I'm proposing that how many of us think about the editing process is outmoded, and should be changed drastically.   My "Revolutionary Editing Manifesto For The New Millenium",  as I modestly call it,  holds that the model of the production process that we now all participate in has been invalidated by the new technology.   Folks operating "project studios",  and probably a majority of small-company and individual NLE owners are much farther along the road to The New Millenium Model---but need to consider the last few steps to make a clean and complete break with the past.

A friend of ours,  who's owned expensive on-line edit suites for the last 25 years,  bought an Avid 8000 late last year,  ($117,000)  and promply installed it in his new Edit B suite---complete with nice grey rug and walls, with expensive track lighting, and a nice little producer's supervising desk elevated on a little platform and back a few feet---just like his several year-old BetaCam to D2 suite in Edit A.  Nice, black leather, sumptuous "Space Commander Chairs" and everything...

If you know What's Arrived In New Technolgy, then you instantly see what's wrong with that picture.  Indeed, lots of his clients want to sit in the orchestra pit, right at the editor's very elbow, and see all the meticulous teensy computer-driven action up close and personal.

The Revolutionary New Millenium Edit Model Paradigm Calls For:

1.  The editor attends the shoot(s) as an observer, perhaps making useful suggestions since his head is not overloaded.  His job is to learn the content, learn the significant issues from the client, and know the internal politics and other secondary information considerations---like what NOT to show---in the script.   (In the current model, the first an editor knows about a program's content is the day the producer shows up in the edit bay with a milk carton full of tapes---and in One Very Big Hot Hurry to get it all done.)

2.  After the show is in the can, the editor and producer and/or director have a brief meeting as the set is wrapped, kicking around any last-minute thoughts or problems while it's all still fresh.

3.  The editor leaves with the tapes, and the next day(s) does an "editor's cut" working alone.  When this is ready, they hold a meeting at the producer's convenience and location for a viewing, critique, and to take notes for any changes.  The editor goes back and makes the changes.  Barring any final tweaks, the program is now done. 

Instead of one --or more --full, boring, long, nerve-wracking days, the total time investment in the edit process on the part of the producer/director is only an hour or two---not fourteen!   During this process the producer/director is not tempted to meddle with minor things that don't really matter---wasting time, and slowing the process.  (They all do that.  They can't help themselves.  They're sitting there, watching the grass grow, bored silly most of the time.  It's too tempting.  They're control freaks, or they wouldn't even BE directors.) 

Instead, they get to see the show all the way through the first time---more like the audience will---as a whole piece,  with the momentum and sweep of narrative you can never grasp in an edit bay as the meticulous stitches are put in the fabric one at a time, at an agonizingly slow pace.

(The stark and simple fact is, most individual edits are not subject to much interpretation.  You cut when the talent finishes his last words.  You cut when the pan ends.  You dissolve for a nice relaxed mood;  you cut cut cut cut cut cut cut for fabulous high energy pacing.  You dazzle 'em with digital tumbling