Talk:Jump cut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Filmmaking, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to filmmaking. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.

I deleted the section on literature. I've never heard that expression used in that way and it strikes me as idiosyncratic. If I'm wrong, feel free to put it back in. Deleuze 20:30, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Confusing to a layman

I've had a primer on cinematography at best, so the jump cut, which I may have never seen before (the description of a jump cut doesn't evoke for me anything I've seen), is very hard for me to comprehend from this article. It probably won't be easy to write about so visual a technique in order that a layman can visualize it without seeing an actual jump cut, but if someone could, I (and probably others down the line) would really appreciate it.

I can only picture three techniques that may be this 'jump cut' trick. The first would be when the current scene slides off the screen while the next scene slides onto the screen to replace the old scene. The second would be going straight from one scene to the next without any sort of transitional blackout. The last would be overlapping a fade out/fade in. However, I can't be sure article's talking about any of these.

This article also mentions the political use of the jump cut, but even with the example given, it's not terribly clear how this technique works to further a political message. The article says it turns your focus from the emotional content to the political message. That's fine, but why is this technique particularly good at it? It's alienating? Does that mean it fuels apathy or anger at the issue being discussed? I imagine reading the article on Brecht could clarify this, but one shouldn't have to read another big article when interested just on the jump cut and its uses. A better and/or more detailed explanation of its political utility would help this article.

I have studied cinema and understand what a jump cut is. It is somewhat difficult to describe. Basically a jump cut is where a shot is taken of something. Say the shot shows a person enter the left of frame and walk across in from of the camera and then sit down on a seat in front of the camera. In a jump cut a section of the film is cut out, and the beginning section joined to the end section, so the person will enter the frame, walk a few steps, and then instantly be in the seated position. The camera position does not move but the middle section of the shot is taken out. People often call any abrupt cut between two different shots a jump cut but this is technically not what a jump cut is. Asa01 07:21, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I've read through all the comments on this article and agree with most of them. But, a jump-cut is not solely taking out the middle of a shot. When editing in a classical style to perform a proper cut the angle of the camera should change at least 30 degrees (called The 30 degree rule) from shot to shot or at least one shot size if it is of the same person or object. Any cut that does not adhere to this is basically considered a jump-cut. You can simply take out the middle of the shot, but that is not the only thing that constitutes a jump-cut. Obviously a jump-cut is not anything that is simply jarring, and it is a common misconception, but it is also not simply taking out the middle of a shot. There are certain formulas to classical editing and deviations from them such as in Jean-Luc Godard's "Breathless" which I think was an example in the article, are what make up discontinuity editing and cuts such as this. In fact in Breathless many of the jump-cuts that occur are not simple a matter of Godard taking out the middle of the shot.

Also, a jump-cut is more commonly confused with a cross-cut and using 2001 as an example of a match-cut is confusing. Also, it's not known whether or not the jump-cuts in Battleship Potemkin are on purpose and besides that, a montage is different from a jump-cut. Although it might utilize them sometimes.

I don't know, no offense but this is not a very good explanation of a jump-cut. It's not that anything is necessarily wrong, it's just not well defined. Sorry about anything, this I'm still figuring out how this works. --FruityCheerios 10:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Still needs clean-up

I've just reinstated the clean-up template after it was deleted. Why? The examples in this article are random ones (e.g., The New World) and poorly explained. And much of the grammar is clumsy (e.g., "The term jump cut is frequently used to describe any abrupt and noticeable edit cut in a film, however technically this is incorrect."). In my opinion, the whole piece needs to be overhauled and streamlined. --Jeremy Butler 12:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's too bad. Some of the examples are less than ideal, as you say, but a little tweaking and copyediting would make this pretty servicable. I'll try to get around to doing some this weekend. Deleuze 13:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article lacks clarity

I believe the first sentence is too limiting: "A jump cut is a cut in film editing where the middle section of a continuous shot is removed, and the beginning and ends of the shot are then joined together." The two elements to be joined together could have originated from different takes.

The 2 examples in the first paragraph seem to be untypical.

Also, nothing is said of the technique of using multiple jump cuts in a sequence (often used in a scene with the character speaking directly to the camera, such as in Strange Days or Elisabeth).

I believe the part about the political use of the jump cut is unclear. It should either be clarified or removed. How does the jump cut serve a political use? How is it used in intellectual montage? What is a Brechtian technique?

I don't see how "any abrupt and noticeable edit cut in a film" applies specifically to the cut at the end of 2001's Dawn of Man sequence. It is important to point out the distinction between match cut and jump cut, but the first sentence of that paragraph is misleading.

Overall the article needs a lot of clarification.(JFR)

Sorry but "A jump cut is a cut in film editing where the middle section of a continuous shot is removed, and the beginning and ends of the shot are then joined together." is the precise, exact, and ONLY thing that a jump cut can be. If the start and ending bits of film originated from different shots, then it is not a jump cut but merely straight cut. Asa01 21:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I said "The two elements to be joined together could have originated from different takes", not "different shots". I mean alternate takes of the same shot (same angle, same action); that is why it is wrong to say that the two elements of a jump cut must come from a single continuous shot. If editing 2 elements from alternate takes of the same shot is not a jump cut then what is it? And how could anyone (not involved in editing the film) ever know if the elements came from the same take or from alternate takes? (JFR)

Yeh I don't disagree with that - i didn't quite notice that distinction in your argument. Nothin' stopping you from changing the article. Asa01 08:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The 2001 bit describes how in popular disucssion people loosely use "jump cut" for any noticeable or bold cut. If people notice a cut enough and want to describe it, they will often call it a jump cut - and that 2001 edit cut is one of the most famous and most discussed edits cuts in cinema history. In most films using classic editing regimes, the cuts seem invisible. I once thought that any noticeable cut was a "jump cut", but having consulted filmmaking handbooks and cinema books, realised it is completely wrong. But in popular situations the term is frequently used in this way. Asa01 21:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I generally agree with Asa01's comments about jump cuts--particularly the 2001 edit--but there is a small problem with this definition. And that is: alternate takes of the same shot. Or multiple shots taken at the same location. Take Godard's Breathless (1960), a couple of frame grabs from which are over here, midway down the page. In one scene, Michel and Patricia drive around in a car. Godard shot numerous shots of her and then cut them together without regard for continuity. Those instances are definitely jump cuts, but they were not created by removing the middle section of a shot. --Jeremy Butler 11:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)