If there is something like this, please let me know.
Yep. Its called an Editor but unfortunately for you... its "hands on" and not automatic.
How would that work in practicae anyway?
A film with dialogue is not always wall to wall audio. The bits where an actor is not talking is as important as the bits where they are.
Plenty of shots are MOS
Many shots have overlap dialogue and audio extensions.
Sorry...I dont get it.
I'm sorry but if you "don't get it." Don't leave a comment. Especially opening with a snide comment.
It would work on a single track timeline or 1 select video and audio tracks selected in the timeline. The video cut would be based upon the audio levels. This is useful "in certain productions" such as an interview.
Sorry...I dont get it.
I have to agree. I'm just not seeing the value of such a feature, or more accurately, I'm just not seeing why anyone would possibly cut something in this fashion - audio or video.
Okaie dokie then. Thanks for the response, I guess i know I'm doing something original then :S. Thanks for explaining your feelings on the subject.
-I see where the confusion is coming from. The title. It's suggesting that it is for everyone to edit easier, but that was not the intent.
No, the title isn't causing any confusion. It's the idea that edit decisions are based on audio volume. It's just (pardon the pun) unheard of in the industry.
That made me laugh, good one on the audio. the Industry?
I'm sorry but if you "don't get it." Don't leave a comment.
Dont post in an open forum if you dont want to debate. I explained what I dont get about it.
I understand how you think it would work based on audio levels (amplitude if you like). Thats o.k as an idea but practically...
...what happens in an interview when someone pauses (silence) to catch breath , or respond or consider the next part of the answer / question.
exacly what I'm looking for. Obviously the settings would allow an attack time, but generally I wouldn't want to use inverview footage where someone was stumbling. Nor would I lay video over audio where it sounded like someone was stumbling either. That just makes them look bad, unless that is another style choice.
Use a hammer to chip ice, it's still a useful tool for driving nails.
I think what you're seeing here, cliffcof, is a resistance to the way of thinking that the software should do all the work for you.
Maybe you need to look at FCPx.
I do however agree with the sentiments though, that there's no substitute some times for getting your hands dirty.
Except, if that was universal thinking, we wouldn't have beat quantization for music, and pitch correction for singing, and auto-stabilization for video. So, if you think there's a market for an app or plug-in that will automate editing of video like you want, run with it. You can gloat at the naysayers behind the Technical Academy Awards ceremony rope line.
The thing about these down-dumbing technologies is that it needs to be simpler to set up than to do the work the hard way. If you need to set a zillion parameters to get it to work right, it had better be worth the effort in the long run.
One button is the holy grail.
There are a few different speech analysis utilities (Pr has one.) that will transcribe your audio to a text file. Maybe that would help you get where you need to go.
If you have Ae and some scripting knowledge, you could use the Convert Audio to Keyframes function to generate a marker for you to place your cuts and b-roll based on an audio threshold. The stumbling would likely require some human interaction.
I think this deserves to be added to this previous conversation.
and from that came this: