[michaelt]

> going to be an interesting work flow for anyone editing this

We've had techniques for editing videos on underpowered PCs since the 1990s. Possibly earlier.

You use something called a "proxy workflow": For each 8K source video, generate a 480p "proxy" with the same frame timing but a much more manageable amount of data. You edit the entire film using the 480p videos. Then once you're happy you "render" the video - which swaps the high quality sources back in and produces an output file. The final render might take all weekend for an hour-long video - but you've only got to do it once.

[smitelli]

They did that with film too. The editors sliced up a copy of the developed film, called a “workprint,” spliced it all back together, and produced a list of numerical edit points as they went along.

Then a person called the negative cutter would go through the list, duplicate the editing decisions on a high-quality negative without the generational loss, and that would go on to become the final print.

That’s why sometimes you’ll see a deleted scene from a movie whose picture quality looks quite poor. That was most likely taken from the workprint, and never went through negative cutting or any finishing.

[ethagknight]

Great input on the low quality deleted scene, never made sense to me!

[whycome]

same. I always wondered if the proper hq film for some of those scenes is stored away somewhere.