Other: Editing, fast cutting or not?

P

Publimix

Veteran
This might be not the right forum, but I think there are plenty of people here who edit their own work.

The question is fast cutting, why and when? Clients seem to like short films (1 minuter for youtube / facebook)

Is fast cutting necessary for Internet viewers?

Like to hear your opinion.
 
Last edited:
Water will find it's own level, and so should the pacing of any video.

Unless you are doing a montage to busy music or if the interview is cutting from person to person trying to intensify a point, any editing that calls attention to the editing itself detracts from the story itself.

Editing most times should be transparent.
 
Hi Liam, that is exactly what I think too. A

But let's say fast is 1-2 sec clips, max 3 sec ?

Matt;
mcgeedigital said:
Water will find it's own level, and so should the pacing of any video.
Click to expand...

Some of my clients think they have to limit films for their website facebook or youtube-channels to 1-2 minutes. Are they right? (not as in 'the client is always right')
 
Last edited:
There is something to be said for keeping the TRT short for web use, yes.

Attention spans have gotten ridiculously shorter for sure.

However that only means that your content must be compelling.
 
Publimix said:
But let's say fast is 1-2 sec clips, max 3 sec ?
Click to expand...

3-4 seconds a shot would be an average pace of edit for a standard 'talking head' and 'B roll' style doc. 1-2 secs a shot would be average for a performance style music video. I once cut a 3 minute music video with over 800 edits in it, but did another with four edits in it. Neither was too fast or too slow. They were what they needed to be.


mcgeedigital said:
Water will find it's own level, and so should the pacing of any video.

Editing most times should be transparent.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
We cut a lot of Event highlights videos for corporate clients - average shot length of cutaways is 1 sec 12 frames,
If we're cutting for a training film that would increase to 3-5 seconds per shot where information needs to be communicated via images,
depends on the content - but most of our stuff is online video and 1 to 3 & 1/2 minutes max
 
I was delighted to see how long certain shots were held in the feature films of Steven Spielberg or John McTiernan. The scene was so engrossing, the angle and lighting so pleasant, that I seldom notice it until the twelfth viewing.

As for nonfiction work on Youtube, yes, they often drag, but not because the shot is too long. It's the content. Most Youtube videos start with an excruciatingly long introduction, where the host says hello, thanks everyone for watching, gives a summary of the last video he made, traces the inception of the idea from this video based on viewer comments to the last video (complete with screenshots and reading aloud of those comments) and how the video developed while he ate breakfast last week (complete with what he had for breakfast) and was further refined in conversations with his friends over lunch, until finally he talks about what he is going to talk about, which we already knew by the title of the video.

What Youtube videos need is not faster shots but ruthless script editing --- when there even is a script.
 
Be aware of your Plays vs. Finishes. If a clip gets 500 plays, when you check under the hood it may only have 100 finishes, or less. It's always a sobering number. Just be aware of your batting percentage - to me that ratio always suggests one thing - keep it short. In the theater you gotta stand up and walk, on TV you gotta find the remote, online your always a click away from dead.
 
I think it is about keeping it interesting - so long oners in features are generally packed with 'action' of some nature.

As for internet duration I think a lot is about script - so short is right - ir if your are struggling to cut down to a minute you are saying too much.

If the content:script;message is succinct then 1.00 can drag.

For example "ten percent off all fords at Joes motors from December 27" is a legit script for an Internet video. Clearly this does not need fast cuts as one is not trying to jam 10 messages into one minute
 
mcgeedigital said:
Editing most times should be transparent.
Click to expand...

+1

Pacing usually depends on the audience the piece is geared for... each genre of editing has it's own idiosyncrasies.
Having said that, long form does not necessarily mean long edits... same with short form not always short edits.
Increasingly as everyones attention span is getting shorter and shorter... the challenge is knowing your audience.
 
Seems a bit of an odd question to be honest and one that is designed to simply follow whatever is popular. Editing is the heartbeat of your film/video. Serve the story and serve the message and don't just try to ape a trend. Whether that is by nice uninterrupted long takes or by dubstep cutting it's a call for you to make, not based on textual analysis of the most popular videos - otherwise all your films would feature some Minecraft and makeup tutorials.

In terms of audience engagement if you're talking about short films or youtube content then I'd say you have 5-10 seconds to grab someone and keep them watching. Then if you manage it, another 10 seconds and then another and so on and so on. How you achieve that is up to you.
 
Hi Ben,
I didn't design the question to follow the trends.

But I learned a lot from most of the answers.

In an earlier post I said that filming never was as cheap as it is today. But with the changing demands (shorter films) the price per second might be still the same. And selling that to clients is also a new challenge.

Happy Hollidays, Merry Hollidays, Happy Christmas, or whatever is political correct or trending these days :-)
 
Last edited:
As is often the case on DVXuser and the larger community the fact that what you do, what I do, what a 12 year old kid with a youtube channel does and what Ken Loach and what David Fincher does are all sort of being lumped together and classed as the same thing despite all those things having totally different aims, intentions, audiences, budgets and levels of talent involved in producing them.

I see it more that both a sculptor and a painter & decorator might use a chisel but do vastly different things with them. That's DVXUser to me. There is no one-size-fits-all answer.


I wasn't having a dig at you by the way. I just don't think it's a thing anyone can give advice over unless someone is putting forward an example of work to be critiqued along with stating what they want to achieve with it.
 
As we are talking about examples or lack of, well this weekend Ive been editing one of four 30s teasers for a local festival

Each video has one message eg 'kids run free' or 'the best tasting festival'

on that basis the 30s seems quite long and also, even though I shot a lot of stuff 30s eats footage..

Money wise, this 120seconds of content will cost them the expected cost of covering an event for 2 full days plus edit days.

Oh.. someone else with do the graphics :)

Comments?

pwd valley
https://vimeo.com/196179016
https://vimeo.com/196179083
 
Last edited:
Food 1 - 2nd shot (pizza) looks insipid. Would open on the great stir fry toss from 0.22.

Kids 1 - Trombone men, kid on adult's shoulders and kid in bowie makeup at 0.20 should open as they are stronger and full of energy and the vibe of the event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top