What a Rough Cut Means in a News Edit Suite

A rough cut is the first assembled version of a news package. The editor takes the raw footage, picks the shots that carry the story, and lays them on the timeline in the order they will be seen. Interview clips are trimmed to the sentences that matter, the reporter's voice track is placed against pictures, and the running length is brought near its final figure. It is not a draft in the sense of something half finished and ignored. It is a working structure that everybody can watch, question and change.

Colour correction, finished graphics, captions and the last audio mix are left for later stages. That is deliberate. Polishing a shot that may be dropped ten minutes later wastes time that a breaking story does not have. In our edit suites at Exeter we treat the rough cut as the point where the story first becomes readable, and the point where mistakes are cheapest to put right.

• Shots chosen and ordered
• Interview clips trimmed to the usable lines
• Reporter track laid against pictures
• Length close to the final slot

Most corrections in a news package are about structure, not finish. A producer may decide the second interviewee should come first, that the aerial shot belongs at the opening, or that a quote runs too long and cuts the pace. Those decisions are easy on a rough cut and awkward once graphics have been built around a particular sequence. Looking at the assembly early lets the person responsible for the output change direction while the editor still has the footage open and the project unlocked.

There is a second benefit. A rough cut shows quickly whether the material is enough. If the pictures do not support the script, the reporter or camera operator in the field can still be asked for another shot, a cutaway or a short piece to camera. Tom Fletcher, who reports from scenes and often files the first voice track, finds that a rough cut seen within the hour turns a vague worry into a specific request.

Reading a rough cut correctly means knowing what not to judge. The sound may jump between locations because the mix has not been balanced. Some shots will carry a flat or slightly mismatched look because grading comes afterwards. Captions, name straps and locator graphics are usually absent or shown as plain placeholders. A producer who marks these as faults wastes a review round and can leave the editor chasing details that were always scheduled for a later pass.

What should be judged is content and order: is every claim supported by a picture or a source, is the first ten seconds strong enough to hold a viewer, does the package end on something that closes the story. We ask reviewers to note timecodes against each comment so that Priya Nair, our lead editor, can go straight to the moment concerned rather than hunting through the timeline for a vague remark.

• Do judge order, accuracy and length
• Do not judge sound balance yet
• Do not judge colour or graphics yet

Once the structure is agreed, the work divides into predictable stages. The editor locks the picture so that timings stop moving, then adds graphics and captions against the final sequence. Audio is cleaned and balanced, with music or ambient sound set below the voice. A fine cut follows, where individual frames are trimmed for rhythm, and the package is exported in the format and loudness the receiving outlet expects. Each stage depends on the one before, which is why changing the order late is costly.

Picture lock is the term producers most often meet next. It means no further changes to the order or length of shots, and from that moment the graphics team and audio mixer can work in parallel. Declaring lock too early is a common reason for rework, and declaring it too late squeezes everything after it. A short, clear sign-off from the producer, given in writing, keeps the whole chain moving without argument.

Good notes are short, specific and tied to time. Instead of writing that the middle drags, say that the council statement from one minute ten to one minute forty could lose its second half. Instead of asking for it to feel more urgent, ask for the crowd shot to open the package. Editors work against a clock, and a note they can act on in a single move saves more time than any amount of general encouragement.

Gather comments from all reviewers before sending them. Two people asking for opposite changes costs a round that nobody has to spare. Where the story is still developing, say which facts may change so the editor can leave a gap or keep a lower third easy to alter. Daniel Pearce often joins these reviews when a shot needs explaining, because the person who filmed it knows what else was captured that never made the first assembly.

• Give timecodes with every note
• Send one combined set of comments
• Flag facts that may still change

Watch the rough cut once straight through without pausing, as a viewer would, and write down only your first reaction. Then watch again with the script beside you and check every name, figure and place against the pictures. Third, look at the length against the slot you have been given. This order stops you getting lost in detail before you have judged whether the story works at all, and it takes little more than three viewings of a package that is only a couple of minutes long.

Finish by listing what you want kept as it is. Editors need to know which moments you like as much as which you want changed, because a revision that loses a strong shot by accident is a setback for everybody. A clear, brief reply with a yes, a list of changes and a note of anything uncertain gives the edit suite what it needs to turn a rough cut into broadcast material.