Seminar Report
The Evolving Relationship
Between Picture
and Sound Editing
by Mark Phillips
"The miracle today becomes the norm tomorrow and, if we allow the norm to be pushed in our face, what happens to the quality of life?"
SECTIONS:
The mechanisms of evolution are usually seen as gradual, nearly imperceptible changes that will occasionally produce favorable adaptations to the environment. With the onslaught of digital technology, adaptations in the cuttingroom have not been so subtle. Guild V.P. editor Carol Littleton welcomed a sizable audience of members to the seminar, at the Hotel Sofitel, where the evening began with great refreshments.
Priming the audience and panel for a discussion, moderators Mia Goldman and J. Paul Huntsman both stressed that communication between picture and sound departments, from the very beginning, is the key to making everything work smoothly. Mia, a feature editor, sadly recounted how, in her days as a film assistant, turning picture over to sound was a "sacred moment" which doesn't seem to exist any longer. Paul, a supervising sound editor, bemoaning the situation said, "Soon there will be drive-up sound effects windows." Moreover, the "us versus them" attitude is stronger than ever. "Sound editors are seen as interlopers," he continued, "but we are here to help picture finish what they started." Paul also observed an abandonment of the old disciplines, which prompted him to describe picture assistants as "the keyhole or the asshole through which we get our information." He claimed, "Efficiency is the key to creativity with today's schedules."
Mia introduced the distinguished panel which consisted of feature editors Steve Cohen, Steve Rosenblum, and Walter Murch; feature assistant Alan Bell; TV editor Randy Morgan and his assistant Karen Greene; supervising feature sound editor Mark Stoekinger and his assistant Victor Ennis; and supervising TV sound editor Mike Lawshe and his assistant Lisa Wolf.
Mia opened the discussion by asking Steve Rosenblum how things have changed. Steve bluntly stated that the studios lie about schedules from the outset, and even though digital machines help, these schedules are no less than debilitating.
Mark Stoekinger commented that the advanced technology helps him get through shortened schedules if there are no snags with elements such as EDLs and telecine. He lamented that the shortage of time has made him more of an administrator and less of a creator.
Turning to the subject of information flow, Steve Cohen said he works closely with his first assistant and everything flows through him. Noting that everyone's skill level has risen over the years, he emphasized the importance of the first being the ultimate coordinator, but not necessarily the "tech guru," who is also a great benefit in the cutting room. Steve said that ideally editors should be the most knowledgeable person in the room, as it was years ago.
Because he has worked as both a film and sound editor (as well as a mixer) Walter Murch was asked how he has seen the relationship evolve. "The driving force at Zoetrope in the late sixties was that we wanted to make feature films the way we made student films: without compartmentalization," he said. He expressed a sense of liberation being able to cut both picture and sound, a freedom lacking in the Hollywood system which then has one department blaming the other for problems. This is not unique to the film business, Walter pointed out, it's part of the human condition. He cited evidence as far back as graffiti-strewn blocks in the great pyramids of Egypt. Walter claimed that rivalries and deadlines produce competitiveness, and humans will rise to the bait.
Randy Morgan added, "The miracle today becomes the norm tomorrow and, if we allow the norm to be pushed in our face, what happens to the quality of life?" Walter explored the positive side of the situation. Multiple workstations in the cutting room are a great boon because the more ways to access the information, the more intelligent the input and output can be. Networking with sound and music departments is also beneficial because it allows the picture editor a preview of what they are planning and vice versa.
Sound assistant Lisa Wolf enumerated various delays in receiving elements from a single-workstation picture department, including the failure to communicate a dub date, which culminated in two reels not making it to the stage. "It was good the reels didn't make it, now they'll notice," remarked Steve Cohen. Outlining the difference between digitally accessing and cutting, Victor Ennis said that the misconception on the stage is such that producers expect editing to be as quick as accessing.
Randy and Paul both commented on the lack of specificity in Avid sound change notes. From the audience Scott Hecker reported that his assistant whittled thirty pages of sound change notes down to five pages of useful information. Paul even urged picture to make a clone of each reel and clean it up before turning over to sound, but Steve Rosenblum said that there is rarely time to do this.
Paul asked Mike Lawshe if the situation is any better in television. "We rely a lot on the telecine; it must be correct so we don't turn things over out of sync," Mike began. If takes do slide, there is no time for an editor to check them, and an assistant can't do it because there is only one workstation. Mike concluded that this is worse than it used to be, but checking dailies when loading is a great help.
Randy Morgan described having some rare free time once and, checking dailies, found takes up to three frames out of sync. When he complained to a producer the reply was that the dialogue editor would fix it. Mia urged us to reprimand these people.
When asked how some of these problems could be solved, feature assistant Alan Bell conceded that there is no perfect system yet; however, he regards sound as important as picture and feels it is the responsibility of one assistant in the room to communicate with sound early on, check for and eliminate problems before they snowball, and "do it right the first time." Alan advised picture and sound departments to accommodate each other and predicted the future lay in compatible machinery. Television assistant Karen Greene shared Alan's sentiments and warned that it's crucial to check your telecine before the editor cuts because incorrect information is more damaging than none at all. Mia reinforced their comments by suggesting a salaried sound assistant be with the picture department well before any temp dubs.
A sound editor in the audience declared there is a lack of leadership in picture cutting rooms; editors have abdicated their responsibility. Paul agreed, saying, "Some rooms don't care what chaos they've created."
Picture editor Norm Hollyn buffered these complaints by extolling the virtues of foresight - including visits to optical houses to discuss effects. "When the producers want to cut time, I can say. 'This is what we lose. There is no free lunch'. The picture editor must lead in this way," he affirmed.
Steve Cohen noted a lot of customer support has failed, and nobody feels Avid is listening. He postulated that Avid believes there is no more money to be made in Hollywood, evidenced by only three out of three hundred forty engineers concentrating on the film aspects. Avid rep Alan Stewart, who is also a filmmaker, explained that Avid is a big, complex company. One major problem is that the decision makers are not based in Hollywood and, consequently, do not hear our problems firsthand. Alan doesn't believe Avid is not concerned with Hollywood, and he said he wants to spend time with us to work on solutions. In fact, the new software specifically addresses the film industry, he added, and he foresees a smooth transition between picture and sound cuts within six to twelve months.
Lightworks rep Dean Godshall acknowledged similar problems with his company because they are based in England; however, their position in the U.S. is to focus on training and support. And Lightworks has its share of improvements, he said, like new modifiable software for change notes, shared storage is now a reality, and OMF compatibility is on the horizon.
Picture editor Rob Kobrin claimed he has had no problems working with sound editor Frank Smathers because their symbiotic relationship is based on using Avid's OMF (Open Media Framework), which is a set of standards for the exchange of data and media. Paul described OMF as "a VW when you need a dumptruck." But Frank said although OMF needs some work, he's not aware of an easier way to transfer information. There is even a specific OMF support hotline (800-949-6634).
Digital picture assistant Scott Janush, exasperated from all the complaining, said "Technology has been a pain in my butt since day one, but all outputs work if you set them up properly...communication is what's needed. It's usually a picture assistant who's not doing something when there's a problem."
In closing, Paul cautioned against assuming the guy on the other end of the process knows what you're thinking. Make that phone call, he said. Mia felt the editorial process will improve if we all take responsibility and allow assistants the time to do their jobs.
Mark Phillips is an assistant editor.
At the time this article was written he was working on 'Home Alone 3'.
Reprinted from
The Motion Picture Editors Guild Newsletter
Vol. 17, No. 5 - Nov/Dec 1996.
Guild Home | Newsletter Home | Top of Page
Copyright © 1996, All Rights Reserved by The Motion Picture Editors Guild, IATSE Local 776