Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
Thanks for your input Dave. I have Lenny Lipton’s book so I will have a good look at it again. I also have one called 'The Technique of Editing 16mm Film’ by John Burder, which helpfully details editing processes. I’m interested in your response to the idea of editing as stitching and so hope you welcome my thoughts below... That there is no analogy between editing and stitching… the research I’m working on involves constructing this argument with examples to show that the comparison has been made repeatedly by people other than myself throughout histories of filmmaking. I’ll look forward to sharing the research when it’s more finished which will be autumn 2019. OTOH, the actual physical work may be comoparable in some ways, and it would make sense that this physical process inflects the conceptual work in some ways. That’s certainly been suggested by folks who have edited both by actually cutting film and doing it all by computer. It’s definitely the physical process of editing film that I am referring to as being comparable to stitching in this study, BUT I started out editing video in iMovie and Final Cut before I worked with photochemical film. It was this digital editing process that first got me thinking about editing as stitching. I remember looking at the sequence on a computer screen with different shots and sound clips laid out visually in different tracks and thinking they look like a patchwork or embroidery pattern. Then I was thinking about editing being similar to stitching because I understood editing as joining or assembling different video and sound clips together to create something new. I should also say that my background is in textile practice, and when I was first editing video and thinking about this stuff I was in the final year of a degree in embroidery and teaching myself to edit, because when I went to see the video technicians they told me it was too late in the year for them to give me any tuition. So my background and experience of working with cloth and stitch before I worked with video and photochemical film directly informs the idea of editing as stitching and I still continue to work with both practices now. > Some ways the conceptual (and physical) prosesses are different: > 1) The whole point of editing workprint is you can try an edit, see how it > works, then change your mind… at any point. That is, after you’re ‘finished’ > you can go back and change the trim on the first cut you made. I don’t think > of stitching as temporary. Workprint is always edited with tape splices, so > you can pull the splices apart to change them. [You save your trims in case > you want to put a few frames back in]. This is interesting because I definitely understand stitch as temporary, it can always be unpicked and then re-sewn. For example, skirts can be made with a hem that can be let down as the child grows and as long as there is enough seam allowance then the fit of a garment can be altered by unpicking and then re-stitching. So then seam allowance is like ‘handles’ on either side of a video clip or a physical film clip? The idea of saving the trims is interesting too. In terms of cloth and stitch, especially making clothes, it is the cut that is more permanent and decisive than with film editing perhaps? Because if you cut the fabric too small or short then it is difficult to stitch a piece back in without it looking obvious, whereas you suggest that ‘trims’ can be re-inserted ‘seamlessly’(!) > 2) I imagine stitching is usually done more or less linearly: you start with > one piece, add another and another -- the work grows and gets larger as you > go. Film editing, especially narrative work, OTOH, is typically a process of > subtraction. a) The editor first cuts all the discrete shots from the > original — camera start to camera stop — and hangs them in a bin. b) Then > they’re spliced into one long reel — called an assembly — in the rough order > you expect they’ll appear, with multiple possibly-usable takes one after the > other: S1T1, S1T2, S1T3, S2T1, STT2, S3T1 etc. c) From then on, it’s mainly > subtraction: choosing which takes to discard, deciding to disacrd whole shots > or sequences, shortening the shots to the proper in-and-out points. This is > why you often hear that feature films had really long rough cuts at one point > — ‘legendary 4 hour version’ … that’s normal, and those are never intended to > be finished products. The operative maxim that oftens applies to student > films: “I didn’t have enough time to make it shorter!’ This all depends what is being stitched. If it's making clothes, then the order of stitching all depends on the construction of the garment, which may well be dictated by a pattern, unless you are freestyling making a garment. The cloth is rolled out or spread out, a larger piece of cloth is cut from the roll, then smaller pattern pieces of cloth are measured, pinned and cut,
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
Hi Fred, Yes that’s what I meant, the intercutting of shots of editing with sewing (hand and machine) and women working in a weaving factory in Man With A Movie Camera. Warm wishes, Mary On 2 Dec 2018, at 20:22, Fred Camper wrote: > Mary, > > Yes, but you must also have seen what that film editing is intercut with at > several moments... > > Fred Camper > Chicago > On 12/2/2018 11:26 AM, mstark...@gmail.com wrote: >> Hi Fred, >> >> Yes Man with A Movie Camera is an important reference for the study, with >> those great images of Elizaveta Svillova editing with scissors. I’d be >> interested in any other films that show film being edited. I know of another >> that shows a a woman, which is Hail Caesar. There is a scene supposedly >> based upon Margaret Booth who worked for MGM until she was in her late 80s. >> >> All best, >> >> Mary >> On 1 Dec 2018, at 22:24, Fred Camper wrote: >> >>> i was glad to hear of your interesting topic. I trust The Man With the >>> Movie Camera is included? >>> >>> Fred Camper >>> Chicago >>> >>> >>> On 12/1/2018 1:24 PM, mstark...@gmail.com wrote: >>>> Hello everyone, >>>> >>>> Thanks for your feedback. It has been very helpful! I stand corrected. I >>>> somewhat thoughtlessly rushed into sending out the survey without checking >>>> definitions, as what I meant to find out about is about people editing >>>> film in a physical non-computerised way, not video tape, just >>>> photochemical film in any format. >>>> >>>> I’d be interested to know how this discussion list would think this would >>>> be best described. I think it is better to leave the linear out of it and >>>> just term it as ‘editing photochemical film’? >>>> >>>> Just to add that I am in the final year of a practice as research PhD >>>> investigating historical relationships between filmmaking and textile >>>> practice, testing through performance the hypothesis that film can be >>>> compared to fabric and editing to stitching. I will submit a performance >>>> and a written thesis so the survey will be help with the literature and >>>> practice review, as I’m interested to know about artists who continue to >>>> edit film physically, what their process is and ideas about why they do it. >>>> >>>> All best, >>>> >>>> Mary >>>> >>>> On 30 Nov 2018, at 02:37, Christopher Ball wrote: >>>> >>>>> I remember doing sound mixing with 4 U-matic machines, running them all >>>>> together until they drifted out of sync while mixing audio. I also >>>>> editing running 2 U-matics together and punching in on the record machine >>>>> when I wanted the cut to happen. What a difference now. Mind you, film >>>>> editing was not hard and puts you in a much better headspace than >>>>> computer editing. >>>>> >>>>> Christopher >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:34 PM Colinet André >>>>> wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> of course you are right with this approach. >>>>> >>>>> I’m talking about another definition of “non-linear” which is also >>>>> correct. >>>>> >>>>> Anyhow I made a lot of linear analogue video editing and every time you >>>>> had to copy to start a new version until the quality was so bad you had >>>>> to go back to the originals with the timecodes. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Verzonden vanuit Mail voor Windows 10 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Van: Adam Hyman >>>>> Verzonden: vrijdag 30 november 2018 2:04 >>>>> Aan: Experimental Film Discussion List >>>>> Onderwerp: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I learned in film school during the transition period that what Dave >>>>> says is correct >>>>> >>>>> Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was linear due >>>>> to the assembly reason that Dave describes; non-linear digital editing >>>>> was a return to the non-linear editing of celluloid. >>>&
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
Mary,
Yes, but you must also have seen what that film editing is intercut with
at several moments...
Fred Camper
Chicago
On 12/2/2018 11:26 AM, mstark...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Fred,
Yes Man with A Movie Camera is an important reference for the study,
with those great images of Elizaveta Svillova editing with scissors.
I’d be interested in any other films that show film being edited. I
know of another that shows a a woman, which is Hail Caesar. There is a
scene supposedly based upon Margaret Booth who worked for MGM until
she was in her late 80s.
All best,
Mary
On 1 Dec 2018, at 22:24, Fred Camper <mailto:f...@fredcamper.com>> wrote:
i was glad to hear of your interesting topic. I trust /The Man With
the Movie Camera/ is included?
Fred Camper
Chicago
On 12/1/2018 1:24 PM, mstark...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello everyone,
Thanks for your feedback. It has been very helpful! I stand
corrected. I somewhat thoughtlessly rushed into sending out the
survey without checking definitions, as what I meant to find out
about is about people editing film in a physical non-computerised
way, not video tape, just photochemical film in any format.
I’d be interested to know how this discussion list would think this
would be best described. I think it is better to leave the linear
out of it and just term it as ‘editing photochemical film’?
Just to add that I am in the final year of a practice as research
PhD investigating historical relationships between filmmaking and
textile practice, testing through performance the hypothesis that
film can be compared to fabric and editing to stitching. I will
submit a performance and a written thesis so the survey will be help
with the literature and practice review, as I’m interested to know
about artists who continue to edit film physically, what their
process is and ideas about why they do it.
All best,
Mary
On 30 Nov 2018, at 02:37, Christopher Ball <mailto:cbifi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I remember doing sound mixing with 4 U-matic machines, running them
all together until they drifted out of sync while mixing audio. I
also editing running 2 U-matics together and punching in on the
record machine when I wanted the cut to happen. What a difference
now. Mind you, film editing was not hard and puts you in a much
better headspace than computer editing.
Christopher
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:34 PM Colinet André
mailto:colinet.an...@coditel.net>> wrote:
Hello,
of course you are right with this approach.
I’m talking about another definition of “non-linear” which is
also correct.
Anyhow I made a lot of linear analogue video editing and every
time you had to copy to start a new version until the quality
was so bad you had to go back to the originals with the timecodes.
Verzonden vanuit Mail
<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> voor Windows 10
*Van: *Adam Hyman <mailto:a...@lafilmforum.org>
*Verzonden: *vrijdag 30 november 2018 2:04
*Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List
<mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>
*Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
Hi,
I learned in film school during the transition period that
what Dave says is correct
Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was
linear due to the assembly reason that Dave describes;
non-linear digital editing was a return to the non-linear
editing of celluloid.
We could have a poll though.
Best,
Adam
*From: *FrameWorks mailto:frameworks-boun...@jonasmekasfilms.com>> on behalf of
Colinet André mailto:colinet.an...@coditel.net>>
*Reply-To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List
mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>>"
mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>>
*Date: *Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM
*To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List
mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>>"
mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>>
*Subject: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
*I don’t agree with Dave.*
*Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or
video footage.*
*Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because
it’s only a editing list with software.*
*All the best !!*
*Colinet André*
Verzonden vanuit Mail
<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> voor Windows 10
*Van: *Dave Tetzlaff <mailto:djte...@gmail.com>
*Verzonden: *donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50
*Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List
<mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>
*Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
> I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and
splicing film at an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it.
That’s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-li
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
A good introduction would be Roberts and Sharples "Primer of Filmmaking" I believe. --scott ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
Mary: You might want to pick up an old filmmaking book that covers the different processes on physical editing of photochemical film. E.g. Lenny Lipton’s “Independent Filmmaking”. A. There are two methods of putting the cut pieces of film together: 1) glue splices and 2) tape splices. • Both forms of splice are easily visible, the tape will have little bubbles on the frames on either side of the cut. The glue splice makes a noticable lap joint on one side of the cut. B. There are two broad categories of workflow: 1) Cutting the camera original of reversal stock directly. This would be how most 8mm and Super8 ‘amatuer’ films were made. It’s also how “Meshes of the Afternoon was put together (you can see the laps of the glue splices). 2) Striking a ‘workprint’ copy, editing that (typically with tape splices), then ‘conforming’ the original into 'A and B rolls’ There are two rolls, each running the length of the finished fedit, but with only half of the shots: The A roll would have the originbal footage of all the odd shots, and black leader corresponding to the even shots, the B roll vice versa. These rolls are assembled with glue splices, the lap of each splice going over into the black leader, so no actual exposed frames become fogged by the glue. Then you send the rolls off to the lab, with instructions, and they marry them into a single print with invisible splices. • Conforming negative film stock is a tricky business that requires an ultra-clean environment, so few filmmakers do that themszelves. Thus, for most ‘traditional’ 16mm film work, the only creative editing is done with/on a workprint. C. There are two basic tools for film editing, 1) An edit bench with hand rewinds and a simple viewer. This is all you need to cut a silent film (or one with a not-precisely synced ‘wild’ soundtrack) 2) a ‘flatbed’ editing table (Steenbeck and Moviola being the most common makes) that motorizes the shuttling of film, and keeps the film in sync with one or more audio tracks recorded on mag stock (perforated film covered with magnetic particles like audio tape instead of film emulsion). A flatbed is more or less necessary to edit films with sync sound, whether lip-sync or just precise sync for added music, sfx, narration… > the hypothesis that film can be compared to fabric and editing to stitching. Hmm. From the standpoint of what motion picture editing is conceptually, there’s really no analogy. But then. conceptualy, editing is editing, no matter how it’s done. OTOH, the actual physical work may be comoparable in some ways, and it would make sense that this physical process inflects the conceptual work in some ways. That’s certainly been suggested by folks who have edited both by actually cutting film and doing it all by computer. [There’s also typically a difference between film original and video original: since video is cheaper to shoot you tend to wind up with a lot more footage, more repeated takes, and that can be both a blessing and a curse…] Some ways the conceptual (and physical) prosesses are different: 1) The whole point of editing workprint is you can try an edit, see how it works, then change your mind… at any point. That is, after you’re ‘finished’ you can go back and change the trim on the first cut you made. I don’t think of stitching as temporary. Workprint is always edited with tape splices, so you can pull the splices apart to change them. [You save your trims in case you want to put a few frames back in]. 2) I imagine stitching is usually done more or less linearly: you start with one piece, add another and another -- the work grows and gets larger as you go. Film editing, especially narrative work, OTOH, is typically a process of subtraction. a) The editor first cuts all the discrete shots from the original — camera start to camera stop — and hangs them in a bin. b) Then they’re spliced into one long reel — called an assembly — in the rough order you expect they’ll appear, with multiple possibly-usable takes one after the other: S1T1, S1T2, S1T3, S2T1, STT2, S3T1 etc. c) From then on, it’s mainly subtraction: choosing which takes to discard, deciding to disacrd whole shots or sequences, shortening the shots to the proper in-and-out points. This is why you often hear that feature films had really long rough cuts at one point — ‘legendary 4 hour version’ … that’s normal, and those are never intended to be finished products. The operative maxim that oftens applies to student films: “I didn’t have enough time to make it shorter!’ ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
Hi Fred, Yes Man with A Movie Camera is an important reference for the study, with those great images of Elizaveta Svillova editing with scissors. I’d be interested in any other films that show film being edited. I know of another that shows a a woman, which is Hail Caesar. There is a scene supposedly based upon Margaret Booth who worked for MGM until she was in her late 80s. All best, Mary On 1 Dec 2018, at 22:24, Fred Camper wrote: > i was glad to hear of your interesting topic. I trust The Man With the Movie > Camera is included? > > Fred Camper > Chicago > > > On 12/1/2018 1:24 PM, mstark...@gmail.com wrote: >> Hello everyone, >> >> Thanks for your feedback. It has been very helpful! I stand corrected. I >> somewhat thoughtlessly rushed into sending out the survey without checking >> definitions, as what I meant to find out about is about people editing film >> in a physical non-computerised way, not video tape, just photochemical film >> in any format. >> >> I’d be interested to know how this discussion list would think this would be >> best described. I think it is better to leave the linear out of it and just >> term it as ‘editing photochemical film’? >> >> Just to add that I am in the final year of a practice as research PhD >> investigating historical relationships between filmmaking and textile >> practice, testing through performance the hypothesis that film can be >> compared to fabric and editing to stitching. I will submit a performance and >> a written thesis so the survey will be help with the literature and practice >> review, as I’m interested to know about artists who continue to edit film >> physically, what their process is and ideas about why they do it. >> >> All best, >> >> Mary >> >> On 30 Nov 2018, at 02:37, Christopher Ball wrote: >> >>> I remember doing sound mixing with 4 U-matic machines, running them all >>> together until they drifted out of sync while mixing audio. I also editing >>> running 2 U-matics together and punching in on the record machine when I >>> wanted the cut to happen. What a difference now. Mind you, film editing >>> was not hard and puts you in a much better headspace than computer editing. >>> >>> Christopher >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:34 PM Colinet André >>> wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> of course you are right with this approach. >>> >>> I’m talking about another definition of “non-linear” which is also correct. >>> >>> Anyhow I made a lot of linear analogue video editing and every time you had >>> to copy to start a new version until the quality was so bad you had to go >>> back to the originals with the timecodes. >>> >>> >>> Verzonden vanuit Mail voor Windows 10 >>> >>> >>> Van: Adam Hyman >>> Verzonden: vrijdag 30 november 2018 2:04 >>> Aan: Experimental Film Discussion List >>> Onderwerp: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> I learned in film school during the transition period that what Dave says >>> is correct >>> >>> Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was linear due to >>> the assembly reason that Dave describes; non-linear digital editing was a >>> return to the non-linear editing of celluloid. >>> >>> We could have a poll though. >>> >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> From: FrameWorks on behalf of >>> Colinet André >>> Reply-To: "Experimental Film Discussion List >>> " >>> Date: Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM >>> To: "Experimental Film Discussion List " >>> >>> Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >>> >>> >>> I don’t agree with Dave. >>> >>> Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or video footage. >>> >>> Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because it’s only a >>> editing list with software. >>> >>> All the best !! >>> >>> Colinet André >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Verzonden vanuit Mail voor Windows 10 >>> >>> >>> Van: Dave Tetzlaff >>> Verzonden: donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50 >>> Aan: Experimental Film Discussion List >>>
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
that I am in the final year of a practice as research PhD >> investigating historical relationships between filmmaking and textile >> practice, testing through performance the hypothesis that film can be >> compared to fabric and editing to stitching. I will submit a performance >> and a written thesis so the survey will be help with the literature and >> practice review, as I’m interested to know about artists who continue to >> edit film physically, what their process is and ideas about why they do it. >> >> All best, >> >> Mary >> >> On 30 Nov 2018, at 02:37, Christopher Ball wrote: >> >> I remember doing sound mixing with 4 U-matic machines, running them all >> together until they drifted out of sync while mixing audio. I also editing >> running 2 U-matics together and punching in on the record machine when I >> wanted the cut to happen. What a difference now. Mind you, film editing >> was not hard and puts you in a much better headspace than computer editing. >> >> Christopher >> >> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:34 PM Colinet André >> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> of course you are right with this approach. >>> >>> I’m talking about another definition of “non-linear” which is also >>> correct. >>> >>> Anyhow I made a lot of linear analogue video editing and every time you >>> had to copy to start a new version until the quality was so bad you had to >>> go back to the originals with the timecodes. >>> >>> >>> >>> Verzonden vanuit Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> >>> voor Windows 10 >>> >>> >>> >>> *Van: *Adam Hyman >>> *Verzonden: *vrijdag 30 november 2018 2:04 >>> *Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List >>> >>> *Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> >>> I learned in film school during the transition period that what Dave >>> says is correct >>> >>> Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was linear due >>> to the assembly reason that Dave describes; non-linear digital editing was >>> a return to the non-linear editing of celluloid. >>> >>> We could have a poll though. >>> >>> >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> *From: *FrameWorks on behalf >>> of Colinet André >>> *Reply-To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List < >>> frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>" >>> *Date: *Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM >>> *To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List " >>> >>> *Subject: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >>> >>> >>> >>> *I don’t agree with Dave.* >>> >>> *Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or video >>> footage.* >>> >>> *Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because it’s only a >>> editing list with software.* >>> >>> *All the best !!* >>> >>> *Colinet André* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Verzonden vanuit Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> >>> voor Windows 10 >>> >>> >>> >>> *Van: *Dave Tetzlaff >>> *Verzonden: *donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50 >>> *Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List >>> >>> *Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >>> >>> >>> >>> > I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing >>> film at an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it. >>> >>> >>> >>> That’s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-linear, which >>> means you can edit anywhere in the piece you want by winding the reels to >>> that spot. Linear editing was how editing in VIDEO was performed >>> pre-computerization. That is, you had to add each shot sequentially from >>> beginning to to end, in that order, and once you got to, say, shot 5, you >>> couldn’t go back and trim the cut between 1 and 2 without starting over. >>> >>> >>> >>> Needless to say, linear editing is a pain in the ass, and anyone who had >>> ever editied film found it extremely frustrati
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
ld >> be best described. I think it is better to leave the linear out of it and >> just term it as ‘editing photochemical film’? >> >> Just to add that I am in the final year of a practice as research PhD >> investigating historical relationships between filmmaking and textile >> practice, testing through performance the hypothesis that film can be >> compared to fabric and editing to stitching. I will submit a performance >> and a written thesis so the survey will be help with the literature and >> practice review, as I’m interested to know about artists who continue to >> edit film physically, what their process is and ideas about why they do it. >> >> All best, >> >> Mary >> >> On 30 Nov 2018, at 02:37, Christopher Ball wrote: >> >> I remember doing sound mixing with 4 U-matic machines, running them all >> together until they drifted out of sync while mixing audio. I also editing >> running 2 U-matics together and punching in on the record machine when I >> wanted the cut to happen. What a difference now. Mind you, film editing >> was not hard and puts you in a much better headspace than computer editing. >> >> Christopher >> >> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:34 PM Colinet André >> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> of course you are right with this approach. >>> >>> I’m talking about another definition of “non-linear” which is also >>> correct. >>> >>> Anyhow I made a lot of linear analogue video editing and every time you >>> had to copy to start a new version until the quality was so bad you had to >>> go back to the originals with the timecodes. >>> >>> >>> >>> Verzonden vanuit Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> >>> voor Windows 10 >>> >>> >>> >>> *Van: *Adam Hyman >>> *Verzonden: *vrijdag 30 november 2018 2:04 >>> *Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List >>> >>> *Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> >>> I learned in film school during the transition period that what Dave >>> says is correct >>> >>> Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was linear due >>> to the assembly reason that Dave describes; non-linear digital editing was >>> a return to the non-linear editing of celluloid. >>> >>> We could have a poll though. >>> >>> >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> *From: *FrameWorks on behalf >>> of Colinet André >>> *Reply-To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List < >>> frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>" >>> *Date: *Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM >>> *To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List " >>> >>> *Subject: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >>> >>> >>> >>> *I don’t agree with Dave.* >>> >>> *Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or video >>> footage.* >>> >>> *Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because it’s only a >>> editing list with software.* >>> >>> *All the best !!* >>> >>> *Colinet André* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Verzonden vanuit Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> >>> voor Windows 10 >>> >>> >>> >>> *Van: *Dave Tetzlaff >>> *Verzonden: *donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50 >>> *Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List >>> >>> *Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >>> >>> >>> >>> > I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing >>> film at an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it. >>> >>> >>> >>> That’s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-linear, which >>> means you can edit anywhere in the piece you want by winding the reels to >>> that spot. Linear editing was how editing in VIDEO was performed >>> pre-computerization. That is, you had to add each shot sequentially from >>> beginning to to end, in that order, and once you got to, say, shot 5, you >>> couldn’t go back and trim the cut between 1 and 2 without starting over. >>> >>> >>> >>
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
xing audio. I also editing > running 2 U-matics together and punching in on the record machine when I > wanted the cut to happen. What a difference now. Mind you, film editing > was not hard and puts you in a much better headspace than computer editing. > > Christopher > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:34 PM Colinet André > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> of course you are right with this approach. >> >> I’m talking about another definition of “non-linear” which is also >> correct. >> >> Anyhow I made a lot of linear analogue video editing and every time you >> had to copy to start a new version until the quality was so bad you had to >> go back to the originals with the timecodes. >> >> >> >> Verzonden vanuit Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> >> voor Windows 10 >> >> >> >> *Van: *Adam Hyman >> *Verzonden: *vrijdag 30 november 2018 2:04 >> *Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List >> >> *Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> I learned in film school during the transition period that what Dave >> says is correct >> >> Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was linear due >> to the assembly reason that Dave describes; non-linear digital editing was >> a return to the non-linear editing of celluloid. >> >> We could have a poll though. >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> *From: *FrameWorks on behalf of >> Colinet André >> *Reply-To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List < >> frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>" >> *Date: *Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM >> *To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List " >> >> *Subject: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >> >> >> >> *I don’t agree with Dave.* >> >> *Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or video >> footage.* >> >> *Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because it’s only a >> editing list with software.* >> >> *All the best !!* >> >> *Colinet André* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Verzonden vanuit Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> >> voor Windows 10 >> >> >> >> *Van: *Dave Tetzlaff >> *Verzonden: *donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50 >> *Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List >> *Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing >> >> >> >> > I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing >> film at an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it. >> >> >> >> That’s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-linear, which >> means you can edit anywhere in the piece you want by winding the reels to >> that spot. Linear editing was how editing in VIDEO was performed >> pre-computerization. That is, you had to add each shot sequentially from >> beginning to to end, in that order, and once you got to, say, shot 5, you >> couldn’t go back and trim the cut between 1 and 2 without starting over. >> >> >> >> Needless to say, linear editing is a pain in the ass, and anyone who had >> ever editied film found it extremely frustrating and limitiing. Thus >> non-linear video editing was invented by commercial filmmakers after video >> became integrated into feature film produstion via special effects and >> ‘workprinting’. For example, one of the earliest experimental systems, the >> Editdroid, was built by Lucasfilm in the early ‘80s. In fact, before the >> term ‘non-linear editing’ came into common use in the 1990s, these systems >> were called ‘electronic film editing’, because they gave editors working >> with video footage the same flexibility that physical film editing had >> always offered. >> >> >> >> You have checked your definitions before creating your survey… >> >> >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-linear_editing_system#History >> >> ___ >> >> FrameWorks mailing list >> >> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com >> >> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >> >> >> >> ___ FrameWorks mailing list >> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com >> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >> >> >> _
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
i was glad to hear of your interesting topic. I trust /The Man With the
Movie Camera/ is included?
Fred Camper
Chicago
On 12/1/2018 1:24 PM, mstark...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello everyone,
Thanks for your feedback. It has been very helpful! I stand
corrected. I somewhat thoughtlessly rushed into sending out the survey
without checking definitions, as what I meant to find out about is
about people editing film in a physical non-computerised way, not
video tape, just photochemical film in any format.
I’d be interested to know how this discussion list would think this
would be best described. I think it is better to leave the linear out
of it and just term it as ‘editing photochemical film’?
Just to add that I am in the final year of a practice as research PhD
investigating historical relationships between filmmaking and textile
practice, testing through performance the hypothesis that film can be
compared to fabric and editing to stitching. I will submit a
performance and a written thesis so the survey will be help with the
literature and practice review, as I’m interested to know about
artists who continue to edit film physically, what their process is
and ideas about why they do it.
All best,
Mary
On 30 Nov 2018, at 02:37, Christopher Ball <mailto:cbifi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I remember doing sound mixing with 4 U-matic machines, running them
all together until they drifted out of sync while mixing audio. I
also editing running 2 U-matics together and punching in on the
record machine when I wanted the cut to happen. What a difference
now. Mind you, film editing was not hard and puts you in a much
better headspace than computer editing.
Christopher
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:34 PM Colinet André
mailto:colinet.an...@coditel.net>> wrote:
Hello,
of course you are right with this approach.
I’m talking about another definition of “non-linear” which is
also correct.
Anyhow I made a lot of linear analogue video editing and every
time you had to copy to start a new version until the quality was
so bad you had to go back to the originals with the timecodes.
Verzonden vanuit Mail
<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> voor Windows 10
*Van: *Adam Hyman <mailto:a...@lafilmforum.org>
*Verzonden: *vrijdag 30 november 2018 2:04
*Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List
<mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>
*Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
Hi,
I learned in film school during the transition period that what
Dave says is correct
Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was
linear due to the assembly reason that Dave describes; non-linear
digital editing was a return to the non-linear editing of celluloid.
We could have a poll though.
Best,
Adam
*From: *FrameWorks mailto:frameworks-boun...@jonasmekasfilms.com>> on behalf of
Colinet André mailto:colinet.an...@coditel.net>>
*Reply-To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List
mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>>"
mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>>
*Date: *Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM
*To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List
mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>>"
mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>>
*Subject: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
*I don’t agree with Dave.*
*Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or
video footage.*
*Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because it’s
only a editing list with software.*
*All the best !!*
*Colinet André*
Verzonden vanuit Mail
<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> voor Windows 10
*Van: *Dave Tetzlaff <mailto:djte...@gmail.com>
*Verzonden: *donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50
*Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List
<mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>
*Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
> I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing
film at an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it.
That’s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-linear,
which means you can edit anywhere in the piece you want by
winding the reels to that spot. Linear editing was how editing in
VIDEO was performed pre-computerization. That is, you had to add
each shot sequentially from beginning to to end, in that order,
and once you got to, say, shot 5, you couldn’t go back and trim
the cut between 1 and 2 without starting over.
Needless to say, linear editing is a pain in the ass, and anyone
who had ever editied film found it extremely frustrating and
limitiing. Thus non-linear video editing was invented by
commercial filmmakers after video became integrated into feature
film produstion vi
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
Hello everyone, Thanks for your feedback. It has been very helpful! I stand corrected. I somewhat thoughtlessly rushed into sending out the survey without checking definitions, as what I meant to find out about is about people editing film in a physical non-computerised way, not video tape, just photochemical film in any format. I’d be interested to know how this discussion list would think this would be best described. I think it is better to leave the linear out of it and just term it as ‘editing photochemical film’? Just to add that I am in the final year of a practice as research PhD investigating historical relationships between filmmaking and textile practice, testing through performance the hypothesis that film can be compared to fabric and editing to stitching. I will submit a performance and a written thesis so the survey will be help with the literature and practice review, as I’m interested to know about artists who continue to edit film physically, what their process is and ideas about why they do it. All best, Mary On 30 Nov 2018, at 02:37, Christopher Ball wrote: > I remember doing sound mixing with 4 U-matic machines, running them all > together until they drifted out of sync while mixing audio. I also editing > running 2 U-matics together and punching in on the record machine when I > wanted the cut to happen. What a difference now. Mind you, film editing was > not hard and puts you in a much better headspace than computer editing. > > Christopher > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:34 PM Colinet André > wrote: > Hello, > > of course you are right with this approach. > > I’m talking about another definition of “non-linear” which is also correct. > > Anyhow I made a lot of linear analogue video editing and every time you had > to copy to start a new version until the quality was so bad you had to go > back to the originals with the timecodes. > > > > Verzonden vanuit Mail voor Windows 10 > > > > Van: Adam Hyman > Verzonden: vrijdag 30 november 2018 2:04 > Aan: Experimental Film Discussion List > Onderwerp: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing > > > > Hi, > > > > I learned in film school during the transition period that what Dave says is > correct > > Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was linear due to > the assembly reason that Dave describes; non-linear digital editing was a > return to the non-linear editing of celluloid. > > We could have a poll though. > > > > Best, > > > > Adam > > > > From: FrameWorks on behalf of > Colinet André > Reply-To: "Experimental Film Discussion List > " > Date: Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM > To: "Experimental Film Discussion List " > > Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing > > > > I don’t agree with Dave. > > Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or video footage. > > Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because it’s only a > editing list with software. > > All the best !! > > Colinet André > > > > > > > > Verzonden vanuit Mail voor Windows 10 > > > > Van: Dave Tetzlaff > Verzonden: donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50 > Aan: Experimental Film Discussion List > Onderwerp: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing > > > > > I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing film at > > an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it. > > > > That’s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-linear, which means > you can edit anywhere in the piece you want by winding the reels to that > spot. Linear editing was how editing in VIDEO was performed > pre-computerization. That is, you had to add each shot sequentially from > beginning to to end, in that order, and once you got to, say, shot 5, you > couldn’t go back and trim the cut between 1 and 2 without starting over. > > > > Needless to say, linear editing is a pain in the ass, and anyone who had ever > editied film found it extremely frustrating and limitiing. Thus non-linear > video editing was invented by commercial filmmakers after video became > integrated into feature film produstion via special effects and > ‘workprinting’. For example, one of the earliest experimental systems, the > Editdroid, was built by Lucasfilm in the early ‘80s. In fact, before the term > ‘non-linear editing’ came into common use in the 1990s, these systems were > called ‘electronic film editing’, because they gave editors working with > video footage the same flexibility that physical film editing had always > offered. > > >
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
I remember doing sound mixing with 4 U-matic machines, running them all together until they drifted out of sync while mixing audio. I also editing running 2 U-matics together and punching in on the record machine when I wanted the cut to happen. What a difference now. Mind you, film editing was not hard and puts you in a much better headspace than computer editing. Christopher On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:34 PM Colinet André wrote: > Hello, > > of course you are right with this approach. > > I’m talking about another definition of “non-linear” which is also > correct. > > Anyhow I made a lot of linear analogue video editing and every time you > had to copy to start a new version until the quality was so bad you had to > go back to the originals with the timecodes. > > > > Verzonden vanuit Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> > voor Windows 10 > > > > *Van: *Adam Hyman > *Verzonden: *vrijdag 30 november 2018 2:04 > *Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List > > *Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing > > > > Hi, > > > > I learned in film school during the transition period that what Dave says > is correct > > Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was linear due > to the assembly reason that Dave describes; non-linear digital editing was > a return to the non-linear editing of celluloid. > > We could have a poll though. > > > > Best, > > > > Adam > > > > *From: *FrameWorks on behalf of > Colinet André > *Reply-To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List < > frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com>" > *Date: *Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM > *To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List " > > *Subject: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing > > > > *I don’t agree with Dave.* > > *Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or video > footage.* > > *Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because it’s only a > editing list with software.* > > *All the best !!* > > *Colinet André* > > > > > > > > Verzonden vanuit Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> > voor Windows 10 > > > > *Van: *Dave Tetzlaff > *Verzonden: *donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50 > *Aan: *Experimental Film Discussion List > *Onderwerp: *Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing > > > > > I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing film > at an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it. > > > > That’s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-linear, which > means you can edit anywhere in the piece you want by winding the reels to > that spot. Linear editing was how editing in VIDEO was performed > pre-computerization. That is, you had to add each shot sequentially from > beginning to to end, in that order, and once you got to, say, shot 5, you > couldn’t go back and trim the cut between 1 and 2 without starting over. > > > > Needless to say, linear editing is a pain in the ass, and anyone who had > ever editied film found it extremely frustrating and limitiing. Thus > non-linear video editing was invented by commercial filmmakers after video > became integrated into feature film produstion via special effects and > ‘workprinting’. For example, one of the earliest experimental systems, the > Editdroid, was built by Lucasfilm in the early ‘80s. In fact, before the > term ‘non-linear editing’ came into common use in the 1990s, these systems > were called ‘electronic film editing’, because they gave editors working > with video footage the same flexibility that physical film editing had > always offered. > > > > You have checked your definitions before creating your survey… > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-linear_editing_system#History > > ___ > > FrameWorks mailing list > > FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com > > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > > > > ___ FrameWorks mailing list > FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > > > ___ > FrameWorks mailing list > FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
Hello, of course you are right with this approach. I’m talking about another definition of “non-linear” which is also correct. Anyhow I made a lot of linear analogue video editing and every time you had to copy to start a new version until the quality was so bad you had to go back to the originals with the timecodes. Verzonden vanuit Mail voor Windows 10 Van: Adam Hyman Verzonden: vrijdag 30 november 2018 2:04 Aan: Experimental Film Discussion List Onderwerp: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing Hi, I learned in film school during the transition period that what Dave says is correct Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was linear due to the assembly reason that Dave describes; non-linear digital editing was a return to the non-linear editing of celluloid. We could have a poll though. Best, Adam From: FrameWorks on behalf of Colinet André Reply-To: "Experimental Film Discussion List " Date: Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM To: "Experimental Film Discussion List " Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing I don’t agree with Dave. Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or video footage. Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because it’s only a editing list with software. All the best !! Colinet André Verzonden vanuit Mail voor Windows 10 Van: Dave Tetzlaff Verzonden: donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50 Aan: Experimental Film Discussion List Onderwerp: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing > I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing film at > an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it. That’s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-linear, which means you can edit anywhere in the piece you want by winding the reels to that spot. Linear editing was how editing in VIDEO was performed pre-computerization. That is, you had to add each shot sequentially from beginning to to end, in that order, and once you got to, say, shot 5, you couldn’t go back and trim the cut between 1 and 2 without starting over. Needless to say, linear editing is a pain in the ass, and anyone who had ever editied film found it extremely frustrating and limitiing. Thus non-linear video editing was invented by commercial filmmakers after video became integrated into feature film produstion via special effects and ‘workprinting’. For example, one of the earliest experimental systems, the Editdroid, was built by Lucasfilm in the early ‘80s. In fact, before the term ‘non-linear editing’ came into common use in the 1990s, these systems were called ‘electronic film editing’, because they gave editors working with video footage the same flexibility that physical film editing had always offered. You have checked your definitions before creating your survey… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-linear_editing_system#History ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
Hi, I learned in film school during the transition period that what Dave says is correct Editing with celluloid is non-linear; early video editing was linear due to the assembly reason that Dave describes; non-linear digital editing was a return to the non-linear editing of celluloid. We could have a poll though. Best, Adam From: FrameWorks on behalf of Colinet André Reply-To: "Experimental Film Discussion List " Date: Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 4:44 PM To: "Experimental Film Discussion List " Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing I don¹t agree with Dave. Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or video footage. Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because it¹s only a editing list with software. All the best !! Colinet André Verzonden vanuit Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> voor Windows 10 Van: Dave Tetzlaff <mailto:djte...@gmail.com> Verzonden: donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50 Aan: Experimental Film Discussion List <mailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com> Onderwerp: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing > I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing film at an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it. That¹s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-linear, which means you can edit anywhere in the piece you want by winding the reels to that spot. Linear editing was how editing in VIDEO was performed pre-computerization. That is, you had to add each shot sequentially from beginning to to end, in that order, and once you got to, say, shot 5, you couldn¹t go back and trim the cut between 1 and 2 without starting over. Needless to say, linear editing is a pain in the ass, and anyone who had ever editied film found it extremely frustrating and limitiing. Thus non-linear video editing was invented by commercial filmmakers after video became integrated into feature film produstion via special effects and workprinting¹. For example, one of the earliest experimental systems, the Editdroid, was built by Lucasfilm in the early 80s. In fact, before the term non-linear editing¹ came into common use in the 1990s, these systems were called electronic film editing¹, because they gave editors working with video footage the same flexibility that physical film editing had always offered. You have checked your definitions before creating your survey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-linear_editing_system#History ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
No, Dave is right on. In the beginning, we had film editing, and film editing was great. You could put anything anywhere. Then, we had videotape, and although you could kind of razor-blade quad tape, most videotape editing was done by dubbing scenes one at a time from one video machine to another. It was horrible, horrible torture and required extensive planning and preparation. If you have not encountered videotape editing, there are a couple youtube videos which begin to show what an excruciating process it was. It was "linear editing" because the tape was one long sequence that could not be interrupted... you could assemble a shot to the end of the tape or you could insert a shot over an existing section of tape, but the scene that was at 1:30 on the tape was always going to be at 1:30 unless you wiped it and dubbed from the original over someplace else. Video editing was SO BAD that there were productions that were shot on video, kinescoped for editing, and then transferred back to video with all of the conequent loss and annoying artifacts... just to avoid videotape editing. When video people began to be able to do nonlinear editing, it was a total revolution for them. Most of them were people who had never experienced film editing (because videotape editing was so repulsive that nobody EVER moved from film to videotape work), and so it was a total revelation to them that they could just cut the sequence and add a scene in here or take the last three frames of a scene out there. It was utterly amazing what a revolution it was for the video people. For film people, online editing was kind of nice and cut down the costs of workprints and made it easy to do multiple cuts for comparison purposes. But for video people it was a total, total change to finally be able to edit the way film people could. --scott ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
I don’t agree with Dave. Linear editing means physical linear structuring of film or video footage. Non linear editing means virtual editing of footage because it’s only a editing list with software. All the best !! Colinet André Verzonden vanuit Mail voor Windows 10 Van: Dave Tetzlaff Verzonden: donderdag 29 november 2018 22:50 Aan: Experimental Film Discussion List Onderwerp: Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing > I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing film at > an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it. That’s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-linear, which means you can edit anywhere in the piece you want by winding the reels to that spot. Linear editing was how editing in VIDEO was performed pre-computerization. That is, you had to add each shot sequentially from beginning to to end, in that order, and once you got to, say, shot 5, you couldn’t go back and trim the cut between 1 and 2 without starting over. Needless to say, linear editing is a pain in the ass, and anyone who had ever editied film found it extremely frustrating and limitiing. Thus non-linear video editing was invented by commercial filmmakers after video became integrated into feature film produstion via special effects and ‘workprinting’. For example, one of the earliest experimental systems, the Editdroid, was built by Lucasfilm in the early ‘80s. In fact, before the term ‘non-linear editing’ came into common use in the 1990s, these systems were called ‘electronic film editing’, because they gave editors working with video footage the same flexibility that physical film editing had always offered. You have checked your definitions before creating your survey… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-linear_editing_system#History ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Linear film editing
> I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing film at > an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it. That’s not linear editing. Physical film editing is non-linear, which means you can edit anywhere in the piece you want by winding the reels to that spot. Linear editing was how editing in VIDEO was performed pre-computerization. That is, you had to add each shot sequentially from beginning to to end, in that order, and once you got to, say, shot 5, you couldn’t go back and trim the cut between 1 and 2 without starting over. Needless to say, linear editing is a pain in the ass, and anyone who had ever editied film found it extremely frustrating and limitiing. Thus non-linear video editing was invented by commercial filmmakers after video became integrated into feature film produstion via special effects and ‘workprinting’. For example, one of the earliest experimental systems, the Editdroid, was built by Lucasfilm in the early ‘80s. In fact, before the term ‘non-linear editing’ came into common use in the 1990s, these systems were called ‘electronic film editing’, because they gave editors working with video footage the same flexibility that physical film editing had always offered. You have checked your definitions before creating your survey… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-linear_editing_system#History ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
[Frameworks] Linear film editing
Dear Frameworks Friends. I'm interested in 'linear film editing', as in cutting and splicing film at an edit bench or Steenbeck or however you do it. I'd like to know more about artist filmmakers who continue to edit film physically whilst also living in this digital era! I've attached a questionnaire for folks to fill in if you would be so kind. Email responses to maryst...@hotmail.co.uk Warmest wishes, Mary Linear film editing questionnaire.docx Description: MS-Word 2007 document ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
