Should You Say “Just Start” to Your Video Editor? Sometimes.
There’s a certain amount of free-thinking and creative direction that goes into video editing. An editor working on a project needs a firm grasp on voice and tone for both that specific edit and the overall brand. Combined with years of experience, it creates intuition that shapes the music, pacing, visuals, soundbites, structure, and all of the small decisions that determine how a video looks and feels.
Direction can mean different things, though.
The most open-ended version is simple: send the files and say, “Just start.”
Editors have plenty of space for creativity here, but have to design the video’s concept from scratch. This approach is best applied in instances where teams are still having conversations and making decisions, but the project can’t wait.
An example of this would be a sales meeting approaching that needs a video asset. Leadership is still deciding what key points they want to highlight in the discussion, but the date for the meeting is approaching fast so the editor needs to start, today.
The first pass will inevitably miss its moving target and require a longer revision cycle, but the project succeeds by starting on time and meeting the deadline.
On the opposite side of the spectrum, it takes the form of laying out every single detail. Maximum direction equals a minimal timeline and limited revisions. A literal blueprint for your editing partner.
This means providing the editor with everything: pre-selected music, a script with recorded voiceover, storyboards with what visuals should be on-screen for each line of dialogue, and fully designed graphics.
It can be effective when strict review structures are in place. If the video needs to pass through several layers of approval, this direction can reduce ambiguity and the first pass has a much higher chance of being close to the final pass.
However, this requires most of the work to be done before the editor even touches the project, which can put strain on internal teams and make relationships with editors more transactional.
A more universally successful approach is a balance of both: clear direction on what’s available and where the project needs to go.
Editors are problem solvers by nature. With proper direction, an experienced editor can even turn a non-starter into the fuel that propels the project down the runway.
The best example of this took place at SXSW. A company staged events and takeovers around the city, and had the forethought to capture the experience. After the event was finished, they found themselves unsure of what they could even make with what they had.
Their flagship activation was captured by its own dedicated videographer and photographer, which provided a trove of assets with which to work. A panel featuring their CMO was recorded by the venue: great for soundbites. But the smaller events presented challenges. A local diner had staff and cups branded with the company’s logo, but it was only captured in still photos.
All this led to a brief email to their editor, “We want to make a recap video. These are the files we have to use. These are the specs. Is it possible?”
It was more than possible. The images from the diner provided the seed that led to a core creative style of the video: isolating elements in photos and layering them over each other like a moving collage. This further inspired a layering method of utilizing the phone footage from the bar.
Elements that once caused problems led to the cornerstone of the project, because it was presented with the appropriate framework.
