Editing
Editing
Here are five assignments to help you develop and assess your film editing skills:
Task:
• Edit the footage to ensure smooth transitions, maintaining consistent eyelines, screen
direction, and pacing.
Task:
• Take the same raw footage and edit two different versions:
• Compare the emotional impact of each version and explain your decisions in a brief
reflection.
• Choose a short scene (or film one yourself) and edit it in two different ways:
• One version using only diegetic sound (sounds from the scene itself).
• One version using a mix of diegetic and non-diegetic sound (music, voiceovers, sound
design).
Task:
• Choose a short film clip from one genre (e.g., horror, comedy, drama).
• Re-edit the scene to fit a different genre by changing pacing, color grading, music, and
transitions.
Task:
• Research and write a short paper (or create a video essay) on one of the following topics:
• The rise of fast-paced editing in action films (e.g., Bourne Identity, Mad Max: Fury Road).
• Provide examples and discuss how the techniques influence your own editing style.
Would you like suggestions for software or reference materials to help with these
assignments?
Glad to help! Here are some recommended software and reference materials to assist with
your assignments:
3. Final Cut Pro X – Great for Mac users, optimized for fast workflows.
Reference Materials
• “In the Blink of an Eye” by Walter Murch – A must-read on the philosophy of editing.
• “The Technique of Film and Video Editing” by Ken Dancyger – Covers editing history and
styles.
• “Film Editing: Great Cuts Every Filmmaker and Movie Lover Must Know” by Gael Chandler
– Explains key cuts and transitions with examples.
Film Editing: Great Cuts Every Filmmaker and Movie Lover Must Know by Gael Chandler
• Khan Academy (Film & Media Studies Section) – Basics of film editing theory.
• YouTube Channels:
• “Psycho” (1960, dir. Alfred Hitchcock) – Study its pacing and match cuts.
• “Mad Max: Fury Road” (2015, dir. George Miller) – A masterclass in fast-paced editing.
• “The Social Network” (2010, ed. Kirk Baxter & Angus Wall) – Smart dialogue cutting.
• Any film by Edgar Wright (e.g., “Hot Fuzz”) – Creative transitions and match cuts.
Would you like specific tutorial recommendations for any of the assignments?
Great! Here are specific tutorials and learning resources for each assignment:
Tutorials:
• Read: Chapter on continuity editing in The Technique of Film and Video Editing by Ken
Dancyger.
Tutorials:
• YouTube: “The Secret to Great Film Editing Rhythm” (This Guy Edits)
• Read: In the Blink of an Eye by Walter Murch (Chapters on rhythm & timing).
Tutorials:
• YouTube:
• “How Sound Design Can Change a Film” (Nerdwriter1)
• “Why Good Sound Design is More Important Than You Think” (Film Riot)
• Practical Guide: Sound Design: The Expressive Power of Music, Voice and Sound Effects in
Cinema by David Sonnenschein.
Tutorials:
• YouTube:
• Watch parody trailers like The Shining (Romantic Comedy Cut) for inspiration.
• Read: Chapters on editing conventions in different genres in The Technique of Film and
Video Editing.
• YouTube:
• Cut to the Chase by Sam O’Steen (Behind-the-scenes look at classic film editing)
Would you like help finding free versions of any resources? Or suggestions for specific
scenes to edit?
Here are some free resources and scene suggestions to help with your assignments:
• Continuity Editing:
• Khan Academy - Film Grammar (Covers continuity, cuts, and editing basics)
• YouTube – This Guy Edits (Free deep dives into film pacing)
If you don’t have your own footage, try these free resources:
If you have access to editing software and want to practice with real scenes, here are some
ideas:
• Film a simple action (e.g., someone picking up a cup, opening a door, sitting down) from
multiple angles and edit it for seamless continuity.
• Re-edit an existing scene from a public domain film like Night of the Living Dead (1968)
(available here) and fix continuity errors.
• Take an action sequence (e.g., a chase scene) and slow it down or speed it up.
• Re-edit a scene from Nosferatu (1922) (public domain, available here) to create tension
with pacing changes.
• Find a comedy scene and turn it into horror using sound and pacing (or vice versa).
• Take footage from a dramatic movie and re-edit it as a thriller (Example: Charlie Chaplin’s
The Kid—available here).
Would you like a step-by-step breakdown for any of these tasks? Or recommendations on
free editing software tutorials?
Sure! Here’s a step-by-step breakdown for one of your assignments. Let’s use the Genre
Editing Study, where you take a scene and re-edit it to fit a different genre.
Goal: Take a scene from a film (or film one yourself) and re-edit it to change its genre.
• If filming yourself: Pick a neutral scene (e.g., a conversation, a chase, someone walking
down a hallway).
• If using existing footage: Download a scene from a public domain film (Archive.org, Pexels,
Videvo).
• Examples:
• Open Adobe Premiere Pro, DaVinci Resolve, or any free editor (like Shotcut or HitFilm
Express).
1. Pacing:
• Fast cuts → Action, comedy
4. Shot Selection:
✅ Replace happy music with creepy drones. (Try free horror soundtracks from
Freesound.org)
Example: Take a funny dinner scene and turn it into something sinister by adding
uncomfortable silences and eerie background hums.
✅ Tighten the editing. Cut away from moments quickly to add tension.
✅ Increase background sound intensity. Use distant sirens, heavy breathing, or a ticking
clock.
✅ Use quick, abrupt cuts. Jump between close-ups and wide shots.
• Visual Effects (Optional): Add light flickers for horror, or motion blur for action.
• Text & Titles: If making a fake movie trailer, add genre-appropriate fonts.
Step 6: Export & Compare
Would you like a video tutorial recommendation that follows a similar process?
Sure! Here’s a rubric you can use to assess each assignment. It includes four key categories:
Technical Execution, Creativity, Genre/Continuity Adherence, and Reflection & Analysis.
Each category is graded on a 1-5 scale, with descriptions for each level.
5- 3- 2 - Needs
Criteria 4 - Good 1 - Poor
Excellent Satisfactory Improvement
Seamless
editing, Editing is
smooth generally
transitions, clear, but
Well-executed, Several Editing is
no some cuts
only minor flaws noticeable rough with
Technical noticeable feel abrupt,
in cuts, technical errors major errors,
Execution (Cuts, errors. audio levels
transitions, or (e.g., jarring cuts, poor sound
Transitions, High- may be
audio. Color audio issues, mixing, and
Audio Sync, Color quality inconsistent,
grading is inconsistent lack of
Grading) sound and color
effective but grading). Needs attention to
mixing and grading may
could be refined. more polishing. detail.
color not fully
grading support the
enhance tone.
the scene.
Highly
creative
Some
and Shows originality
creative Minimal creative
original. and solid No attempt
elements choices, lacks
Creativity & Style Strong use understanding at creative
are present, engagement, or
(Use of Sound, of pacing, of editing storytelling.
but relies too much
Pacing, Shot sound, and choices. Feels
execution is on default
Selection, Effects) shot Effective use of unoriginal or
inconsistent editing
choices to pacing and directionless.
or lacks techniques.
create a sound.
impact.
compelling
edit.
Adherence to Scene fits Mostly effective Genre or Genre/continuity Little to no
Genre/Continuity the genre/continuity continuity is is unclear or effort in
(For Genre intended choices, with somewhat inconsistent, establishing a
Editing or Shot genre only minor clear but making the edit genre or
Matching perfectly, inconsistencies. lacks strong feel confusing or maintaining
Assignments) with editing unpolished. continuity.
excellent choices to
use of reinforce it.
editing
5- 3- 2 - Needs
Criteria 4 - Good 1 - Poor
Excellent Satisfactory Improvement
techniques
to reinforce
the style.
Deep,
insightful Basic
Limited
analysis of Good reflection reflection,
Reflection & reflection, with
editing on editing identifies No reflection
Analysis (Written little discussion
choices, choices, though some editing or analysis
or Verbal of editing
explaining could go deeper choices but provided.
Explanation) decisions or their
the impact into impact. lacks strong
effect.
of analysis.
techniques.
• 20-25 points: Excellent work! You have a strong grasp of film editing.
• 15-19 points: Good job! Some areas need improvement, but your understanding is solid.
• 10-14 points: Satisfactory. There’s room for growth in technical skills and creativity.
• 5-9 points: Needs work. Focus on refining your technical skills and editing choices.
This rubric is specifically designed to assess your research and analysis of film editing theory
and history. Each category is scored on a 1-5 scale, with a total possible score of 25 points.
2 - Needs
Criteria 5 - Excellent 4 - Good 3 - Satisfactory 1 - Poor
Improvement
Demonstrates Uses good
extensive research Research is
research using with a mix minimal or
multiple of Includes basic relies on only Little to no
credible sources. research with one or two research. Report is
Depth of
sources. Some limited sources. weak vague or contains
Research
Effectively depth in Covers the topic sources. incorrect
incorporates discussing but lacks depth. Lacks information.
historical and theory historical
theoretical and context.
perspectives. history.
Clearly
explains key
editing Explains
Shows
theories (e.g., editing Covers basic
minimal No clear
Soviet theories editing theories
understandin discussion of
Understandin Montage, well with but may have
g of editing editing theories or
g of Editing Continuity examples some
theories, with major
Theories Editing) with but may misunderstanding
vague or misunderstanding
strong lack depth s or lack strong
incorrect s.
examples. in examples.
explanations.
Shows deep analysis.
understanding
.
Connects
editing Provides
techniques to historical
Covers historical Minimal
historical context
aspects but lacks historical No historical
developments and
strong discussion, context or
Historical in film. examples
connections with weak inaccurate
Analysis Discusses how but may
between time examples or historical
editing lack depth
periods and unclear information.
evolved over in
techniques. connections.
time with explaining
strong evolution.
examples.
2 - Needs
Criteria 5 - Excellent 4 - Good 3 - Satisfactory 1 - Poor
Improvement
Well-
Organized
structured
and Poor
with clear Some structure
mostly organization, Disorganized or
arguments, but lacks smooth
Clarity & clear, but hard to difficult to
smooth transitions or
Organization may have follow, or understand. Ideas
transitions, clear argument
minor lacks logical are scattered.
and logical development.
structural progression.
flow. Easy to
issues.
follow.
Uses strong,
relevant Includes
examples good
(films, scenes, examples
No relevant
editors) to and Few or weak
Uses some examples or
Use of support analysis, examples,
examples, but analysis. Report is
Examples & claims. but some with little
analysis is basic purely descriptive
Analysis Provides deep points analysis of
or lacks depth. with no deeper
analysis of could be their impact.
insight.
how editing more
techniques developed
impact .
storytelling.
• 22-25 points (Excellent): Exceptional understanding of editing history and theory. Well-
researched and insightful.
• 17-21 points (Good): Solid analysis with good research, but could be more in-depth.
• 12-16 points (Satisfactory): Covers the basics, but lacks depth or strong connections.
Would you like suggestions for specific editing theories or historical moments to research?