Finely Sliced: The Evolution of Editor Andy Cardy
Andy Cardy has over 15 years' experience as a motion graphics designer and video editor; in his career, he has worked across a diverse range of projects - from documentary series broadcast across Asia, to museum installations and immersive spaces, to infographics and punchy event openers.
At Chrome, Andy takes on most of the in-house motion graphics work as well as oversees projects that are handled by our third-party suppliers and freelancers. His varied skill set, knowledge, and insight allow Chrome to collaborate with animation studios in an informed and creative way to deliver the best results to our clients.
When not looking for inspiration to advance his skills, Andy is a keen rock climber, routinely climbing at The Castle in North London. He looks forward to the day he can take his newly born son there for his first rock climbing lesson.
LBB> The first cut is the deepest: how do you like to start an editing project?
Andy> It depends on the project itself, as they can vary dramatically. Generally speaking, broad strokes.
If it’s a short piece, a promo or branded content, I might just use text onscreen to describe what I think we need to see and when, using this as the blueprint for the edit. Or, if it is interview based, I’ll just begin to go through the interviews and group into themes, pulling together what’s being said into different groups and finding links between the topics they talk about. I’ve always compared edit to a massive game of pairs. You turn over something and then you have to remember it while you look for a match.
Another way I like to prep is just making a list, like acts to show how the story would evolve (for example, in a documentary). Having these initial broad strokes allows me to build the edit out from a starting point that’s easy to approach. It really does depend on the end product though.
LBB> Non-editors often think of editing just in technical terms but it’s integral to the emotion and mood of a film. How did you develop that side of your craft?
Andy> By watching a lot and trying to absorb from other films and other people’s work. Also taking things from life and drawing on memories and then trying to figure out a way of conveying that through video in a way that will resonate with an audience.
Additionally, having the time to see people’s reaction to your work and seeing first-hand through someone else’s eyes if an edit has been successful or not. Just because something is emotional for you doesn’t mean it will translate for someone else. So, seeing people’s reactions first-hand helps a lot and you can build a toolkit of things you’ve tried and tested.
LBB> How important is an understanding of story and the mechanics of story?
Andy> Pretty important.
LBB> Rhythm and a sense of musicality seem to be intrinsic to good editing (even when it’s a film without actual music) – how do you think about the rhythm side of editing, how do you feel about the beats of a scene or a spot? And do you like to cut to music?
Andy> I do like to cut to music. Even if a piece isn’t going to have music, I often add music as a guide track to set an emotional tone for the piece. Or if the music hasn’t been decided yet and there’s a piece you feel conveys the right tone, just sticking that underneath as something to work to is a good trick to help you build the edit.
Sound design as well…if there’s no music, then thinking about the sound at an early stage. I quite like putting sound design in to help fill that gap and provide a sense of rhythm that the music would have done otherwise.
I think a lot of it is feeling. It’s sort of an instinct that you develop with every edit.
LBB> Tell us about a recent editing project that involved some interesting creative challenges.
Andy> 'Bring on the Mountain' – one of the creative challenges was that the core of what we were showing was the Supervan breaking the record, which in and of itself is not that emotional or engaging to a wider audience, which is who we were trying to appeal to.
So, during the race scene, we wanted to heighten the emotional storytelling. This was a story about the Ford team’s journey as much as it was about the journey of the van itself. It was about those who were connected to it, so on race day, seeing their reactions and hearing their reactions was as important (if not more so) as seeing the van racing.
It was also tricky because we had so much footage, but it was all very functional footage showing the van on the road racing its eight minute run. It didn’t carry any emotional weight. So, we had to emotionally charge it and add drama.
There were a few creative decisions I made early on to achieve this, one of which was motion graphics to remind us how far the van had to go in this race and contextualise the challenge.
Then, to tell the human side of the story as the race unfolded, hearing the team’s thoughts, feelings, and the anticipation they felt.
And then a third perspective was adding in a more abstract element of nature and giving a sense of greater purpose and trying to portray the character of the environment [the van] was racing in, which we did through abstract nature shots. We cut to a shot of the eagle and then to the bird’s eye view watching the van.
So, we had different perspectives – nature watching the van, the team and crowd watching the van, and the driver’s perspective. Having all of these perspectives intertwine and climax together was a challenge, but the edit was more powerful as a result. The race experience was heightened beyond witnessing the race itself and it was charged with the motion of the team (hopefully, anyway!).
LBB> How important is your relationship with the director and how do you approach difficult conversations when there is a creative difference of opinion?
Andy> I am not very good at that! Often, I feel I’ve been brought in on jobs because I am good at self-directing. It’s a blessing and a curse: blessing because I feel I am able to pick things up and run with them; a curse because it can put me in conflict with the director creatively and perhaps, I run the risk of overstepping my mark. Where it works best for me is when a director is looking for an editor to offer suggestions and is receptive to new ideas from the editor.
It's a tricky thing to try and execute someone’s vision. And by default, that is the editor’s role. It’s important to remember that. The director needs to communicate effectively to an editor, but it is the editor’s job to nurture their ideas.
In cases where that relationship doesn’t happen naturally, I guess my approach would be to make sure that their ideas are heard and to try it, even if you disagree at first or can’t visualise it yourself. Never say no.
In many cases, I’ve been surprised when I’ve been opposed to an idea but tried it anyway and then felt, ‘Oh ok, I get it,’ and it has worked. But, if after trying and it’s not working, or you feel that it’s not possible within the time frame and budget, then I think it's about explaining the issue and showing your efforts and then creatively pivoting to a slightly different direction. Or, presenting a new idea which hopefully gets to the crux of what the director is after or shows them a different way of approaching it.
LBB> What’s harder to cut around – too much material or not enough? And why?
Andy> That’s interesting…I often feel that not enough material leads to making creative decisions more quickly.
For example, there have been plenty of edits where all we have is static imagery – a few photos – and initially that may seem restrictive, but actually it’s led to quite a few creative decisions that end up proving more powerful than if you had loads and loads of footage.
So, you might find an interesting execution – with the image example, maybe you use graphics, or you introduce the images in a different way – so with only a few assets you’ve maximised their impact. If you have too much – although it’s great to have variety and options – it can slow down the creative process because you’re just drowning, and you can do everything and anything and it’s harder to make decisions.
LBB> Which commercial projects are you proudest of and why?
Andy> I am really proud of 'Bring on the Mountain'. That was really a labour of love (and an example of too much footage!) – that’s a perfect example of how too much material can slow down the creative process. We could have made an entire series with what we had, so to pick which direction and which story we were going to tell and which bits we were going to leave out was a real challenge. 'Bring on the Mountain' was a challenge, but creatively it succeeds and has had good feedback so I’m pleased about that one.
LBB> There are so many different platforms for film content now, and even in advertising something can last anything from a few seconds to a couple of hours. As an editor, are you seeing a change in the kind of projects you’re getting from brands and agencies?
Andy> It’s an interesting one because I think this change started with the advent of social media. I think over my entire career that change has been happening and now there are more finite things that impact it, like which app is popular or what is trending. But it’s part of a larger trend/change of being more online and being more social-friendly. It’s clear that brands are leaning into the power of social media and that’s just continuing.
So yes, it’s changed but it’s a change that’s been happening gradually and has just evolved with the latest iteration of each new thing. I think overall I welcome it. It keeps things fresh and allows for new creative ideas to surface.
LBB> Who are your editing heroes and why? What films or spots epitomize good editing for you?
Andy> This is a tricky one… there isn’t really a single thing that stands out to me, and I don’t really have any editing heroes as such. Instead, I think I just passively absorb any work that catches my eye in a sort of memory bank of good editing or direction that has shaped my preferences. I do remember at uni, though, I had 'The Work Of' series on DVD, which was like my bible at one stage, particularly The Work Of Spike Jonze, Chris Cunningham, and Michel Gondry. I would watch these over and over.
LBB> How does editing in the commercial world differ from the film world and TV world?
Andy> Most of my work has been in commercials, so it’s hard for me to say. I have done some TV though. In terms of editing, I’d say I think you have more creative freedom in commercials as an editor.
In TV, the editor is given less autonomy I think, and it’s often about cutting to a format and hitting deadlines and following a procedure; whereas with commercials for brands – because the projects vary so much and are often shorter in length – it allows more creative exploration for an editor. And editors are often picked for their creative flair in commercials, whereas in TV, I think it’s more about the length of your career and your experience with the format.
LBB> Have you noticed any trends or changes in commercial editing over recent years?
Andy> Talking about social again…a lot of online content creators have really set the tone for editing styles. And I feel like because we’re all watching a content a lot more (like a lot of editing trickery and creativity), people are more aware of it now and the commercial industry has a higher expectation too.
There’s a real hunger for the next cool way of doing something. I feel like everyone’s seen a ‘fun edit style’ on Instagram that they like, so there’s definitely more expectation for editors (and directors) to follow or keep up with these trends.
Sometimes it can feel intimidating to keep your style fresh and to continually widen your skill set. It feels like if you can be one of those people who comes up with a new style or approach, you will get noticed and your career can take off (in the world of social media anyway), which I think is a bit of a recent phenomenon. Ten years ago, editing was much more traditional or conventional. It didn’t evolve as quickly, that’s for sure.
LBB> Anything else?
Andy> There’s one personal story…I can remember the first time when editing really clicked for me. It was when I was making a home video just after a holiday with some friends. And it was the first time where I edited a clip out of sync and cutaway to some b-roll, which is a really simple editing technique. But I remember the first time I did it I just saw this whole storytelling potential from this one little step.
After that, I remember the feeling I got when I knew an edit was really working. There’s an excitement of, ‘Oh yeah!’ when an edit really starts to come together. It’s a feeling I still try to find in my work today several years on. If I can emulate that feeling, then I know the edit is going to be a good one, and it reassures me that I am still enjoying the work. It’s a good benchmark. I started editing just for the fun of it and if it stopped being fun, I think I would stop.
