A different style of editing

[Brian]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,alt.video.dvd.software (More info?)

I know that most people assemble video clips with mark in and mark out
points. Lately I've been trying a different way of editing.
I've put the entire video on the timeline then at the start of the
video of something I want to keep, I've made a split, then I move the
the end of the part I want to get and make a split. I continue until
I've put splits at the places in the video that mark the start and
finish of the parts I want to keep. I then delete the parts I don't
want to keep. So instead of marking the in and out points of the video
I am splitting the video.
Are there any disadvantages of editing the video this way?

Regards Brian

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,alt.video.dvd.software (More info?)

"Brian" <bclark@es.co.nz> wrote in message
news:5gh4e0t2mtqohmjsjj10cu44svos7k349n@4ax.com...
> I know that most people assemble video clips with mark in and mark out
> points. Lately I've been trying a different way of editing.
> I've put the entire video on the timeline then at the start of the
> video of something I want to keep, I've made a split, then I move the
> the end of the part I want to get and make a split. I continue until
> I've put splits at the places in the video that mark the start and
> finish of the parts I want to keep. I then delete the parts I don't
> want to keep. So instead of marking the in and out points of the video
> I am splitting the video.
> Are there any disadvantages of editing the video this way?
>
> Regards Brian
>
Sounds like a distinction without a difference. A potential
down side is if you miss a split it would be easy to accidentally
delete a part you wanted to keep. Marking and highlighting
a portion gives you a better look at what you are doing. Doing
one cut at a time seems the safer way to go.

I don't see what advantage your procedure gives you, but
if you like it great, it should make no particular impact on the
resulting video.

Luck;
Ken

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,alt.video.dvd.software (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:55:42 +1200, Brian <bclark@es.co.nz> wrote:

>I know that most people assemble video clips with mark in and mark out
>points. Lately I've been trying a different way of editing.
>I've put the entire video on the timeline then at the start of the
>video of something I want to keep, I've made a split, then I move the
>the end of the part I want to get and make a split. I continue until
>I've put splits at the places in the video that mark the start and
>finish of the parts I want to keep. I then delete the parts I don't
>want to keep. So instead of marking the in and out points of the video
>I am splitting the video.
>Are there any disadvantages of editing the video this way?

It is a pain to reorder the clips or insert other material when you
do it that way.

Otherwise, it is a fine way to handle your edit if you are just
cutting things out of a sequential piece of video -- everything shot
on one tape, nothing needs to go in another order. Mark splits, cut
out the unwanted bits, continue until complete.

You can always expand the splits if you didn't get them at quite the
right point, sliding the video out a bit (in essence, changing the in
or out point, but after placement. This applies no matter how you do
it, but when you're doing you're cutting on the timeline, rather than
on the clips themselves, it is your only easy way to recover cut
material.

--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,alt.video.dvd.software (More info?)

Brian wrote:

> I know that most people assemble video clips with mark in and mark out
> points. Lately I've been trying a different way of editing.
> I've put the entire video on the timeline then at the start of the
> video of something I want to keep, I've made a split, then I move the
> the end of the part I want to get and make a split. I continue until
> I've put splits at the places in the video that mark the start and
> finish of the parts I want to keep. I then delete the parts I don't
> want to keep. So instead of marking the in and out points of the video
> I am splitting the video.
> Are there any disadvantages of editing the video this way?
>
> Regards Brian

None.

I often do this, but it depends on the type of project. For example, if
it's a family video, I'll capture everything on the tape, place the
whole thing on the time line, and start editing it by cutting out
sections for time reasons.

However, if I'm working on a film project, a project like this has a
structured path, and I'll review all the footage, make notes on what I
like based on eye movements and emotion, then choose the takes I want to
use, and assemble the scenes the traditional way.

I really doubt if there's a right way, each project has a different way
to approach it. Great editing programs support multiple was of doing
things.

Have you read, "In the blink of an eye" by Walter Murch? Should
required reading for all editors!

-Richard

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,alt.video.dvd.software (More info?)

Brian wrote:
> I know that most people assemble video clips with mark in and mark out
> points. Lately I've been trying a different way of editing.
> I've put the entire video on the timeline then at the start of the
> video of something I want to keep, I've made a split, then I move the
> the end of the part I want to get and make a split. I continue until
> I've put splits at the places in the video that mark the start and
> finish of the parts I want to keep. I then delete the parts I don't
> want to keep. So instead of marking the in and out points of the video
> I am splitting the video.
> Are there any disadvantages of editing the video this way?

You are talking about a very simple form of editing, assemble editing,
so it doesn't really matter that much whether you trim the clip first,
or put it in the timeline and then trim it.

The general form of editing is to do the assemble edit first, then go
back in for inserts. The assemble edit streams the clips together that
you need to play in real time to tell the basic story. It may be an
establishing shot followed by some medium shots of whatever action
unfolds. After you have that all figured out, then you go look for the
inserts, which are the close-ups and cutaways that help explain the
story better and spice up the visuals. This very general process applies
to any project you can dream up, and is one useful way of thinking about
the process.

Gary Eickmeier

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:55:42 +1200, Brian <bclark@es.co.nz> wrote:

>Are there any disadvantages of editing the video this way?

Seems awfully inefficient to me. I always capture with Scenalyzer
Live, so the footage from my camera tapes is broken up into seperate
clips when I capture to my hard drive according to the way I shot the
footage originally. It saves a lot of editing time since there is no
need to figure out where different shots start and end .

 

[Brian]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Jim Gunn <Jim_Gunn@Yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:55:42 +1200, Brian <bclark@es.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>Are there any disadvantages of editing the video this way?
>
>Seems awfully inefficient to me. I always capture with Scenalyzer
>Live, so the footage from my camera tapes is broken up into seperate
>clips when I capture to my hard drive according to the way I shot the
>footage originally. It saves a lot of editing time since there is no
>need to figure out where different shots start and end .

Thanks for your reply Jim.
At the moment I'm editing a captured TV program and usually only want
to keep parts of the program. The program of breaking up the video
into seperate video clips using a change of scene sensor is that there
would be a large amount of clips as in most programs the camera is
changing view every 5 seconds of less and I'd have about 400 or more
sort clips to sort out. But I might try editing this way to find out
if it is difficult.

Regards Brian

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Brian wrote:

> Thanks for your reply Jim.
> At the moment I'm editing a captured TV program and usually only want
> to keep parts of the program. The program of breaking up the video
> into seperate video clips using a change of scene sensor is that there
> would be a large amount of clips as in most programs the camera is
> changing view every 5 seconds of less and I'd have about 400 or more
> sort clips to sort out. But I might try editing this way to find out
> if it is difficult.

No, you wouldn't want to use that function for capturing a TV program.
The normal Scenalyzer shot breakdown is done by means of a digital
camera's date/stamp that it puts on every shot. The scene changes when
the camera starts and stops. A TV program is continuous, doesn't need
any editing by you, except to cut out commercials or long unwanted
sections. It is possible to program Scenalyzer to recognize streaming
scene changes, but that function can be confused, and isn't necessary
with this situation.

But I didn't realize you were talking about recording TV programs,
either. I went into a whole composition about video editing, because I
thought that was what you were asking. I think it is unkind to ask
people about general video editing when you are talking about recording
TV shows.

Gary Eickmeier

 

[Brian]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Gary Eickmeier <geickmei@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:

>
>
>Brian wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your reply Jim.
>> At the moment I'm editing a captured TV program and usually only want
>> to keep parts of the program. The program of breaking up the video
>> into seperate video clips using a change of scene sensor is that there
>> would be a large amount of clips as in most programs the camera is
>> changing view every 5 seconds of less and I'd have about 400 or more
>> sort clips to sort out. But I might try editing this way to find out
>> if it is difficult.
>
>No, you wouldn't want to use that function for capturing a TV program.
>The normal Scenalyzer shot breakdown is done by means of a digital
>camera's date/stamp that it puts on every shot. The scene changes when
>the camera starts and stops. A TV program is continuous, doesn't need
>any editing by you, except to cut out commercials or long unwanted
>sections. It is possible to program Scenalyzer to recognize streaming
>scene changes, but that function can be confused, and isn't necessary
>with this situation.
>
>But I didn't realize you were talking about recording TV programs,
>either. I went into a whole composition about video editing, because I
>thought that was what you were asking. I think it is unkind to ask
>people about general video editing when you are talking about recording
>TV shows.
>
>Gary Eickmeier

I read your concern Gary.
I do both video camera and TV editing.
I was asking if the method you suggested would be useful for TV
program editing as well as video camera editing.
Sorry I missed that bit of info in my original question.

Regards Brian

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Brian wrote:

> I read your concern Gary.
> I do both video camera and TV editing.
> I was asking if the method you suggested would be useful for TV
> program editing as well as video camera editing.
> Sorry I missed that bit of info in my original question.
>
> Regards Brian

OK, fair enough. I was just attempting to communicate the general case,
or approach, from the experience of a film editor as well as a video
editor. I don't know if the concept of assemble and insert editing - or
should I say the distinction between them in how you work - is
recognized or appreciated by younger editors who have worked only in video.

Maybe a larger topic than you were asking about, but I thought I would
poke that in there and see how it registered.

Gary Eickmeier