this blog has been made in order to determine the difference in good and bad editing when it comes to raod safety adverts in this i have given a good example and a bad and also a colleague has contributed the same giving two example of each good and bad.
The first is a good example i feel in the case that you are shown in depth not only the catastrophic damage from the incident in what seems like real time but the editing is seamless this compels the watcher to take interest i feel because of the depth they have gone in to in order to demonstrate this i hope you agree.
The second instance i feel has given us something completely different, below budget and terribly edited the only thing this shows is almost a lack of interest in the subject by who ever has created it. The only edit point is a terrible fade to black then a question mark that almost humours the drink driving as a whole again i hope you agree.
i feel that these next examples are again good and bad in entierty and there fore demonstrate the principal of what we are trying to demonstrate.
the first example again is a good example i feel that technically this is a very sound piece and the story hits a broad ranged target audience allowing everbody i feel to relate to it.
The second example is of a childrens advert and a bad example of it if this is terribly long winded and for the target audience being children i feel that there attention span really should have been taken in to consideration there are parts that could have been clearly removed to keep the flow of the advertisement true instead you are left feeling trapped in a repetitive trap with dry tones a bad bad bad example of editing because they haven't done enough!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPCcpSHPiuA
