Jump to content

What "style" of edit is this ?


Recommended Posts

Hi Xavier, it is a form of  "invisible cut "editing, there was a brilliant article on the technique on nofilmschool last month. Real eye opener. I hadn't realized myself but its an incredibly sophisticated technique of very carefully matching shots that are visually similar or connected. In particular the motion and  speed of motion of  the cut shots is vital. its very time consuming to get right apparently.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I am currently editing a video in this style so I can point you to a few links if you are looking for further inspiration. 24 hours in Ibiza https://vimeo.com/135852367 India Land of Kings https://vim

Oh no, Xavier, by story I meant any coherent message that the images speak as a whole, the subtext, the underlying message that talks to us as humans at a higher, intellectual level rather than at a p

I made a video in this style. Definitely not as good as the Watchtower of Turkey, but I'm pretty proud of it. What do you guys think?   

Dear Sekhar, it depends what you define as "story". No there is no classic story. But thank god for it, we can't live forever with "a guy meets girl and fall in love" and/or "someone killed someone else, let's see who did it" kind of stories. 

As much as there can be non-verbal communication, there can be non-verbal audio-visual story. Watchtower of Turkey offers a glimpse of Turkey in 3.30 minutes and of course, it can't replace travelling and staying there! But for those who have never been there, I more than welcome to have seen it!

Oh no, Xavier, by story I meant any coherent message that the images speak as a whole, the subtext, the underlying message that talks to us as humans at a higher, intellectual level rather than at a purely sensory (visual/auditory) level. E.g., many interpreted even the little pizza rat clip as an underdog "story." A more obvious example is of the buffalo that saved its calf from lions that clearly has a "story" I'm talking about (a beginning, middle, and end, to use the cliche).

If there was such a message in Watchtower of Turkey, I didn't get it. It seemed to me like a juxtaposition/collage of beautiful images, much like a Victoria's Secret fashion show. E.g., frenetic cuts like that can indicate a frenzy of wild activity, but I don't believe that's what this filmmaker intended for the tourist viewers. What then was the purpose of this kind of cut other than to look cool and generate discussions like this?

Anyway, I sense clear disdain and disapproval of my comments here (talking of subtext, I can easily read "what the heck do you know?"). But guys, rather than immediately push back, please consider what I said and discuss because we're all trying to be better filmmakers, and I for myself might be missing an important point here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

May be, but the Pizza Rat video shot with cell phone has 8+ million views and caused an Internet sensation, so views mean squat. My point is, to use the cliche: content is king, and there ain't a story in this one.

The problem with telling a story is that it's hard, and like exercise folks will resort to all kinds of tricks to avoid it: slow-mo, time-lapse, drone shots, macros, crazy cutting, night for day, bizarre stunt go-pro shots, you name it. Basically do anything gee-wiz to distract the viewer from realizing that there is no story.

As I said, the footage is lovely in this piece, so kudos for that. But being great at shooting video is NOT the same being great at telling a story. And storytelling matters a lot to indie filmmakers here, much more so than the gee-wiz stuff.

That poor rat is trying to feed his adapted turtle kids..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh no, Xavier, by story I meant any coherent message that the images speak as a whole, the subtext, the underlying message that talks to us as humans at a higher, intellectual level rather than at a purely sensory (visual/auditory) level. E.g., many interpreted even the little pizza rat clip as an underdog "story." A more obvious example is of the buffalo that saved its calf from lions that clearly has a "story" I'm talking about (a beginning, middle, and end, to use the cliche).

If there was such a message in Watchtower of Turkey, I didn't get it. It seemed to me like a juxtaposition/collage of beautiful images, much like a Victoria's Secret fashion show. E.g., frenetic cuts like that can indicate a frenzy of wild activity, but I don't believe that's what this filmmaker intended for the tourist viewers. What then was the purpose of this kind of cut other than to look cool and generate discussions like this?

Anyway, I sense clear disdain and disapproval of my comments here (talking of subtext, I can easily read "what the heck do you know?"). But guys, rather than immediately push back, please consider what I said and discuss because we're all trying to be better filmmakers, and I for myself might be missing an important point here.

I agree that it was a collage of beautiful images but I wouldn't compare it to a Victoria Secret fashion show or any unrelated cellphone video because of the "view count". I'm not really one to be a critic either, though; mostly because I prefer the humble nature of an open minded audience too. The mouse video catered to a certain crowd.. rightfully earning its view count with female viewers likely saying "awwwwwwww" inadvertently in perfect harmony. Nothing wrong with that. Content is king and Watchtower of Turkey packed a bigger punch for me. I'm not trying to compare it to any elaborately written short film that I may have also loved but if a picture is worth a thousand words than I just watched what felt like a billion in under 4 minutes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, I sense clear disdain and disapproval of my comments here (talking of subtext, I can easily read "what the heck do you know?"). But guys, rather than immediately push back, please consider what I said and discuss because we're all trying to be better filmmakers, and I for myself might be missing an important point here.

No, sorry if I sounded disapproval. I love to discuss "content" instead of Mac/Pc or 8/10bit discussions!!! 

Oh no, Xavier, by story I meant any coherent message that the images speak as a whole, the subtext, the underlying message that talks to us as humans at a higher, intellectual level rather than at a purely sensory (visual/auditory) level. E.g., many interpreted even the little pizza rat clip as an underdog "story." A more obvious example is of the buffalo that saved its calf from lions that clearly has a "story" I'm talking about (a beginning, middle, and end, to use the cliche).

We'd better not use YouTube counts as a measure of quality. But makes videos for near-zero audience it's not cool either!

I see this type of editing as a "virtuosistic" version of normal editing. But I must confess that I have enjoyed Joe Satriani and Steve Vai quite a bit! You either like it or not, there is nothing wrong with not-liking it!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed the Loving Lanka video just as much as WatchTower.

I'm surprised, after reading about all the work that went into audio, and especially after looking at the timeline of Watchtower, that I didn't really notice all the soundbites that were included.

In other words, I worked hard to try and hear all the subtle audio adds, but they didn't stick out to me all that much, for whatever reason.

Another point I noticed, after reading through this thread, that I found helpful, was the idea of "letting an image breathe".

To all those above, thanks for posting. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Editing is a "hidden" part of the filmmaking craft. 

When done right, it contains incredible power without being too noticed. 

The interesting thing about this sort of technique is how very very assertive it is while still keeping many things "hidden" --such as audio...and by visually connecting seemingly disparate elements. 

It's a sort of paradox.  It's also visual candy.  

Its an impressionistic film, yes.  And not one that is meant to be direct narrative. It's fun to watch, but as a viewer you're not allowed to have much emotional connection to anyone in it.  Which is fine.   It's more about letting that environments sounds and images wash over you. 

And, yeah, it will be a "dated" look a handful of years down the road, much like the twee "maker" movies will be/are. 

However, that's not to say that the craft used very aggressively in this sort of work couldn't be used judiciously as an effective narrative tool in other sorts of filmmaking. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyway, I sense clear disdain and disapproval of my comments here (talking of subtext, I can easily read "what the heck do you know?"). But guys, rather than immediately push back, please consider what I said and discuss because we're all trying to be better filmmakers, and I for myself might be missing an important point here.

I didn't mean to come across as looking down on your opinion from above. I was just suggesting that by looking at the discussion here and on Youtube, it is striking a chord with people and I think it is important to ask ourselves why. I read some of the comments on his Youtube upload. People have had heated debates about how the Watchtower of Turkey is heavily bias towards Islamic iconography of Turkish culture, and some Turkish citizens are very angry. When placing such an emphasis on the imagery alone, it raises interesting debates on the symbolism, subtext and iconography of the moving image.

With regards to how filmmakers are responding to the effects (and thinking about what you are saying about story); we can think back to what happened when The Matrix came out and we all collectively pooped our pants. The Wachowski brothers saw Michel Gondry's Smirnoff commercial (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vj4jppqwkw) and they used the effects to tell an interesting story. But then they couldn't really use that effect again as it propagated itself into almost every action movie and commercial at the turn of the millenium. This style has that kind of appeal, and probably the same trajectory. The difference is that you don't need a budget to pull it off, just plenty of time and the software, which is what most amateur filmmakers have. I dare to say that perhaps even this filmmaker may feel a bit cursed by his success, as judging from the movies he has made since, he may feel obligated to edit this way and feel caged by its limitations.

 

However, that's not to say that the craft used very aggressively in this sort of work couldn't be used judiciously as an effective narrative tool in other sorts of filmmaking. 

I look forward to seeing how it manifests itself into other genres beyond travel.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I look forward to seeing how it manifests itself into other genres beyond travel.

Not too hard:  A character's POV as he/she is overwhelmed by sensation.  I mean, I think I've already seen something similar on "Homeland" for instance, as the bipolar protagonist has a cope during an emotional breakdown.

Sci-Fi:  Some sort of temporal time travel.

Thriller: interspatial montage as the hero travels to a new location... 

Whatever.

The main thing is that creating dynamic edits that actually controls the viewer's eye movement in a deliberate way is a basic and effective technique.  Even "slow" edits should do the same if the material demands it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Watchtower of Turkey doesn't have a story in the classic sense, but I found it just as powerful in its own right.  Is a Rothko inferior to a Michelangelo because the latter is figurative and chooses to tell a story?  They have different aims and each succeeds in its own way.  Looking at the medium of moving images as more than cinema / storytelling, to me this short explores some aesthetic qualities of the medium extremely well.

Thanks for posting the question OP, and thanks to all the other members for the excellent explanations and links; this is a great thread!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just tried this weekend with some footage I had, to do something similar. Its far from good, needs a lot more training, only the last transitions worked, I think. But still its quite fun to edit this type of thing, and including all the little sounds (no camera sound) is quite fun and something I dont usually do. Anyone know any good webiste to download free sound effects ? I took all of those from youtube, but it would be great to know a dedicated place for it..

https://vimeo.com/143796710

Password : Test

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just tried this weekend with some footage I had, to do something similar. Its far from good, needs a lot more training, only the last transitions worked, I think. But still its quite fun to edit this type of thing, and including all the little sounds (no camera sound) is quite fun and something I dont usually do. Anyone know any good webiste to download free sound effects ? I took all of those from youtube, but it would be great to know a dedicated place for it..

https://vimeo.com/143796710

Password : Test

Nice work! I'm by no means an expert in this editing style but you've definitely got the feel for how it works down.  I do like that sequence towards the end with the trees and tree sound effects. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work! I'm by no means an expert in this editing style but you've definitely got the feel for how it works down.  I do like that sequence towards the end with the trees and tree sound effects. 

Thank you :d

Yeah, that sequence worked well, this weekend will try some more, and try more seriously (this time was all rushed), however, with this exercise, it made me realize how important sound is, and I dismiss it so easily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some old examples from me.  I wouldn't say this is the same style as the video we're talking about.  However, there are sound editing techniques in a simple sports PR series I did in 2013 that are kinda-sorta similar.  It's not a complex technique, just a little time consuming.  And building a nice unexpected but motivated soundscape in an edit always takes it up a notch.

Sound is always good to concentrate on.

Basically, just getting in there with curious elements can create a nice context to an edit.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 8 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...