![]() We would screen cuts together as an editorial team and debate how to land a joke better, or which scenes would play best in an episode together. The culture of History of the World was extremely collaborative. Of course, I jumped at the chance!Ĭoming from The Upshaws, where it was generally just me in the edit bay combined with the multi-camera editorial style, was an adjustment as History was quite the opposite. Just as we were wrapping up our season, Wanda asked if I’d be interested in cutting the Mel Brooks sketch comedy series. ![]() My experience editing The Upshaws led me to my next show, History of the World, Part II. History of the World Part 2 | Trailer | Hulu youtu.be I enjoyed the challenge of landing the jokes with the proper takes and reactions while artfully weaving in the laughter. The editorial style of The Upshaws is a hybrid of the two: we have the element of the studio audience, however, our showrunners prefer that the edits are on the tighter side, which is a different take on this format. Single Camera comedy, however, is usually edited in a much tighter manner, with jokes layered on top of each other. Multi-camera sitcoms are shot on a soundstage with a studio audience and because they have a laugh track, the editorial style is much like stand-up comedy in the sense that the show is cut fat with room for the laughter to play out and time for the characters to take the laughter in. ![]() The Upshaws: Part 3 | Official Trailer | Netflix youtu.beĬoming from a background of editing stand-up comedy made my transition to cutting The Upshaws a fluid one. This came with a lot of pressure and growth but also led to my first three Primetime Emmy nominations in 2023: two for The Upshaws and one for History of the World Part II. It was my first multi-camera sitcom and I was the only editor on the second season of a hit show (except Episode 5, where I share a credit with the talented Russell Griffin). This was a pivotal moment in my career for multiple reasons. It's important to note that only LumaFusion media can be transferred, but new comments can be added to the timeline at any point allowing for real-time feedback. According to Luma Touch, the integration allows editors to see comments and annotations from Frame.io source media and then reply directly from the LumaFusion preview window. LumaFusion has also been integrated with Frame.io and allows creators with a Frame.io account to collaborate and review notes without leaving the program. With this latest cut, copy, and paste feature, multiple clips can be selected and added to a new location or another project saving you time when starting a new timeline. It allows users to select an entire range of clips in the timeline, and those clips can be dragged to a new location, copied, deleted, or have a number of attributes applied. The multiselect function is exactly what it sounds like. LumaFusion is a popular mobile video editor among creators because of its multi-track magnetic timeline, blend modes, effects, keyframe capable audio, and projects that can be created using different aspect ratios and frame rates. Unlike version 2.2, which added XML export support for Final Cut Pro for a one time fee of $19, version 2.3 is completely free. Imagine you have a peak controller after a delay effect, and you modify this delay effect, with side chaining the driven "something" will change how it behaves, whereas with an automation curve it won’t, it will still follow the same curve.Luma Touch released LumaFusion version 2.3, an update that includes a multiselect function directly in the timeline, the ability to cut, copy, and paste in-between timelines, as well as Frame.io integration, which is a platform that allows creators to review and approve work all in one place. One can sometime obtain a quite similar result with automation, in some cases, and sometime it’s even a better choice, but definitively not the same thing. I don’t want to have to edit an automation curve every times I put a note somewhere, or change any parameter of the instrument, or any parameter of a note, like its amplitude, or if I want to vary how deep my “dips” are globally, in relation with the instrument signal. An automation curve doesn’t dynamically follow an instrument signal amplitude. Side chaining is more than just “a dip in something in specified rhythm”. And there are multiple compressor plugins anyway. I do not have any crackle using side chaining with the peak controller to the CALF compressor, or rarely, in some particular cases. Īfter i realized that sidechain is only a dip in 'something' in specified rhythm, i only use automation and bigdip I vaguely recall something about artefact cackles with a compressor, but it is ages ago, so.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |