Editor credits

Not sure which forum to post this in but looking for advice on it.

I have a boss who knows nothing about Avid or FCP but wants to sit in the editing room and tell me exactly how to edit the movie. He/she wants me to strictly ?be their hands? while they tell me exactly what to do for every scene and every cut. Aside from this completely stiffling the editor?s creativity and freedom, they also want an editing credit.

Is this done in the real world where you receive an editing credit without ever physically touching anything? And if so, is the person who is ?just the hands? still credited as an editor or something else?

Generally speaking, whoever is paying the bills get to choose.

"is this done in the real world where you receive an editing credit without ever physically touching anything?"

actually, some editors work that way,
"Directing" an assistant or associate editor.

i think the "Lord of the Rings" editor works like that.

but it sounds like you aren't enjoying it.
do you need the work that bad?


nick

There would be two distinctly differently ways of approaching this -

For instance on a big budget film the director sits in on many if not all edit sessions working closely with his or her editor, the film has already been tightly storyboarded and in some cases cuts or transitions written into the script/screenplay. Then again some editors are given the freedom to almost act as second director 'in the edit' as it were.

This is very different however to being left with raw footage for weeks at a time, with the director popping in 2-3 times a day to ultimately say yes or no and see how things are developing. Where i work we have the good fortune of working under the latter conditions, to quote our second director "we pretty much get free reign" over the look of the projects we cut. The longer you work with i director the more they trust the direction you take the material and will more than likely be left to your own devices.

if your director was sitting there with you every moment instructing you to "pull the transition 3 frames to the left or right" or "turn the volume up 3db on the sound effect there" it'd be a different story and more to the point ultimately, to a certain degree your employment wouldn't be required would it?

Maybe just realise in this case that it's only a job, and that the director wanting to take credit for your work is really nothing more than a rather pleasant complement

Legally and Technically...

They are DIRECTING you on what to do.

You are EDITING the piece under their DIRECTION.

If they choose to micro-manage the edit then that is their prerogative, however they would and should not receive an editors credit.



For instant answers to more than one hundred common FCP questions, check out the LAFCPUG FAQ Wiki here : [www.lafcpug.org]

> Is this done in the real world where you receive an editing credit without ever physically
> touching anything?

Yes.
This could be an amateur who doesn't know anything and thinks editing is just assembling shots the exact way he'd imagined. Or it could be a seasoned editor who just isn't good at operating the software.

Yes, the people paying the bills can set whatever terms they want. It may not always result in the best film, but it's their call. And for what it's worth, they're doing it right by divulging the terms to you right up front, so you'll know whether you want to do this. But as Nick would say, that means the operator isn't really the editor, but more an assistant, and if you take the job, it should also be apparent to all involved that any creative snafus would not be your fault. You would shut up and do what you're told, and if the scene sucks, point at the guy who's dictating every editing decision 100 per cent. Your responsibilty is strictly technical.

To be honest, most of the time professional editors aren't so stuck up about collaborating. For example, we would often give assistant editors the chance to cut something, with permission from the director or producer. If the scene turns out well, why not, as long as credits are still observed fairly and there are no contractual issues? It just saves us time and could lead to interesting things. There are stories in the feature world where a director or editor freely admits to an assistant "rescuing" a scene by bringing a fresh perspective, and then the director or editor is gracious enough to give some publicity to the assistant, by mentioning it on a commentary. That kind of thing only tends to make a director look good -- s/he does whatever is necessary to make a great film.


www.derekmok.com

> If they choose to micro-manage the edit then that is their prerogative, however they would and
> should not receive an editor's credit.

The second half of that statement is not necessarily true, Ben. That's all down to the contracts, and their terms are clear up front. Some directors who co-edit their own work may have it in their contracts to share the editor credit. What shouldn't happen is that if they hire you as an operator -- with the title of assistant editor -- and then give you full editor responsibilities without giving you the corresponding pay or credit.


www.derekmok.com

Of course D's right - you CAN write down anyone with any job title - it doesn't make it right and I would check with the Unions (and possibly Broadcaster) to make sure you aren't doing anything that could get you into trouble due to misrepresentation which it would be.

If the "Director" does not actually touch the edit themselves to a significant amount of work then they are not the Editor even if they do a paper edit - it's usually part of the job description of Director to direct the edit or produce a paper edit or give notes to the editor to follow.

If a producer directs the edit then you can get a Producer/Director or Edit Producer Credit. Sometimes Producers go without a Director credit even if they did direct. But I've never seen someone get a full credit for something they didn't actually do.

To receive an official credit you have to have actually done the job. (Executive Producer being the exception).

Re: pay

Although I have seen (at some major broadcasters who will remain nameless) that assistant editors are cutting entire programmes to "give them the chance" but not then getting the full pay. Once would not be so bad but this goes on for several shows and even over several seasons! Its wrong.

Ultimately the reason that we have job titles for different roles is to differentiate who did what.

An Editor edits - whether creatively or not, whether autonomously or micro-managed.

A Director directs the crew what to do - this includes post.

It's in the name!



For instant answers to more than one hundred common FCP questions, check out the LAFCPUG FAQ Wiki here : [www.lafcpug.org]

Quote

i think the "Lord of the Rings" editor works like that.

Yup, true story. Though it was just Jamie Selkirk who edited "The Return of the King," as each of the three parts had its own editor. If I remember the story correctly, Jamie has carpal tunnel or something along those lines, so actually running the Avid is out of the question for him. So the three of them sat in a room ? Peter Jackson, Jamie Selkirk and an assistant whose name I unfortunately forget ? and cut the film. The assistant ran the Avid.

I take it you're not in the guild, RG? I'm not myself, but my understanding is that when conflicts arise over fair credit, there are guild mechanisms in place to arbitrate those conflicts so nobody has to be the unequivocal bad guy.

> Jamie has carpal tunnel or something along those lines, so actually running the Avid is out of the
> question for him

The reason I heard in the documentaries is actually that Selkirk, by his own admittance, isn't very good at working the Avid. So he has the assistant operate the computer, and the assistant did not get "Editor" credit on the film. That film is actually what I'm thinking of as an example. Operating the computer does not necessarily make one the editor on the film.

But rest assured, they cleared everything with the assistant, Selkirk, Jackson, and the unions, and all the credits are on paper with signatures. A union dispute could make a film unreleasable.


www.derekmok.com

Oh, you may be right, Derek. I could totally be misremembering that. All I can testify to is that Selkirk had some reason for not being the keyboard-mouse guy on that show.

You know, since I brought up unions ? I can't remember right now an example of an editorial credit dispute. Obviously we all know the famous stories of DGA disputes, and issues revolving around the writers' guild (Nicholas Meyer famously wrote the shooting script for Star Trek II in the weekend before it was needed, for no money and no credit, if I remember that story right). But I guess editorial credit disputes just don't get talked about as much.

Presumably 'cause editors are just uniformly awesome and aren't petty enough to make a big stink.

Thanks for the responses. It makes more sense in the Lord of the Rings case because the guy calling the shots was an editor already and potentially now has a physical imparement that prevent him from physically editing (or physically editing fast). But in my case it is a director (first time BTW) who has never edited anything other than perhaps a student film in college. He just doesn't want to learn Avid or FCP because he "doesn't have time for that."

FYI, if a director wanted me to just be hands, I'd quit and tell him to hire an assistant. Either I am a part of the creative process, or don't hire me. I am not just hands.

If you are an assistant, then hey, it might be a way for you to watch someone edit (sorta) and get paid.

But the director should RARELY, IMHO, also be the editor. You need collaborators.


www.shanerosseditor.com

Listen to THE EDIT BAY Podcast on iTunes
[itunes.apple.com]

Quote

But in my case it is a director (first time BTW) who has never edited anything other than perhaps a student film in college. He just doesn't want to learn Avid or FCP because he "doesn't have time for that."

AH. Well, that changes things a bit.

First question: How much are you getting paid for this? I really don't want to know; just think about it. Are you getting compensated sufficiently that you don't care about the credit, and just want it for pride? Then screw it. Do what you're getting paid to do, let him put his name on it, and if you see him making any sub-optimal choices, say "Yes sir" and get on with your life.

On the other hand, if the credit is important to you for career purposes, then this can be a teachable moment. Have a conversation with him about the close collaboration between directors and editors. Explain how no one person can edit a feature; it takes more eyes than that, more points of view. If he's receptive to that, great. If not, see step one.

The other factor to consider is your level of confidence in the production. If this is a first outing for a new director, then what are the odds it's gonna turn into a real stinker? If the director is going to be, well, dictatorial about rhythm and pace, are you sure you want to go to war over the editorial credit? Is that the hill you really want to die on?

And yeah, next time get it in writing up front. It doesn't necessarily have to be a legally binding contract, especially on an indie or hobby feature. But just the existence of a gentleman's agreement on who'll get what credit is often enough to keep people reasonable over the evolution of a project.

Shane is a very well known editor who's worked hard to build up a reputation for himself; he's absolutely right that he shouldn't take an editor-in-name-only job; that'd harm his reputation. Me, because of a variety of factors I'm more of a bottom-feeder in the industry these days. My first question tends to be, "Are the checks clearing?" Most other considerations are secondary to that. But that's just me.

> he's absolutely right that he shouldn't take an editor-in-name-only job; that'd harm his reputation.

Well, that's the point of this post, you won't even be editor-in-name-only. You'll be a button pusher that won't get credit. Might get paid...IS this a paying job? If not, then why the hell would you take it? Not paid to sit and push buttons and not get credit? The WHOLE POINT of jobs where you work for no pay is to get the credit. The credit is the thing.

So I hope you are getting paid. If not, then why are you doing this? You gain nothing.


www.shanerosseditor.com

Listen to THE EDIT BAY Podcast on iTunes
[itunes.apple.com]

They want to direct you editing the piece...and want to take the edit credit too? Did they tell you they want to go to your home and sleep in your bed with your Wife as well? I would be out of there so fast there would be skid marks and the smell of @#$%& rubber.

When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

If you are early in your career it is all about the credits. If he is taking sole possession then I would bail, unless you really need the money.

In terms of union arbitration, they are kind of weak on the arbitration front IMO if you are the one fighting for the credit. Basically what they do is they watch the original and the re-cut not knowing which version is which. Not sure what they are really looking for, but basically they compare the overall story of scenes I guess? I know several people who have come in and re-cut movies. I know of one specific example where the movie was unwatchable before hand, and became a very good movie with new performances, flashbacks, scenes rearraged etc. In my opinion it was night and day. Even though the 2nd editor worked on the show for 3 months, however they ruled there was not enough change to warrant a shared credit. Basically have it all guaranteed in your contract up front. That's the only way to guarantee anything.

> Even though the 2nd editor worked on the show for 3 months, however they ruled there was
> not enough change to warrant a shared credit.

And that's why it's so important to know your own priorities first, and don't budge on terms that are important to you. Me, if I'm going to be a creative editor, I will get that "Editor" credit. I won't take a "button pusher" job, either, unless the pay is really good.

Besides, directors and producers willing to pay an editor's rates generally don't want a button pusher; they want the years of experience, speed, narrative and rhythmic sense, stylistic knowledge etc. that a professional editor brings. There are cheaper personnel for button-pushing, execute-the-director's-orders jobs. You don't hire Shane to "operate"; you hire him to whip the piece into shape, creating things that the director and producer wouldn't have thought of.


www.derekmok.com

RG writes-
[Aside from this completely stiffling the editor?s creativity and freedom, they also want an editing credit.]

I've worked with a director or two who want their names in the editing credit. To me, it's just hogging, often a sign of insecurity.

But a Supervising Editor who shares the credit does so appropriately, IMHO,although usually under that title. This is a magnificent master/journeyman opportunity. Even with my time and experience in the craft I would look closely at an offer like this. Hell, I learn from my students!!

As Derek says, there are times when the editor cannot physically cut but does direct the edit, down to the frame. This describes a great opportunity for a journeyman or assistant on his or her way up. I would think credit is shared here.

[And if so, is the person who is ?just the hands? still credited as an editor or something else?]

I'm with Ben K. on this. Editors are assumed to be working under direction. Should take absolutely NOTHING away from their credit. If you're in the Guild, there are rules governing allocation of credit no matter what-- and as Tim describes, that's a double-edged sword.

We are in the Golden Age of Editing. No director worth his salt dares hog that!

An old Hollywood post guy came to visit Boston University while I was editing there in the 70's. The gal I was working for introduced me as "her editor." The guy quietly remarked to her, "Oh, no, you never say that. It's always 'THE editor'-- because he's independent."

Then he turned to me.

"You, of course, always introduce your director as MY director."

That's how I learned it. Never forgot it. There's a distinction and civility to it which still makes sense.

Ironically, although she only strung up the rushes for her show, on the finished film the gal insisted on sharing editing credit! LOL.

- Loren

Today's FCP 7 keytip:
Invoke Big Timecode window with Control-T!

Your Final Cut Studio KeyGuide? Power Pack.
Now available at KeyGuide Central.
www.neotrondesign.com

As an Editor, I am more or less a producer that does not receive credit as being one.
I am also a caretaker/babysitter for someone's "baby".
I don't get credit for that either.... usually.
At times, I am a "Therapist", having to dispel distribution, marketing, marital, financial, medical and whatever else advice.

I could be any number of "titles" that should indeed be given credit and compensation.
As important as being recognized for what I do is to me, being compensated appropriately is equally important.

There is a huge misconception as to what a "good" editor does.
We are typically the last people to touch a project before it hits its final destination.
The smart ones realize the importance of what we do and have respect.
Others don't.

Depending on the Producers and Directors involved there is one thing they all want and that is knowing they are going to have a show, commercial, promo, webisode, feature film or whatever "title" this "masterpiece" is labeled as, will be done as they envisioned or better. Having them feel that they are in capable hands is very important.

Some like to hold hands. Some like to be as far away as possible. Some let their egos make their decisions. Some understand they are only as good as the people they work with.

My point is sometimes we just don't click with people and sometimes people are just plain control freaks. Having someone wanting to take "credit" for something that you feel is unjustified should be dealt with before anytime is spent and resolved ASAP.

I prefer the credit "Executive Problem Solving Post Wizard"

When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

In the credits for "Ghostbusters 2," now-apparently-retired model maker Wim Van Thillo was listed as the "bathtub wrangler."

Ever since then, all arguments about credit on a film have been officially pointless. The best possible credit in the whole world has been handed out, and it went to Wim Van Thillo, and we all have to find ways to somehow go on with our lives.

There are some directors/ producers that will act like this just because they never worked with you before. Give these type of guys sometime to get use to you. I'm sure when they'll discover at some point that you capable to deliver the goods, the atmosphere in the edit suite will change. Good luck

If directors can't trust you enough to do a first cut, then they shouldn't hire you. You are hired because of your ability to tell a story. This is why people want to see your reel.

If they want a button pusher, then they'll get a button pusher. But they'll never know how well someone can cut if all they do is press buttons.


www.shanerosseditor.com

Listen to THE EDIT BAY Podcast on iTunes
[itunes.apple.com]

To me the editor is the most important member of a production. I have a chapter in my book on the editor. You can read it for free on Amazon.com > FILMMAKING A TO Z. There is a table of contents and you can review the whole book if you like.

Here are some points missing in this discussion (not entirely):

1) If a director respects the editor, the editor will do a better job than the director ever imagined was possible. A director may make a clever suggestion here and there, or has a gut feeling about something, but usually it's the editor who finds the best way to edit 99.9% of the movie. So the editor should always get the sole credit as Editor.

2) If a first time director (original post question) wants to have input on "cuts", let him edit it the movie himself. I highly recommend the editor to walk out.

3) If a director (e.g. from Broadway) like Mike Nichols is making his first movie (The Graduate), and he wants co-credit for a movie and you're a new editor getting a shot at working on your first big movie, ok, maybe you can consider the money or the opportunity; but even then it's not fair. Mike Nichols by the way did not ask or get credit for editing; this is strictly hypothetical.

4) If you need the money and you don't want to lose the job for whatever reason, then at least ask not to be credited; because a badly edited movie will ruin your reputation.

5) If a director doesn't know how to use FCP, for example, and that's the program being used, then the director shouldn't get credit as editor.

For example, I like to make no-budget, personal movies, and do everything myself; I can't ask Nick Meyers, Ben King or Shane Ross to edit my movie and then put my name on as the editor. If I were making a feature documentary (and I have one in development), I'd ask Shane to edit it. I'd definitely look at the first cut and make my comments, but I'd go with what he comes up with in the end. If I were doing a musical comedy in London (and I have one in development:-), I'd ask Ben King to help me in pre-production as well (sound recording, camera angles, etc.) If I were asking Nick Meyers to edit an action adventure movie for me in Australia, I'd ship him the rushes and ask him to post the edit online for me to review and comment on. I'm pretty sure I'd go with his final edit. I know Derek wouldn't work with me, but for the sake of argument, I'd ask him to be on the set with me and make suggestions as to how the story was being developed and what additional character development was needed (if any mistakes were being made, things overlooked -- I wouldn't want to lose his experience with story just because he was only the editor). And so on; I don't want to upset all the editors on this forum with my presumptuousness. Did I spell that right.LOL

It for sure is a sign of insecurity on the part of the Director. They want everyone to know how capable they are, and how incredible they are at every aspect of the process. Nothing dumber looking than a credit list with the same name in every slot alongside the people who actually did the work.

In my line of work, when someone starts demanding credits or really bad choices, my name immediately comes out of the credits. I still do the job, I just pull my name out. Almost without exception the offender is a first-timer, and the job is woeful.

I had one recently where the Director didn't know what a jump cut was, and couldn't see why we needed to bother fixing that. Credit? No thanks.. Credit is for BUILDING reputation.

Make yourself an alias. Use that and then you can explain to people why you used an alias.

Quote

Make yourself an alias.

Alan Smithee! Alan Smithee! I know they don't use it any more, but I'm bringin' it back, baby!

RG Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks for the responses. It makes more sense in
> the Lord of the Rings case because the guy calling
> the shots was an editor already and potentially
> now has a physical imparement that prevent him
> from physically editing (or physically editing
> fast). But in my case it is a director (first
> time BTW) who has never edited anything other than
> perhaps a student film in college. He just
> doesn't want to learn Avid or FCP because he
> "doesn't have time for that."

In that case, I wouldn't want the editor credit. It just doesn't sound like the guy knows what he's doing, and I wouldn't want my name on his editorial decisions.

Having said that, there's nothing wrong with simply operating for an experienced editor--as an assistant editor. I occasionally work in that capacity, mostly because I'm relatively fast in FCP. With the right person it can be a very effective way to undertake an edit, and I've learned a lot from the process. But it has to be the right pairing and situation, and this doesn't sound like it.

Whatever you decide to do, I think the most important issue here is communication. You need to set the ground rules before you move ahead. My personal experience has shown that I almost every time I'm unhappy being involved with a project, in whatever capacity, communication breakdown has played a significant role.

- Justin Barham -

HAhaha Alan Smithee! There's a guy I haven't read about for a while...

Check out the guys credits:

[www.imdb.com]


Interesting that "he" is directing the new Bill & Ted movie... EXCELLENNNNT!


Is there an Editor's version? If not; I propose using the pseudonym/anagram: 'Emerita Dhoti'



For instant answers to more than one hundred common FCP questions, check out the LAFCPUG FAQ Wiki here : [www.lafcpug.org]

pseudonym/anagram: 'Emerita Dhoti'

..Imitated Hero? Theatre Idiom? Heed Imitator? A Timid Hetero? Heh, this is fun..