Quote from: SiL on May 02, 2024, 05:20:01 AMAs an editor, if I realised the last frame of every other shot had an odd issue I wouldn't be precious about them getting cut.
Outside of the tedium of actually doing it, at least.
I gave up editing a long time ago.
In fact, there was a time pre-90s when editing tape-based composite PAL, that the technology wouldn't guarantee single-frame precision for every cut because of the dreaded odd/even PAL-sequence requirement.
Basically, you had a 1-in-4 chance of your out-point and in-point being completely PAL compliant. If you were willing to allow a 180 degree-phase error (which meant a very slight picture jump horizontally) then you had a 1-in-2 chance of achieving the in- and out-points as desired. It was a nightmare for anyone like me who came from a film background and was used to cutting to exact frames.
Obviously, digital non-linear editing in the 90s and 2000s turned that around completely.
However, it's true that frame precision is not really an issue if the material is of a certain type: e.g. lots of wide shots cut together montage-style (maybe the film is a tourism promo featuring mainly picturesque landscapes - there was a time when I worked on lots of those).
But for up-tempo action and close-up dialogue scenes you really are trying to squeeze those cuts in at exact frames: either between or on camera/actor movements, and in close-up dialogue scenes you really have to watch out for eye-blinks and lip movements. Do you not find this the case?
TC