At Peters behest, I edited up and took in a short rough cut sample of the film. Only 30 seconds long, it comprised mainly of exerts from Pats interview and some B roll of the beach. It didn’t go down as badly as I was expecting, but don’t take that to mean that it exactly went well. Peter immediately took issue with the audio, as we expected. He didn’t mention much else of the piece, which either means that the rest was flawless or that one failure was enough to dwarf any others in comparison. I’m just going to go ahead with the former, and assume otherwise flawless.
We also had some great advice from Peter, an editing method that may well give our audio a fighting chance. By cutting up audio, creating shorter clips of the most important sections of the audio, we can give the audio a little extra definition and hopefully make it easier to understand our subjects. It seems a difficult and slow process, but I feel like it will be necessary if it even give our audio a slight advantage. Someone suggested perhaps even considering subtitles, but I don’t know how I feel about that. Especially in regard to the interviews with Alan and Astrid, where accents are thickest, I’m afraid that they aren’t heavy enough to require subtitles. The issue is more one of audio, and I feel to give them subtitles could be seen as either patronizing or an attempt to pass off my own troubles with audio as a problem with the interviewee.
Editing continues, and we’ve got maybe a minute together. It’s looking alright, actually, and the editing process isn’t as bad as I was expecting it to be. I wouldn’t say I’m exactly enjoying it, but the nuances and controls of the editor itself are slowly becoming easier to manipulate. With a whole lot of patience and a few hundred instructional youtube videos, I should be able to get through this.