We were also introduced to some basic principles of screenwriting, and the concept of working closely with the script when editing a film.

We focused on organising our bins and using the source browser to import files. Importing with the correct format was a big emphasis of the lesson too. Learning how to use VLC to inspect the elements of files proved very useful.

We were instructed to highlight a transcript of its' interviews, and edit together three or four small sequences/scenes from the interview.

What we focued on was the individual challenges presented by different audio tracks when trying to get them all to an equal level. We were advised to set dialogue tracks to a standard level of -12 dB, and ambient tracks to a standard of -14.

The character of Andrew was to me so boring that he was interesting. An exampled that summed this up for me was his answer to the question: "what do you like most about biking?", which was something like "just biking, I don't know. Going up the hills and down the hills."

This made even more sense to me when he talks about his faith, saying that he gets to "play in god's creation" when he bikes. He just seemed happy to be there.

I decided to edit a sequence out of the latter section of the interview. I chose coverage with a focus on the surrounding environment for this.

I wanted to convey a sense of place in the documentary with it beginning in the car park and ending at the dirt tracks. I decided to show much of my chosen coverage without the interview as narration, particularly in the beginning and the end. What wasn't ideal however was the audio we were given, which impacted these parts a lot. If I was to do it again, I would work around this, probably by condensing the film a bit to include more interview dialogue.

What I would have done in hindsight was try to experiment more with how it was I edited the footage. I felt that it was filmed with the intention of looking "cool" and intense, and I limited myself with my choice of direction.

I made an effort to stay out of the way and helped out with moving equipment since I was essentially a free pair of hands. Seeing the film come together and speaking with the crew helped me get a comprehensive idea of what the film should look like.

However, due to an oversight I wasn't given the camera report and didn't recieve the sound report until I had already labelled the files. I labelled the camera files before attempting to put them in and when I did try to, I found that the MXF codec they were shot in wasn't compatible with Avid Media Composer. This wasn't the fault of the camera crew as they followed intructions but it did slow down the edit. I had to transcode them to mov on a different software.

By the end of day 1, I had only set up the project. If I were to do it again I would have booked the editing suite at the start of the day in case of any unforseen issues.

Kyle, the director, visited me at the halfway point of the day. This was very helpful as we were able to discuss the desired emotion for specific sequences and the length of important moments, focusing on what could and couldn't be cut in aiming for the desired time frame. Kyle gave me notes on the assembly cut as it was comparitive to his vision for the final cut.

In the second half of the day, I was able to put together a rough cut using the lined script. This was a very quick process as I copied the timeline from the assembly cut onto a new sequence and edited from there. I titled this sequence "ALTERNATE_ROUGH_CUT."

I found myself somewhat reliant on two audio tracks that sounded very different and each had their own issues. I sent these to Rushil, the dialogue editor, so he could let me know if they were useable. He got back to me by the end of the day letting me know they were. I also sent some clips to Jamie, the colour grader, to have a look at on his request.

When building the rough cut, I trusted my intuition as to which shots worked best for what dialogue. I did what I could to build sequences that were tight and seemless, and as I did I had to do a fair deal of adjusting of which audio clips I was using over certain moments.

For flexibilty, I edited alternate cuts for certain sequences I found tricky. I did this by editing together each short excerpt onto seperated video and audio tracks in the timeline, and I only did it for 3 seperate moments in the edit.

Kyle was able to have another meeting with me in the screen academy, which was ideal. I was able to show him both the rough cut and the alternate rough cut. He preffered my cut, but, importantly, we were able to compare the strengths of the two and combine some of their parts. We would spend the rest of the meeting discussing where we could trim down the time.

One issue was the absence of a score in the opening sequence. I told the producer and director that if I didnt have a score by this (the 3rd) day I would use an alternative. I was never given an alternative so I found my own on the 4th day. At the end of the day, I exported a rough cut to show the post team.

The room tone I opted to use was from elsewhere, as I saw problems in the room tone recorded on set, including its short length. I added room tone that I felt fit the scene, recorded in a similar location, and it sounded quite seemless with the dialogue.

In the 4th day I managed to get the film down to ~2.50 and add the required resizing and stabilisation effects to the footage. I spent around 20-30 minutes looking, downloading and inserting music that fitted the tempo of the conducting in the introduction. Kyle had also sent me a rough recording of his ending score, which I added where I felt best. There was discussion over where it should begin, so I added it in three places and exported three endings as options that I sent to Kyle.

I also managed to talk to Rushil about the possible issues he would face in the edit and where the dialogue tracks proved tricky to select and arrange. I arranged a brief meeting with Johnny that he wasn't able to attend, so I texted him with some information on the state of the sound in the edit and give him a heads-up on some decisions I'd made in the edit.

By the time I had moved the first minute to a separate file and added the necessary timecode, the screen academy was shutting, so I left the one-minute text export to the next day.

I was able to ask Susan about the arrangement of my dialogue and make the simple adjustment of adding some handle to the dialogue in the timeline, which I had so far isolated. This served as both a reference for Johnny (design) and extra handle for Rushil (dialogue).

In my meeting with Kyle, we watched back the cut, which Kyle was happy with. I was shown some detailed notes that Erin, the producer, had sent to Kyle, but these were mostly centred around creative decisions Kyle had set his mind on. Kyle had also brought the final score, which I was finally able to add in. It didn't take much time as it was only over the introduction, so I had no issue with adding it this late.

After some minor adjustments to some stabilising, Kyle told me that he wanted to change the aspect ratio. I was able to to this with a separate track before going through all the video and resizing to fit. This took up a good chunk of time.

All that was left was credits. It was useful having Kyle to help me pick fonts he was happy with, and after we had I was able to fill out the credits list and move onto the export. After backtiming the timelne, I added the clock and the napier screen academy card at the bottom. I copied the timeline and added the timecode and file name burn-in. The AAF export template found in post materials were easy to follow and I added the advised 120 frames of handle Susan informed me of. After exporting the AAF and MOV files I sent a detailed email to Johnny and Rushil. I also uploaded the original, on-set room tones alongside the room tones I had used and a handy alternative to my "editor AAFs" folder.

The very unextrordianry contiguous editing doesn't emphasise any of the number of horrible things on display, instead seemlessly inserting them into the scene. This conveys the feeling that these are everyday events at the hospital, giving the scene a distinctly uneasy tone.

What stood out to me were the scenes of Sarh playing her mechanical orchestra, which progress from images of her instruments close-up, showing the complex and unusual nature of them, to wides that ground her in her environment. The rhythm of these scenes was hypnotic and importantly gave the music room to breath.

Another element that stood out was the choice to edit the footage of Sarah's community from the beginning of the day to the end, ending on a sunset. This gave the documentary a great sense of direction and closure.

We looked at where elements of the 3-act structure were evident, comparing the film to graphs that represent the action throughout the 3-act structure. Susan described the Hollywood 3-act structure as being very useful to screenwriters as it can turn bland subject matter into something very watchable, and can make good subject matter very engaging.

The importance of acknowledging the intended structure of a screenplay or documentary is in having an idea of rising and falling action, and in knowing which moments to emphasise.

We filled the films events out into the three act structure and had an open discussion on how this helped make the film engaing.

I then had another look over the timeline and exported what I had done the day before to send to the crew and post team.

What stood out me was how well paced the moments of levity and dialogue were in the middle of such a fast-paced action scene. The rhythm of the dialogue scene flowed so well despite the short time it took up in the film. For Sarah Connor, who is a confused victim caught up in the action, the outlandish dialogue is just another dissorienting event in the scene.

It proves again that your reading of the script should directly influence your approach to the edit.

We were taught with this scene that reactions are the foundation of any good dialogue scene. The characters' reaction to the dialogue have to be sufficiently edited into the scene.

This showcased how an extended dialogue scene can be edited unconventionally for thematic purposes. These scenes prioritise conveying a feeling or leaving an impression over giving us information about the characters.

The way that the subject matter blends dark comedy with sincerity is similar to the tone of Shopping for Maestro.

The editing is tight, managing to fit a very eventful storyline into a concise 101 minutes. The editing in the larger ensemble scenes is deceptively simple, designed to be invisible. The film is carried on the backs of some very good performances.

I felt the same about Shopping for Maestro, so I tried to make sure as much of the performances were visible as possible.

In these films, the environment is almost a character in itself. It plays a large part in conveying their themes and reinforcing certain narrative elements. Sense of place is very important in these films.

They are both examples of slow cinema, so the editing in them is often slow and hypnotic in pacing, using dead time as a narrative tool.

The influence of these films is obvious to me in my choices when editing Insane Biking and in my rough cut and following drafts of Shopping for Maestro. They emphasised to me the importance of breathing space in an edit.

However, I consider their influence somewhat detrimental, as my early attempts at pacing in Shopping for Maestro were not all that good and took up too much runtime.

What I can do more of next time is noting down specific actions in more detail, so that I have a reliable library of the various tools and commands in the software written down.

Another thing I would have done differently is use more assemblies to edit specific moments and scenes. This would also allow me to give a director multiple options for editing a scene more easily than editing multiple options on different tracks proved to be.