a new paradigm and a remembrance to older paradigms from the wisdom cultures of the world. We need new stories to tell, new visions to put forth, and awakened filmmakers to co-create them. This is where you come in.

The new vision would:

• Celebrate our capacity to be magnificent, compassionate, and generous.

• Welcome women to fully participate in the top decision-making positions in media, government, and all professions, to regain a balance in solving the great challenges before us.

• Convert “weaponry” to “livingry.” Convert national defense budgets to “plowshares” to eliminate hunger, poverty, and homelessness. (The $500+ billion that the U.S. spends annually on the defense budget would make quite a dent.)…The standard of living could be raised worldwide for everyone…At the moment, we can’t see what needs to be done because it’s all around us. Our own beliefs have to first be examined and changed. The filmmaker needs to make a commitment to transform and connect with other parts of his or her own mind in a profound way so that he or she will not just be making the same old stuff.

• Filmmakers and writers can stimulate this transformation by telling fresh stories that envision a world that works for everyone. Things are already headed in this direction, so you will have a tidal wave of energy behind you. Audiences will awaken from their slumber, realizing their own magnificence and power, their connectedness, their natural knowing, and the result can be a global transformation.

• The answers and solutions to our current crisis already exist among us. So in Occupying Hollywood, let’s make a new kind of film, one that envisions a world that works for everyone, where humans, animals, and plants can rejoice in our mutual dependency and interconnectedness. Remember, we live in heaven here on earth — let’s not blow it.

Click here  http://www.mwp.com/ to read Michael’s entire article.

Mismatches: Why do they happen and how to deal with them during editing

How many times have you gleefully noticing a mismatch during a movie on TV show? Guess what? Many more mismatches have been put over on you than you’ve ever detected. Can you detect the mismatches in this cut from The Aviator, which won the Academy Award for Best Editing? (See * below for the answer.)

The Aviator ©2004 Miramax, All Rights Reserved.

Types of mismatches

When searching for the right place to cut, editors habitually look for a match point – a place in the first shot that is duplicated in the second shot. When there is no duplication, you have a mismatch. There are many elements to match, hence there are many types of mismatches. The two boxes below describe the main types.

Mismatches due to direction, camera, or sound recordist

These are the primary mismatches to finesse when editing.

Mismatches due to department or actor

Pay attention to these issues too, but often you can get some help from your Post House during the post editing phase; for example color grading will resolve lighting problems.

Cutting around the mismatch

To assuage a bad match, make the most sensible, least discernible cut. How to do that? Here are five main ways to avoid a mismatched edit:

1. Cut away to another shot and then back.
2. Cut earlier or later where there is a better match.
3. Cut to a tight close-up, overhead shot, or an insert shot.
4. Add a quick flash frame (frame or two of white) between cuts.
5. Add a short, transitional effect such as a dissolve or wipe.

If the mismatch is in screen direction, there are numerous tried and true remedies:

1. Cut to a shot coming straight at or away from the audience.
2. Cut out of the first shot when the person’s eyes pass the edge of the frame on the left. Then cut to the second shot approximately six frames before the person’s eyes enter the frame. This allows the audience’s eyes to adjust and makes the person appear to be moving in real time.
3. Reverse the shot.

When you encounter a sound mismatch, equalize the volume or cross fade to balance disparate volumes or sounds. To ameliorate wording and pacing problems, find an acceptable cut point, make an overlap (a.k.a. an “L” cut), or edit in a cutaway.

With experience, you’ll make all these fixes reflexively, and come up with tricks of your own.

Conclusion

To read the complete article as well as my second article, “Facing the Footage: How to avoid frustration and wasted time by editing confidently from the first frame,” read the current issue of MovieMaker.

*There’s a mismatch in the left hand position of the hatless character (Howard Hughes played by Leonardo DiCaprio) as well as in the background action.

And it’s free.

Currently available iPad and iPhone, Burkell told me that he is aiming for an Android release in January and a Blackberry release is also in the works.

He also wrote that, “The app contains exclusive videos from the American Cinema Editors, the Canadian

Sample interview on app.

Cinema Editors and the Australian Screen Editors as well as audio interviews with editors around the world. It has an event section that helps find events near you and also keeps people up to date with the editing news section.”

Download the app at: http://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/aotg/id461852158?mt=8&ign-mpt=uo%3D4.

Read about it yourself in MovieMaker Mag

To learn more, read an interview with Burkell in this month’s MovieMaker magazine. Incidentally, the hard copy of this issue of the mag contains two articles by moi, which I will feature in upcoming posts.