Alludo USER to USER Web Board

vidoman wrote:Since you're editing DV (avi), the A/V should not be OOS. Are you splitting the audio from the video before making your cuts? If so try doing all your cuts before splitting the audio...

Also with VS11.5+ you do have the ability to use Cue points to mark where you want to make cuts, add titles, music, ect.. This would help in keeping things synced up, especially when you are doing frame-accurate cutting.

skier-hughes wrote:Do you count to 3 aloud?
If so, don't.
Start by

turning camera on
breath 5 times do your chat
stop talking
breath 5 times
then turn camera off.

Devil wrote:IMHO, you must cut in with something else. For example, when you talk about Thiefrow, you could cut in with a shot of it, as your commentary continues. Cut in with a still of the Aldermaston marches and a jar of potted shrimps etc.
you can use transitions and p-in-p much more freely if you have more material than a single talking head and these will appear seamless with distinct cuts. At all costs, avoid cuts with almost no difference between the two scenes, so that it looks like your head has received an invisible punch from Mohammed Ali. If you must do this, put in a fading transition or, sometimes better, a morph.

skier-hughes wrote:There is nothing at all you can do in editing straight cuts to make this better, as you'll never be in exactly the same position. It may look slightly better if you use a shortish crossfade, as often used in tv.

I'd still go for some other shots though, a bit of machine gun fire in the background, pictures of the areoplanes you speak about etc, all would have added to the story telling.

I'm sorry we couldn't give you some editing tips.

Nobody has criticised your filming techinque, there is nothing worng with that.

There is nothing wrong with your editing of the material you are using.

It's just that all the rest of us would do it differently, and curiously we would all do it in a similar fashion.

Hi All
I found a lot of your replies to be very educational (in as much as ' well;that taught me a lesson') Having viewed a lot of replies on various subjects in the past few years, I know that you in your own ways, were trying to be helpful , but my original 'cry for help' seemed to have got lost along the way. the thing that does concern me however, is it seems to me that a certain amount of pontification appeared in some of the replies, and as I said previously there was stuff that I could and will , take on-board , however; if I had been a newcomer to the 'Forum' I think I would be unhappy,as there appeared to be a certain meaness of spirit and lack of togetherness and understanding, which there should be no place for. we can't all be Experts and Gurus and there is a big danger of ending up believing in your own hype.
So remember you guys, stick to the Kiss principle when dealing with neophytes like me
LOL
Jimzjazz

None of use are experts or gurus, just users like yourself. At one point in time we came to this forum seeking help or advice. We are simply trying to pass on the knowledge that we have gained from our experiences.

With that said, having another look at the first line of your thread I don't understand your gripe.

jimzjazz wrote:I am becoming increasingly frustrated with my editing techniques ( as can be seen in youtube 'quixotemeetspapillon' ) in particular, stuff that has been filmed 'in front of camera' and would appreciate any advice on this.

So were you not given some advice, particularly what you could do to improve the "in front of camera" aspect?

What's the saying - don't look a gift horse in the mouth?

Sorry, Jimzjazz, but if you were expecting us to say that your technique was wonderful and that there was nothing that could be improved, then I can understand your disappointment with us. I, for one, thought you were asking us for advice and we all did our best to offer it, perhaps overstepping the strict limits of editing but, as Steve says, editing starts long before you set a camera up; it starts with the storyline.

Please do me a favour: just do one short 60-120 second story, taking on board everything we have said. Have a look at it, then look at it again a fortnight later. Then go back to one of your original ones and mentally compare them. If you still prefer your old technique, then there is nothing further to say. If not, let us help you improve things even more.

Hi Guys
A thousand Mea Culpas
Here was me thinking that I had made a simple request for help in what I consider to be my relatively poor editing techniques and 'lo and behold' a slight diversion seems to have appeared in the proceedings. having supplied some videos to enable you to see what I considered was bugging me, I was greately surprised to see that it was suggested that I was perhaps seeking PRAISE and that I shouldn't 'look a gift horse in the mouth' 'au contraire'; neither was I ' a dog seeking scraps from a rich man's table' ' let he who is without sin cast the first stone'
So let's start again; I consider I have a problem with my editing techniques, can you help YES or NO ( answers on a postcard please)

Perhaps we should all make a video on this (bags me to be in front of camera!) I have a great title for it 'HOW NOT TO....
CHEERS
JIMZJAZZ

jimzjazz wrote:So let's start again; I consider I have a problem with my editing techniques, can you help YES or NO ( answers on a postcard please)

No

If you consider you have a problem with your editing techniques, you can easily find the answers by re-reading this thread. They are all there. The apparent fact that you don't seem to want to know puzzles me. Producing a video has to be considered holistically, from your first inspiration in your mind to the finished product; there is no way that you can separate the steps without affecting the whole.

Your current whole is, if you'll excuse my frankness, 5 mins of someone (not even a pretty girl one can feast ones eye on) sitting in a chair with no movement, no camera changes or techniques, waffling on with many vocal presentation errors. It is boring. I ask you, when did you last see something similar on professional TV? If at all, perhaps in the 1940s. Just look at the BBC News. You will never see the anchor for more than 10 or 15 seconds, except when he is interviewing someone, when the cameras switch between them. You may see excerpts of political speeches or a reportage from some remote place with a single camera but even these are interrupted with other scenes at frequent intervals. Use these EDITING techniques, as several of us have advised, and the interest level of your work will rise by hundreds of percent.

And finally -- and this is my last word in this thread if you continue with your stubbornness -- think of the meaning of the word video. It is literally the first person singular of the present tense of the Latin: I see. I see what? Something interesting? No! The visual side of a video is far more important than the sound side. I can assure you that if you made the video side interesting with good edits, as we have described, we probably wouldn't even notice your hesitations or when you trip up over your words. I guess that is why someone suggested that this is for the radio. There is no real video; it would not matter if a viewer shut his eyes after 5 seconds for the next 5 minutes: he will have seen the whole video, with his eyes shut. Editing in some interest would change that. Understand?

Edit: As a PS, why don't you join your local video club, listen, absorb, chat with fellow members, show them what you are doing and seek help from them. They may be able to put things over to you better than we can.

PAX,
I surrender,
end of,

JIMZJAZZ