It never ceases to amaze me how vehemently editors talk about editing as if the director had no clue about the nature of the material they obtained during the shooting of a film, like if they were aimlessly capturing the reenactment of a series of scenes with different camera positions, expecting the editor to actually DIRECT the film in the editing room. I don't question the fact, arguably, most directors are impostors and have never put two shots together in Imovie... but when I think of masters like Spielberg, Fincher, Cameron, Zemeckis, Soderbergh or the Coen Brothers. it's staggeringly obvious they had a clear image of the outcome before they set foot on a set.
Correct. Totally agree. I was about to type a similar thing but you nailed it. Directors who aren't first great editors themselves-- and haven't masted the fundamentals of filmmaking before stepping into the chair-- are in fact imposters. Otherwise, literaly anyone could sit in front of a video-village and say "when they like stuff". Everyone on earth has "a vision" if they aren't required to prove it first. There might as well just be a lottery for the public to "direct films" at that point.
@lrigsnart6821Do you believe that people still have an interest in movies and the art of film editing, or has the prevalence of random, low-effort streaming content led to a decrease in critical thinking and engagement with cinematic storytelling?
It's about specialization. As talented as any director is, I doubt there's a single director that thinks they can work a camera better than a dp or well trained camera operator. Same with editing. There are simply a lot of technical aspects to editing a film that a director doesn't specialize in, and I'm certain they appreciate a good editor that may understand the science of the cut in a more sophisticated way than the director themselves.
Editors won't be replaced. Not in real work. AI will assist in tools to help streamline the technical editing but will never replace editors. I think the headlines and misguided statements like that spread fear in those that haven't read enough into things.
This kinda explained why I feel like some modern movies feel like they're already made by AI. Things just happen and it's not clear why. You know why because it's often scenes you're familiar with, but you don't feel them and they feel distant. People are already used to it, so AI can probably start to replace editors in productions any time now. Thankfully not in all movies!
Wow. A refreshing new - and very helpful - take on approaching editing. I'll have to rewatch this a few times, and save it for reference. Many thanks!!
I think the best way to describe AI tools is that they lower the bar for entry, but the ceiling is just as high. So we'll see the floor get raised with AI tools, but it will still take real talent and understanding of the craft in order to use any tool to its full capacity.
I think also ith as to do with the influence of TH-camrs cutting/editing. In a way the "grammar" within TH-cam, (to lesser extent other social platforms...), is changing the new generating of editors but also: re educating a new generation of "people watching" the content
this video is really valuable for helping people collaborate together on a project. oftentimes its hard to communicate what youre trying to achieve when its a visual thats trying to be formed. everyone involved has different interpretations of the base story and the shots captured, so being on the right page with your editor and director is important but difficult when you dont have the language needed. its like she said in the beginning, you get notes back that are too vague and you have to try and pinpoint what they were getting at so you can actually work on it in the intended way. people are too hung up on the ai half
finetunning is the job you are describing, the system will show you a cut and you watch it, then you tell it if you like it or not (not even why) then it will show you more until you like something.
Karen is one of the few if not the only editors online stating a fact: AI can't replace editors. Or at least, not good editors. 👏👏👏 Those editors (or just people who edit) who have relied on gimmicks, plugins, effects, and repeating rhythms to achieve their goals (you know who you are) will be heading to the unemployment line because AI will get there faster than any human can. AI can study copy and regurgitate all that stuff. Karen takes a different path to the same goal; and a unique one with Trajectory Phrasing. It is an interesting concept. However, I struggled to find facets of her approach in what I do and have done for decades. No surprise because I don't think all editors (or any creative people) embrace a monolithic philosophy to their work. That said, I take issue with Karen's list of "watching, sorting, remembering, selecting, composing" where she outlines that watching is where AI can't replace us because it requires, in part, feeling something while you watch. I agree it's important...but certainly not limited to watching. Rather than obsessing over rhythm and pace in my edits, I full harness emotional sensitivity in EVERY aspect of the editing process - which I breakdown into thirds: Screening, Selecting, Composing. And Screening/Selecting are two stars that orbit each other. How the actors perform, how the light falls on a scene, the framing, the action - when something feels right while I'm watching it gets selected. When to cut, what to cut to, how one shot follows another, when it needs sound and which sound, when it needs music and what kind of music, when it needs effects and why it needs them - these are all emotional questions. Does it feel right? What's missing? How do we fix it? I ask my heart. Not a metronome, not the timeline, not script, not the directors notes, not even what I presupposed the story and it's trajectory should be. I simply, quietly, internally ask myself: how does it make me feel? If I like how it feels it stays, if I don't it doesn't. That's why AI, at least today's AI, won't replace good editing. Because AI can't sit back and reflect on a scene and honestly ask itself it it's engaged or bored. It can't like or dislike something. It can only poll what other projects have done in the past. And even then it doesn''t understand why it works when it does. Filmmaking is humans making stories for other humans. Naysayers will submit that AI can study all the content out there and take reasonable guesses at to what should happen next. I absolutely guarantee failure with that approach for two reasons. One is every project is unique and requires a unique set of solutions. Stapling on a formulaic approach to projects is destined for ridicule. And the second, more important reason, is that human's are fickle. We don't crave creative repetition; we crave the new. And AI may stumble upon something new accidentally, but it takes a human to see it. Ask AI to generate an image based on a text prompt and the results can be very surprising - mostly not in a good way. And AI itself can't tell the difference between good and bad. We can. It can't. "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" - Arthur C Clarke. Right now AI seems like magic. I confess, it's pretty cool. And I expect it will be an amazing tool. It will disrupt our industry like someone doing a cannonball in a kiddie-pool. But that disruption, like the emergence of Photoshop, digital compositing, 4K digital cameras, and many others will be from the people who assume that jobs should be replaced. That's always the real disruption. Iv'e seen it happen over and over for decades. Every time a new tool comes along, people see it a way to save time and money and discard people. It takes them about 2-3 years before they figure out why they had people doing stuff in the first place. Because tools don't save time & money - they repurpose that time and money in different ways. Invest a new tool in construction, the construction process may change, but inevitably there's more construction requiring more people and more specialized roles with new tools. The individuals who run into the fire, the editors who embrace the new tech and harness it - those are the ones who will shape the media moving forward and they will prevail. In every creative field, they always have. Great conversation. Very thought provoking. Very refreshing. Thank you!
I do agree that perceiving the energy in motion without an actual body, will be hard for AI. But isn't trajectory semantics what LLMs excel at? They do not even need a rosetta stone to translate between languages with almost no shared roots. Somehow I think they might be good in editing because of how versed they are in languages through translation of semantic relationships into geometric (and statistical) relationships.
I was watching & studying intently until the Babylon scene. I completely got immersed in that scene to the point where I couldn't even hear what both of you were saying.
AI will never be able to recognise and apply nuance. It's the rhythm, the cadence, and recognising the smallest of gestures to editorially convey story of intent, and not simply story displayed.
Indeed. But at some point audiences will be trained not to care. Just like they lost the interest into the geometry of a scenes, which is why Marvel movies just cut random explosions next to each other and that is good enough for most purposes...
@@Schmidtelpunkt The braindead action movies have always been a guilty pleasure, though they're only that guilty pleasure when there's thought-provoking drama and intelligent comedy to balance the entertainment out. When studios oversaturate with the same content like marvel and DC have, audiences lose interest. Once the large studios have crashed under the weight of their own ambition, along with their hubris and woke agenda, we'll see a major injection of great stories of mid-budget hit the cinema screens by smaller studios. Any remaining large studios which may survive the collapse will have no choice but to scale back to recoup losses. I think we'll see a movie renaissance in the next ten years.
@@PhantomFilmAustralia If it was a guilty pleasure, it would not dominate the charts. Cinema is the event movie. The interesting stuff happens on Netflix and other streaming services for 80s budgets. And it does not help that most capable directors have their heads too far up their own arses not to be able to deliver anything under 180 minutes. If there ever is an "oversaturation" it will end cinema entirely, because there is nothing left. Young people see video games at the culturally leading medium anyway, which is even tighter in the hands of mega companies. Don't let Oppenheimer and Barbie fool you - this is not the big turning point, it was a lucky punch made possible by the Covid delays, and one of those will top the charts with an added 2 within the next 5 years, to beat the originality out of the medium before it gets used to not being shit again. There is no collapse of big studios in sight. They are still raking in enough money to cancel finished 100 million dollar projects. The next superhero movie will still top the charts. They still run the danger of drowning in money and it will be even more, as they will need fewer artists on any level. The renaissance happens on a small screen. In fact we are already in the middle of it. But that is done at a budget which makes nobody rich except for the streaming providers.
There is nothing inherently wrong with this... I think it's important for any creative to understand some of the mechanics behind their work BUT the word "Trajectory Phrasing" is just another word for Intention - which has been common teaching forever. Maybe for some people it helps to rephrase it but it feels mainly like a selling point for the book.
@@ookiemand Yes but to know the “trajectory” you have to know the intention - and when you know the intention it’s impossible to NOT consider the “trajectory”. That’s the reason for finding out what the intention is in the first place. There is no point of knowing the intention if you aren’t going to serve it.
Yeah this video is a little clickbaity. It may be helpful to novices but this is ultimately 17 minutes of gatekeeping jargon for basic concepts that any subscriber should already understand.
'Secret editors business" well, I dont think thats the really the case most directors I know can edit ....but if it makes editors feel special...then yes, it's secret :)
I'm totally not understanding this 'trajectory phrasing' thing. I don't recall a single example here of how it might be put into practice. It seems to have something to do with supporting the overall energy and intention of the scene in order to tell the story, but surely that's the most basic, fundamental purpose of all cinematography and editing?
Yep, especially in the scenes where it deviates from what is talked about. This makes it also harder to reconnect once they are back on a scene they are actually mentioning.
As an editor of 23 feature films and also a technology CEO, I can safely say that AI will figure this out too, one day. AI can be trained to have its own pattern/intution as well especially when it hits the AGI level. The patterning that humans do isn’t that special anymore now that it can be simulated. Current LLMs have difficulty with long-term fidelity and consistency of understanding their creations currently. But we’re still in the “early AOL dial up days” of the internet when it comes to AI. The big stuff comes later. That said, its one of the reasons I got out of video/editing and got into tech and finance because I saw how flooded the market was becoming with editing talent and AI will make things much easier one day to make great edits
She is certainly knowledgeable about editing, although her expertise in AI is limited. We've all witnessed AI projects that can recreate images based on brain activity. Given that emotions are a result of specific neuronal activity in various regions of the cerebral cortex, it should be feasible to create a model for emotion reconstruction that stimulates video/emotions behaviours.
@@firasfadhl yeah one day it’ll be even easier than that, you’ll be able to tell it “I like movies edited like (list the movies) or youtuber videos like (name the youtuber) and if it has access to the dataset it can be trained to do match it it. It all takes time of course and won’t happen over night. The people who have researched and understand how AI works know that these neural networks tend to surprise and astound experts at how they’re able to generate and predict the outcome you’re looking for
This argument is specious: computers are also flawed, and can be built to include or simulate all kinds of things - including flesh, if you want. It has yet to be established whether there is anything distinct about the way the human brain works, other than characteristics like it being analogue rather than digital, etc. Any conclusion at this point other than uncertainty is simply a belief, or a guess - educated or not.
@@oldvlognewtrickswe are not special lol, people can argue about energetics, feel, intuition, but there’s so many layers that if input into enough, we can eventually simulate and copy many things. For now no, but soon yes. Is that a good thing? I don’t know, do I want it no, will it happen, probably lol
A long time people thought computer will beat Grandmaster in Chess. Today it sounds ridiculous people ever doubt that. Then after Chess people thought a computer will never beat a Grandmaster in Go. So it is just a question of time until a computer beats humans in everything. And then there is the point that was already made in the video: in todays world where so much of film and TV is just garbage - why would anyone need a master cutter. Just replace your overpriced shitty human cutter with and shitty almost free AI cutter. As long as there are enough people watching that garbage as long you don't need people which are brilliant at there craft. I even predict that film will end up in a crisis like the music industry did - IMO it already started...
Chess and Go have quite narrowly defined rules. Creative work such as editing is rather more complex. That isn’t to say that AI cannot eventually catch up with humans, but the logic of your argument is flawed.
@@dudhman That is exaclty what people said about Go: "Oh, chess is a simpler Game but computer will never beat Humans in Go". Human tend to think they are special - but in reality we are also just a machines.
@@FTropperCreativity isn't a game, though, it doesn't really have a goal. If someone thinks that it can be done by something without experiences and feelings it makes them a hack, because they're missing the entire point and value of the endeavor.
This is great and sad at the same time. It feels obvious, but for an industry populated by mostly video game loving film school graduates who think movies from the 70's are old... this is what those people need to hear right now!
Interesting idea. I think it's not true though. Right now AI editing is quite rough and timing and pacing is off, but it's improving rapidly. Obviously if a human can learn it, then an AI will be able to learn it. It's just a matter of when and I don't think it'll take more than a few years.
Well, you kinda missed the point. A rewatch would be good for you, they do acknowledge the thing you just said, but don't take that part as something which AI can't copy.
In my view, this video is a click bait… the title completely undermines not only the director but also the screenwriter who’s actually taken care of the nuances that this lady explained in her phoney concept called “trajectory phrasing”. This video is an excellent example of someone creating content and super inflating concepts just to claim a fresh perspective on things that already exist. I can go on and on about this dumb video, but I’ve wasted over 16 minutes watching this video and can’t waste more.
Another absolute BS Americanism … give me a break ! Trajectory Phrasing - really … & watch at the end … you can leave me your Credit card details for my introductory, bi lateral, intuitive composting consultation. Academics SUCK… just DO THE DO … practice brings failure, failure builds confidence,& confidence makes you better …. You just WORK IT OUT by applying it over & over again until you get YOUR OWN signature style. There is NO rule to this industry … no matter what area your’e in. Dir, actor, writer, composer, editor, design…. It’s all creative & intuitive made by error & perfecting by persistence.
Film Editors who master this technique are invaluable to directors. Enroll to EditRave: editrave.com (limited FREE seats)
I got my spot!
Just signed up. See you in 9 days.
Dear Karen and Sven, please continue! There's nobody who's explaining our craft so dense and so clear! Thanks a lot.
It never ceases to amaze me how vehemently editors talk about editing as if the director had no clue about the nature of the material they obtained during the shooting of a film, like if they were aimlessly capturing the reenactment of a series of scenes with different camera positions, expecting the editor to actually DIRECT the film in the editing room. I don't question the fact, arguably, most directors are impostors and have never put two shots together in Imovie... but when I think of masters like Spielberg, Fincher, Cameron, Zemeckis, Soderbergh or the Coen Brothers. it's staggeringly obvious they had a clear image of the outcome before they set foot on a set.
Correct. Totally agree. I was about to type a similar thing but you nailed it. Directors who aren't first great editors themselves-- and haven't masted the fundamentals of filmmaking before stepping into the chair-- are in fact imposters. Otherwise, literaly anyone could sit in front of a video-village and say "when they like stuff". Everyone on earth has "a vision" if they aren't required to prove it first. There might as well just be a lottery for the public to "direct films" at that point.
@lrigsnart6821Do you believe that people still have an interest in movies and the art of film editing, or has the prevalence of random, low-effort streaming content led to a decrease in critical thinking and engagement with cinematic storytelling?
An editor can really make a film
It's about specialization. As talented as any director is, I doubt there's a single director that thinks they can work a camera better than a dp or well trained camera operator.
Same with editing. There are simply a lot of technical aspects to editing a film that a director doesn't specialize in, and I'm certain they appreciate a good editor that may understand the science of the cut in a more sophisticated way than the director themselves.
Sound, music, director, editor can all make or break a film. And then there is masses of people without opinion. 😂
With comedy particularly the difference between a laugh and no laugh can really be one frame.
Editors won't be replaced. Not in real work. AI will assist in tools to help streamline the technical editing but will never replace editors. I think the headlines and misguided statements like that spread fear in those that haven't read enough into things.
LOVE Dr Pearlman! Loved Cutting Rhythmns and share it often.
The problem will be about nuance. Nuance is not the priority for most people, once ai offers ultimate speed and efficiency, nuance will be ditched.
This kinda explained why I feel like some modern movies feel like they're already made by AI. Things just happen and it's not clear why. You know why because it's often scenes you're familiar with, but you don't feel them and they feel distant. People are already used to it, so AI can probably start to replace editors in productions any time now. Thankfully not in all movies!
Happy to see this finally out
[ yes continue this series of video please!!! ]
Wow. A refreshing new - and very helpful - take on approaching editing. I'll have to rewatch this a few times, and save it for reference. Many thanks!!
Now this has come at an excellent time for me!
Such a brilliant way of considering the process!
I think the best way to describe AI tools is that they lower the bar for entry, but the ceiling is just as high.
So we'll see the floor get raised with AI tools, but it will still take real talent and understanding of the craft in order to use any tool to its full capacity.
OMG - I will watch this a number of times and squeeze out everything I can. Awesome info.
I'm just here to say this is one of the most beautiful and intriguing thumbnails I've seen on TH-cam in a long time.
Great video as well :)
I think also ith as to do with the influence of TH-camrs cutting/editing. In a way the "grammar" within TH-cam, (to lesser extent other social platforms...), is changing the new generating of editors but also: re educating a new generation of "people watching" the content
this video is really valuable for helping people collaborate together on a project. oftentimes its hard to communicate what youre trying to achieve when its a visual thats trying to be formed. everyone involved has different interpretations of the base story and the shots captured, so being on the right page with your editor and director is important but difficult when you dont have the language needed. its like she said in the beginning, you get notes back that are too vague and you have to try and pinpoint what they were getting at so you can actually work on it in the intended way.
people are too hung up on the ai half
Thanks to you guys! Been my bread and butter for the last 7 years
OMG...what a piece of study...awesome video Sven...
finetunning is the job you are describing, the system will show you a cut and you watch it, then you tell it if you like it or not (not even why) then it will show you more until you like something.
Honestly the most helpful video I’ve ever seen on editing. Thank you
I love this series with you and Karen! Keep up the great work!
Yes, please continue these. I always learn something useful. 😎
brilliant stuff!
Such an amazing Video! Very valuable thoughts!
Great Job! Thank you!
Masterful content.
Karen is one of the few if not the only editors online stating a fact: AI can't replace editors. Or at least, not good editors. 👏👏👏
Those editors (or just people who edit) who have relied on gimmicks, plugins, effects, and repeating rhythms to achieve their goals (you know who you are) will be heading to the unemployment line because AI will get there faster than any human can. AI can study copy and regurgitate all that stuff.
Karen takes a different path to the same goal; and a unique one with Trajectory Phrasing. It is an interesting concept. However, I struggled to find facets of her approach in what I do and have done for decades. No surprise because I don't think all editors (or any creative people) embrace a monolithic philosophy to their work.
That said, I take issue with Karen's list of "watching, sorting, remembering, selecting, composing" where she outlines that watching is where AI can't replace us because it requires, in part, feeling something while you watch.
I agree it's important...but certainly not limited to watching. Rather than obsessing over rhythm and pace in my edits, I full harness emotional sensitivity in EVERY aspect of the editing process - which I breakdown into thirds: Screening, Selecting, Composing. And Screening/Selecting are two stars that orbit each other.
How the actors perform, how the light falls on a scene, the framing, the action - when something feels right while I'm watching it gets selected. When to cut, what to cut to, how one shot follows another, when it needs sound and which sound, when it needs music and what kind of music, when it needs effects and why it needs them - these are all emotional questions. Does it feel right? What's missing? How do we fix it? I ask my heart. Not a metronome, not the timeline, not script, not the directors notes, not even what I presupposed the story and it's trajectory should be. I simply, quietly, internally ask myself: how does it make me feel? If I like how it feels it stays, if I don't it doesn't.
That's why AI, at least today's AI, won't replace good editing. Because AI can't sit back and reflect on a scene and honestly ask itself it it's engaged or bored. It can't like or dislike something. It can only poll what other projects have done in the past. And even then it doesn''t understand why it works when it does. Filmmaking is humans making stories for other humans. Naysayers will submit that AI can study all the content out there and take reasonable guesses at to what should happen next. I absolutely guarantee failure with that approach for two reasons.
One is every project is unique and requires a unique set of solutions. Stapling on a formulaic approach to projects is destined for ridicule. And the second, more important reason, is that human's are fickle. We don't crave creative repetition; we crave the new. And AI may stumble upon something new accidentally, but it takes a human to see it. Ask AI to generate an image based on a text prompt and the results can be very surprising - mostly not in a good way. And AI itself can't tell the difference between good and bad. We can. It can't.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" - Arthur C Clarke. Right now AI seems like magic. I confess, it's pretty cool. And I expect it will be an amazing tool. It will disrupt our industry like someone doing a cannonball in a kiddie-pool. But that disruption, like the emergence of Photoshop, digital compositing, 4K digital cameras, and many others will be from the people who assume that jobs should be replaced. That's always the real disruption. Iv'e seen it happen over and over for decades. Every time a new tool comes along, people see it a way to save time and money and discard people. It takes them about 2-3 years before they figure out why they had people doing stuff in the first place. Because tools don't save time & money - they repurpose that time and money in different ways. Invest a new tool in construction, the construction process may change, but inevitably there's more construction requiring more people and more specialized roles with new tools.
The individuals who run into the fire, the editors who embrace the new tech and harness it - those are the ones who will shape the media moving forward and they will prevail. In every creative field, they always have.
Great conversation. Very thought provoking. Very refreshing. Thank you!
I do agree that perceiving the energy in motion without an actual body, will be hard for AI. But isn't trajectory semantics what LLMs excel at? They do not even need a rosetta stone to translate between languages with almost no shared roots. Somehow I think they might be good in editing because of how versed they are in languages through translation of semantic relationships into geometric (and statistical) relationships.
I freaking love your videos
Great video! Would love to see more of these 🎬
To Edit is to give Meaning: No machine will ever even understand what it is doing…
great video always!
I was watching & studying intently until the Babylon scene. I completely got immersed in that scene to the point where I couldn't even hear what both of you were saying.
Awesome theory and explanation, but my biggest takeaway is in 10:29... what is this Kaspar thing????
It’s an AI plugin that recognizes images and audio so you can search for anything in your footage.
AI will never be able to recognise and apply nuance.
It's the rhythm, the cadence, and recognising the smallest of gestures to editorially convey story of intent, and not simply story displayed.
Indeed. But at some point audiences will be trained not to care. Just like they lost the interest into the geometry of a scenes, which is why Marvel movies just cut random explosions next to each other and that is good enough for most purposes...
@@Schmidtelpunkt The braindead action movies have always been a guilty pleasure, though they're only that guilty pleasure when there's thought-provoking drama and intelligent comedy to balance the entertainment out. When studios oversaturate with the same content like marvel and DC have, audiences lose interest. Once the large studios have crashed under the weight of their own ambition, along with their hubris and woke agenda, we'll see a major injection of great stories of mid-budget hit the cinema screens by smaller studios. Any remaining large studios which may survive the collapse will have no choice but to scale back to recoup losses. I think we'll see a movie renaissance in the next ten years.
@@PhantomFilmAustralia If it was a guilty pleasure, it would not dominate the charts. Cinema is the event movie. The interesting stuff happens on Netflix and other streaming services for 80s budgets. And it does not help that most capable directors have their heads too far up their own arses not to be able to deliver anything under 180 minutes. If there ever is an "oversaturation" it will end cinema entirely, because there is nothing left. Young people see video games at the culturally leading medium anyway, which is even tighter in the hands of mega companies. Don't let Oppenheimer and Barbie fool you - this is not the big turning point, it was a lucky punch made possible by the Covid delays, and one of those will top the charts with an added 2 within the next 5 years, to beat the originality out of the medium before it gets used to not being shit again.
There is no collapse of big studios in sight. They are still raking in enough money to cancel finished 100 million dollar projects. The next superhero movie will still top the charts. They still run the danger of drowning in money and it will be even more, as they will need fewer artists on any level. The renaissance happens on a small screen. In fact we are already in the middle of it. But that is done at a budget which makes nobody rich except for the streaming providers.
Awesome video.
There is nothing inherently wrong with this... I think it's important for any creative to understand some of the mechanics behind their work BUT the word "Trajectory Phrasing" is just another word for Intention - which has been common teaching forever.
Maybe for some people it helps to rephrase it but it feels mainly like a selling point for the book.
From a layman here.
The way I see it now is that you have/find an intention and the use various techniques to communicate that to the audience/viewer.
@@ookiemand Yes but to know the “trajectory” you have to know the intention - and when you know the intention it’s impossible to NOT consider the “trajectory”. That’s the reason for finding out what the intention is in the first place.
There is no point of knowing the intention if you aren’t going to serve it.
Yeah this video is a little clickbaity. It may be helpful to novices but this is ultimately 17 minutes of gatekeeping jargon for basic concepts that any subscriber should already understand.
I loved this
WE NEED MORE SCIENCE OF EDITING
Great video....for learner's ✌🏻
'Secret editors business" well, I dont think thats the really the case most directors I know can edit ....but if it makes editors feel special...then yes, it's secret :)
I'm totally not understanding this 'trajectory phrasing' thing. I don't recall a single example here of how it might be put into practice. It seems to have something to do with supporting the overall energy and intention of the scene in order to tell the story, but surely that's the most basic, fundamental purpose of all cinematography and editing?
Dr. Karen Pearlman is John Connor
🤣
I can’t help but think-keep it simple.
well-- directors (good directors) should see it also. Otherwise they shouldn't be directing.
madre mia que pedazo de video
I voted for this title
the topic is interesting but i find the non-stop stock footage a bit hard to watch, not hating just being honest here about the presentation
Yep, especially in the scenes where it deviates from what is talked about. This makes it also harder to reconnect once they are back on a scene they are actually mentioning.
👍 👍
i havent been impressed with ai. i think people give it more credit than it deserves.
As an editor of 23 feature films and also a technology CEO, I can safely say that AI will figure this out too, one day. AI can be trained to have its own pattern/intution as well especially when it hits the AGI level. The patterning that humans do isn’t that special anymore now that it can be simulated. Current LLMs have difficulty with long-term fidelity and consistency of understanding their creations currently. But we’re still in the “early AOL dial up days” of the internet when it comes to AI. The big stuff comes later.
That said, its one of the reasons I got out of video/editing and got into tech and finance because I saw how flooded the market was becoming with editing talent and AI will make things much easier one day to make great edits
She is certainly knowledgeable about editing, although her expertise in AI is limited. We've all witnessed AI projects that can recreate images based on brain activity. Given that emotions are a result of specific neuronal activity in various regions of the cerebral cortex, it should be feasible to create a model for emotion reconstruction that stimulates video/emotions behaviours.
@@firasfadhl yeah one day it’ll be even easier than that, you’ll be able to tell it “I like movies edited like (list the movies) or youtuber videos like (name the youtuber) and if it has access to the dataset it can be trained to do match it it. It all takes time of course and won’t happen over night. The people who have researched and understand how AI works know that these neural networks tend to surprise and astound experts at how they’re able to generate and predict the outcome you’re looking for
Yeah 23 1/1 feature films 😂 people like you are easily replaced yes but not the real creative people
@@machiavellian333cope, AI will destroy modern cinema.
@@MyFriendlyPup Well, whatever is left to destroy after the Marvelization.
Ai: takes notes
I don’t think that’s a good idea
A.I. will eat up everything. But only humans can do human stuff. Cause its not about perfection its about the flaw and the flaw comes frome flesh .
A.I. can barely do shit.
This argument is specious: computers are also flawed, and can be built to include or simulate all kinds of things - including flesh, if you want.
It has yet to be established whether there is anything distinct about the way the human brain works, other than characteristics like it being analogue rather than digital, etc.
Any conclusion at this point other than uncertainty is simply a belief, or a guess - educated or not.
@@oldvlognewtrickswe are not special lol, people can argue about energetics, feel, intuition, but there’s so many layers that if input into enough, we can eventually simulate and copy many things. For now no, but soon yes. Is that a good thing? I don’t know, do I want it no, will it happen, probably lol
Me, a director watching this *evil laugh
Great video but curse u for putting the Brazil - Germany game to show the speed of the actual game. 😢
I couldn’t help myself :)
Yet
A long time people thought computer will beat Grandmaster in Chess. Today it sounds ridiculous people ever doubt that. Then after Chess people thought a computer will never beat a Grandmaster in Go. So it is just a question of time until a computer beats humans in everything. And then there is the point that was already made in the video: in todays world where so much of film and TV is just garbage - why would anyone need a master cutter. Just replace your overpriced shitty human cutter with and shitty almost free AI cutter. As long as there are enough people watching that garbage as long you don't need people which are brilliant at there craft. I even predict that film will end up in a crisis like the music industry did - IMO it already started...
Chess and Go have quite narrowly defined rules. Creative work such as editing is rather more complex. That isn’t to say that AI cannot eventually catch up with humans, but the logic of your argument is flawed.
@@dudhman That is exaclty what people said about Go: "Oh, chess is a simpler Game but computer will never beat Humans in Go". Human tend to think they are special - but in reality we are also just a machines.
@@FTropperCreativity isn't a game, though, it doesn't really have a goal. If someone thinks that it can be done by something without experiences and feelings it makes them a hack, because they're missing the entire point and value of the endeavor.
U are goood
This is great and sad at the same time. It feels obvious, but for an industry populated by mostly video game loving film school graduates who think movies from the 70's are old... this is what those people need to hear right now!
AI can’t edit from the gut
Interesting idea. I think it's not true though. Right now AI editing is quite rough and timing and pacing is off, but it's improving rapidly. Obviously if a human can learn it, then an AI will be able to learn it. It's just a matter of when and I don't think it'll take more than a few years.
Well, you kinda missed the point. A rewatch would be good for you, they do acknowledge the thing you just said, but don't take that part as something which AI can't copy.
Most TH-cam editors to be replaced in 3..2…
In my view, this video is a click bait… the title completely undermines not only the director but also the screenwriter who’s actually taken care of the nuances that this lady explained in her phoney concept called “trajectory phrasing”. This video is an excellent example of someone creating content and super inflating concepts just to claim a fresh perspective on things that already exist. I can go on and on about this dumb video, but I’ve wasted over 16 minutes watching this video and can’t waste more.
Title should be: SECRET Editing Businesses
Haha seeing "what AI cant copy" seems very defiant.
Best of luck ... but we both know AI can and will be able to edit cinema one day.
A.I. can't imitate... yet.
AI can’t do it yet.
AI can't copy... yet.
AI will edit. This is copium.
Another absolute BS Americanism … give me a break ! Trajectory Phrasing - really … & watch at the end … you can leave me your Credit card details for my introductory, bi lateral, intuitive composting consultation. Academics SUCK… just DO THE DO … practice brings failure, failure builds confidence,& confidence makes you better …. You just WORK IT OUT by applying it over & over again until you get YOUR OWN signature style. There is NO rule to this industry … no matter what area your’e in. Dir, actor, writer, composer, editor, design…. It’s all creative & intuitive made by error & perfecting by persistence.
Wow, your English is so bad I could barely understand what you’re saying 😅
ai will do all of the mentioned in 2 years. prepare.