I am the producer and sometimes screenwriter for a community filmmaking group We tend to have problems when we get to editing. The editing process seems to take an excessively long time and the final film doesn't meet expectations. I was hoping people here would have some suggestions.
A few more details: We have a different director, writer, camera operator, and editor for each project. The directors typically have lots of experience with stage productions and little or none with film. I feel that the directors have a little trouble with the concept that the audience's frame of view has to be created on film yet in stage productions, the audience can look anywhere they like. The editors typically have experience editing family events and documentary projects. They tend to have technical skills but have not used storytelling skills in fictional stories. There aren't any personality problems. The director, editor, and I (and the rest of the cast and crew) work well together and we all want a great film.
The process we follow is basically:
1. Writer and director create shot list.
2A. While filming, mostly follow shot list. Usually need 2 or 3 takes to get the perfect shot. We make note of the best take.
2B. If, while on location, we identify new shots, we'll add them.
3. Editor renames all the audio and video files with the scene / shot / take.
4. Editor assembles the best take of each shot in the proper order.
5. Producer and director provide notes.
6. Editor makes changes.
7 We repeat steps 5 and 6, seven or eight or nine or ten times or until we get fed-up with it.
8. Add music.
9. We look at each other and ask, "why isn't this film better?"
During the editing process, we tend to lose dialogue and action that we want but when we see it in the rough cuts, those shots seem wrong somehow.
I appreciate any tips or thoughts. Because we use different crew / cast for each project, I'd like to create a process or a list of things to do -- or not to do -- that I can share with each new director, camera operator, and editor.
1 person likes this
Right now you have too many hands in the process. You're doing t hings by committee, deciding things, and that makes for a disaster. How about this: each director has the final say on creativity, shot list, and editing. This will allow only one creative direction, and you will probably see better results with each short. The producer is the coach, and the director is the quarterback. The producer ensures everything is there so the director can work. The editor can edit daily and has the cut when production is complete. The director and producer view the cut and then tweak it so it matches the vision.
Thank you for your input. We have been doing things by committee. Frequently by design. We haven't had directors that had all the necessary skills or experience to make all the creative decisions. The director had to sign-off on all the decisions made by someone else (shot list, editing, script revisions, etc) but it is clear that didn't work. I had hoped that there was a solution to working with directors with limited film experience. Now I'm leaning heavily towards just not using them in future projects. Instead, using directors that do have ability to be the quarterback.
Again, thank you. If anyone else has different thoughts and tips, I'm still open to suggestions. I feel like there are still other things we could be doing to make this process better.
1 person likes this
I don't know that I agree with Lindbergh in this case about too many hands, but I do agree that editing (or ANYTHING creative) by committee is asking for mediocre results at best. Editing can ruin at good film or salvage crappy performances and poor story-lines. But the usual problem is in the writing, the directing and the acting. Look there, not at the editing process, IMO, because just like in data analysis - garbage in, garbage out.
Thanks Shadow. I am more confident assessing the acting and writing. While they might not be perfect in these cases, they aren't the cause of the disappointing final cut. What I don't have is a good feel for directing and editing. I see the editing process like putting together a jigsaw puzzle. The director provides the pieces (the footage). The shot list with notes and script are the picture on the puzzle box. The editor assembles the pieces so they look like the picture on the box.
In these shorts, the editor is providing rough cuts that look like they have missing pieces or that some pieces have been mangled to make them fit -- to take the analogy a bit too far. If it is the directing that is the source of the problem and the editor is merely doing the best with what is provided, how can this be prevented in the future? In the current project, neither the editor nor the director are able to clearly state what should have been done differently.
3 bits to add to your process -
0 - rewrite, rewrite, review, rewrite, rewrite - feedback from director and producer, rewrite even more - and don't even start any pre-prod until you are confident the script is as good as you can get it
10 - show a cut to some punters who have nothing to do with your films and get some honest 3rd party feedback - you could put a questionnaire together for them
11 - pickups and reshoots
Thanks Simon. We are just about to show the current project to some folks to get their input. The director was strongly opposed to showing it to strangers. I"m not sure how effective this process will be showing it to family and friends. Anyway, do you have an example questionnaire that we could borrow and adjust to our films? The director, editor, and the producer (me) have very different opinions on what to ask the people reviewing it.
More cooks in the kitchen doesn't always equate to a better meal. I think your question needs to be accompanied with a final product for review. How does this meal taste...(wait you can't taste it...but how can I make it taste better)