I do my own cutting, and imagine many others do --- it's an excellent way to cut costs without hurting the quality, provided you can do it. But I'm wondering if anyone here does still work with an editor. I'm sure there would be benefits, another pair of eyes, etc. But then, some also like to write screenplays in collaboration, and I can't imagine that. Who settles what? But anyway, yes, interested to know if the way of the editor hasn't vanished except with big studios, and for anyone, what that relationship's like.
-
✅ Technical and creative solutions for your film.
✅ Screenplay formatting help, plot and story guidance.
✅ A respectful community of professionals and newbies.
✅ Network with composers, editors, cast, crew, and more!
🎬 IndieTalk - Filmmaking and Screenwriting help site and community.
By filmmakers, for filmmakers since 2003
editing Do indie people still use editors?
- Thread starter PhoenixBoneFilms
- Start date
“Indie” is such a vague term. There are indie films that have budgets of $250K or $1M… or more. There are indies that have a budget of “copy, credit, meal”, and are calling in favors wherever they can. And there’s everything in between. So… where do you fall on that spectrum? And are you talking about shorts, features, or both?
I’ve worked on quite a few self-funded indies that have hired both picture editors and audio post. These can make a huge difference.
I’d argue that it’s not exactly “an excellent way to cut costs without hurting the quality”. When I see (most) directors edit their own footage, the final product often suffers. Cutting your own footage can save money, sure, but you’re way too familiar with your footage and might not be as objective when it comes to making cuts. I do know some directors who edit their own projects and do just fine, but I know more who would benefit from someone else being able to make decisions without personal attachment to the footage.
And too often, directors who do their own post sound just end up with very poorly-edited and poorly-mixed films. Sound design isn’t adding 4 or 5 extra tracks of sound; it’s a complex process that builds the world through many intricate layers, and creates a cohesive re-recording mix that is compliant with delivery specs for wherever the film will be distributed. I work with a few indie directors who will always send me their films for thorough audio post, whether they edited the picture themselves or hired someone else to do it.
If you can make it work, get yourself both picture and sound editors.
I’ve worked on quite a few self-funded indies that have hired both picture editors and audio post. These can make a huge difference.
I’d argue that it’s not exactly “an excellent way to cut costs without hurting the quality”. When I see (most) directors edit their own footage, the final product often suffers. Cutting your own footage can save money, sure, but you’re way too familiar with your footage and might not be as objective when it comes to making cuts. I do know some directors who edit their own projects and do just fine, but I know more who would benefit from someone else being able to make decisions without personal attachment to the footage.
And too often, directors who do their own post sound just end up with very poorly-edited and poorly-mixed films. Sound design isn’t adding 4 or 5 extra tracks of sound; it’s a complex process that builds the world through many intricate layers, and creates a cohesive re-recording mix that is compliant with delivery specs for wherever the film will be distributed. I work with a few indie directors who will always send me their films for thorough audio post, whether they edited the picture themselves or hired someone else to do it.
If you can make it work, get yourself both picture and sound editors.
Last edited:
Where do I fall on that spectrum? Well, people get paid, but not handsomely. Hamlet quite a bit more than the others, I'll vaguely say it's a six-figure film. Yes, I agree to hire someone for post if you're at all uncomfortable, and yes, I've worked with sound designers. But for editing, if I may so, I feel I have a knack for it, and the rhythm and flavour must come from myself. Though much of it is easier, as I do have a habit of shooting one take and no coverage (where possible), I also love montage and have experimented extensively. So believe me, it's not just out of cheapness I cut the picture myself! I'd gladly work as an editor, freelance, but haven't found any gigs.
That said, if there's any doubt about something, could always help to bring someone in and say, "Tell me what you think of this." I don't think a film's any better or worse necessarily for having the director edit, just depends on his feel for things. Was curious what others do.
That said, if there's any doubt about something, could always help to bring someone in and say, "Tell me what you think of this." I don't think a film's any better or worse necessarily for having the director edit, just depends on his feel for things. Was curious what others do.
I love editing and have been hired as an editor several times.
On the movies I direct I have edited a few. On several I did the initial edit and then
passed everything to someone else. But I prefer to work with an editor. That other
creative perspective is not only helpful but I love the collaboration with a dedicated
editor.
All my movies have had a smaller budget than yours - a couple over fifty large but
most under that. Never directed a six-figure movie.
Isn't there a song about mo' money, mo' problems? Very true, this one experience. Though Hitchcock said it's a miracle that anything, by anybody, ever gets completed at all.
Quite a few youtube creators and indie filmmakers use editors. It's mainly a function of income. Teenagers in LA with a 10k monthly allowance hire them all the time, anyone working with the actual profits that microbudget or smaller narrative films generate typically don't. Some youtubers collaborate by combining skillsets for shared revenue, you'll see it in the credits fairly often.
With a significant number of more serious indie filmmakers, the lack of an external editor is often just a logical choice. You've put x amount of time and money into a film, and it doesn't make sense to introduce a person without all the investment in your project to do a job that can ultimately ruin it and cause all the investment to be lost.
In a situation where you had a genuinely talented editor, It's definitely a positive, for the exact same reason many avoid it. A detached perspective on the source material can lead to editing decisions that ultimately benefit the film. For that to work though, you'd typically need a caliber of editor beyond the price range of a microbudget film.
Lastly, I'd say that indies don't hire editors as much because it's not a very expensive or difficult thing to learn or execute yourself. I'm definitely not saying it's unskilled, but if you're the type of person who would undertake the challenge of filming a movie out of pocket, you've already made a commitment to effort considerably beyond 60 hours of coursework and a download of DaVinci. People often underestimate the skill involved, as they do with many aspects of production, like grading, foley, etc, but with editing specifically (assuming you mean time and sequence editing) it's something you can learn to do yourself with a reasonable amount of study and practice.
There are editing jobs so simple that you can automate them now, like I did with the Showreel.video site. (see the video "Time" available here on Indietalk) I can put together a montage or music video in less than 30 seconds at this point. I've been building a far more competent robot video editor, but it's a very complex solve that requires a lot of training and intelligence, so it's far from production ready in my opinion. Here's a sample of an early test of that. It kind of works. I watched a person watching it and they forgot about the tech and got interested in the documentary itself. That was all I needed to see to know that I could improve it 5x over the next 6 months and have an instant solve for all but the highest level tasks. It lets me focus on the many other aspects like script, visual design, color, foley, and music, that I'm more interested in spending limited available time on.
With a significant number of more serious indie filmmakers, the lack of an external editor is often just a logical choice. You've put x amount of time and money into a film, and it doesn't make sense to introduce a person without all the investment in your project to do a job that can ultimately ruin it and cause all the investment to be lost.
In a situation where you had a genuinely talented editor, It's definitely a positive, for the exact same reason many avoid it. A detached perspective on the source material can lead to editing decisions that ultimately benefit the film. For that to work though, you'd typically need a caliber of editor beyond the price range of a microbudget film.
Lastly, I'd say that indies don't hire editors as much because it's not a very expensive or difficult thing to learn or execute yourself. I'm definitely not saying it's unskilled, but if you're the type of person who would undertake the challenge of filming a movie out of pocket, you've already made a commitment to effort considerably beyond 60 hours of coursework and a download of DaVinci. People often underestimate the skill involved, as they do with many aspects of production, like grading, foley, etc, but with editing specifically (assuming you mean time and sequence editing) it's something you can learn to do yourself with a reasonable amount of study and practice.
There are editing jobs so simple that you can automate them now, like I did with the Showreel.video site. (see the video "Time" available here on Indietalk) I can put together a montage or music video in less than 30 seconds at this point. I've been building a far more competent robot video editor, but it's a very complex solve that requires a lot of training and intelligence, so it's far from production ready in my opinion. Here's a sample of an early test of that. It kind of works. I watched a person watching it and they forgot about the tech and got interested in the documentary itself. That was all I needed to see to know that I could improve it 5x over the next 6 months and have an instant solve for all but the highest level tasks. It lets me focus on the many other aspects like script, visual design, color, foley, and music, that I'm more interested in spending limited available time on.