Multi-camera editing
Three cameras and one room. Most of the craft goes into making the seams stop existing.
The short version
Is this for you? For three cameras that read as three rooms, and a timeline nobody but the last editor can open. Not if you film on a single camera; one angle has nothing here to fix, and we will tell you so.
What leaves your plate. Every angle nested, named and colour-coded before a single cut, the production sound kept on one path inside the main angle so no duplicate scratch track reaches export, and a missing angle flagged back to the shoot the same day rather than a fortnight later.
What starts working. Three cameras that read as one room, and a project so ordered your next editor opens it without ringing the last one, which is the part that outlives the edit.
The smallest way in. A free audit: three fields, and a written reading back, usually within about three working days. It commits you to nothing.
What to read next. The five levels to see where this fits, or the casework to see it done.
What a multi-camera handover owes the next person who picks it up
Every angle is nested, named and colour-coded before a cut is made
All of it against a reference project, so one brand's timelines look identical from one month to the next. This is not tidiness for its own sake. A named, coloured nest is what lets a second editor open a two-year-old project, find the side angle in three seconds and change one shot, instead of discovering an hour later which of six untitled layers was carrying the audio.
Sound lives inside the main angle's nest
The audio file is placed inside the nest of the primary angle, so exactly one channel is live at export. It sounds like housekeeping. It is what prevents the commonest way a multi-camera master goes wrong, which is two copies of the same voice a few frames apart: quiet enough to pass a rushed check, obvious to anybody wearing headphones, and heard by everyone as cheapness.
No two neighbouring shots share a distance
Cut from a wide to a wide with nothing else changing and the change reads as a mistake rather than a move; where the material wants two shots of a similar size, the way round it is a real change of angle or composition, the same thirty-degree instinct a drama editor works by. Our default is that every adjacent pair differs in how close it sits, and across the piece the scale drifts inward slowly enough that nobody notices being drawn in, though a cut back to wide is kept in hand to reset where the viewer is. Two house habits, both invisible, and together they are most of the reason a static three-camera shoot feels like it has movement in it.
A missing angle goes back to the shoot the same day
The first pass over a new batch is an inventory: a folder and a project per video, then a check on what did not arrive. Anything absent goes straight to the people who filmed it, before the edit starts. An editor who quietly works around a gap has taught the shoot that the gap was survivable, and it will be there again next month.
The order the work happens in, and why it is that order
Assembly before anything pretty
Downloads, the shared tracking sheet, a folder and a project per video, then the nests. The cut and the transitions come next, with markers dropped on everything that needs a second pass. Colour, type and motion happen last, on a timeline whose length has stopped changing. Grading a shot that later gets shortened is work paid for twice.
Markers are notes to your future self
They carry what a thumbnail cannot show: where the inset window has to come off, where a title is due, where a decision was deliberately deferred. A marker costs four seconds now. Reconstructing why you left that particular gap, three weeks and eleven videos later, costs an afternoon and usually a phone call.
One reference project per brand
New work starts from the same skeleton every time: the same nest names, the same track layout, the same colours. The reason is not aesthetic. It is so a partner's videos can be opened by whichever of us is free, in whatever order the shoot list dictates, without a handover conversation first. The skeleton is built for that one brand and revised as the work does; what it holds still is the plumbing, so the attention goes to the cut rather than to rebuilding the project every time.
A delivery nobody can reopen in a year is just a file, and you paid for an asset.
The order inside the project is the part you never see and the part you keep.
What changes for you
Three cameras that read as one room, and an organised handover your next editor can pick up without ringing the last one.
Related: Colour grading · Long-form editing · Tracking and punch-ins · Delivery and export
Send the channel and we will read the edits themselves: pacing, cuts, consistency across recent videos. The audit names what post-production would change first, in writing, before anything is committed.
Request your free audit.
Three fields, and a written reading back: a fit snapshot, two or three prioritised opportunities, and a recommended next step.
A person reads the channel and writes the audit by hand: a considered read typically takes three working days. That is the usual shape, not a promised turnaround. We use these details only to reply to you: no lists, no lurking.
What you will get
A fit snapshot: where your channel stands, and whether we are a match.
Two to three opportunities: specific, prioritised, yours to keep.
A recommended next step, even if that step is not us.
The audit is free and commits you to nothing: nobody follows up with a call you did not ask for.
The casework shows all of this done.
The case studies are the same work with the numbers, the sources and the dates attached.
See the casework →