11
Replies
You won't do this because
A) it takes forever
B) you don't need to
But it might give you an idea.
3 cameras on process trailer, many takes ( with slates)
3 cameras on roof handheld, same deal.
If I remember right, I put all CAM A on a level, all CAM B on one, and C … leaving video levels free below and above them. V1 and V2 blank ( V2 would become the rough cut and V1 blank for future corrections manual cross dissolves or whatever...)
I did NOT use source monitor for anything. I scrubbed through the stuff to get idea of cut and threw out the total junk.
Then, as I used stuff I would make an actual cut ( not in out points) and copy paste that portion below the current camera level, and THEN copy paste it to my roughcut too.
That way I had a visual quick reference to all the clip portions USED from all the cameras.
maybe you can do something similar with moving used stuff to a blank video level directly below or above the source using shift key with drag and then put it into your roughcut ?
good luck
Yair, yes... lots of toggling tracks on and off and activating for paste stuff... took forever, but was very exact.
also,, honestly, compared to doing things with plastic film it is really FAST. hehe...
Oddly, the faster things get the more faster we want MORE fast stuff... but I find that by taking some time to think through things I personally do a better job. For example, the cameras on roof were seeing crew members and other cameras so often I HAD to make cuts I didn't want to make. People can't really tell how an edit is ( whether it's good ) unless they also know what the sources were. Sometimes you cut when you don't want to.
So I devised the black and white thing ( making it look like cheap video camera) and did STATIC ( as if video camera was switched on and off randomly). That took care of the forced cuts .. made it look OK. The broadcast of that thing totally dumped the rooftop scene, I think due to this screwup of seeing so many cameras and crew members... But taking the time the brainstorm of doing it my way came to me.
So, sometimes FASTER is not better.
I think that's a great idea.. the hole idea.. but it doesn't allow you to see what used to be in the hole ...and it may not match where in the timeline your use of it is ( won't be directly below it ). But I hope no matter what you figure out it works well and helps you make a cool movie !
good luck !
Meg's suggestion sounds best so far for your situation. In mine, there were multiple cameras and takes... so let's say I did a roughcut and then realized (scrubbing later on to get sense of pace etc.) I discover that a cut I used had a bright background outside car window one second, and then turned really dark on my cut 1 second later, which looked really stupid. So now I have to hunt through that stuff to see what I can do to save it.... and having my system of visual reminder of what was used helped me figure out how to fix it ...using the slate ID ( take numbers) and all that jazz...
hehe.. anyway, now you have lots of options
AdChoices