Use this selection board when discussing a highlights edit from an agreed set of project productions. It helps the buyer propose a coherent story and identify available evidence. It does not assume that every source shot can be reused or that new filming is included.
Choose the connection before the clips
Write the question the collection should answer. It might show the range of a particular contribution, several ways a team approached a recurring constraint or the relationship between different kinds of work. Keep the theme specific enough to guide selection.
Test the theme against the actual films. If only one project supports it, choose a different theme or acknowledge that the collection is uneven. Do not force unrelated footage into a story because the wording sounds impressive.
Avoid using an annual highlights film to imply that the selected projects represent all work completed in the year unless that is accurate and intended. The selection needs a clear boundary.
Identify evidence moments, not favourite shots
For each project, list a small number of moments that contribute to the theme. Record the source version, time reference, what the moment explains and the context it depends on. A beautiful image may be valuable, but it should not displace the evidence needed to make the sequence understandable.
Look for repetition. If three participants make the same general point, decide whether one well-supported statement is enough and the other projects can contribute different evidence. Equal screen time is not automatically the most useful structure.
Keep project identity visible where it matters. Cutting between sites can otherwise imply that people, activities and finished results belong to the same project.
Preserve the limits of each source
Check the words and pictures as they will appear in the new combination. A statement about one installation should not sound like a claim about every project shown afterwards. A qualification in the original film may need to remain or be expressed differently in the shorter edit.
Confirm permission and publication conditions for the compilation. The fact that a source film was approved does not answer every new-use question. Ask the responsible owner about any conditions that attach to a participant, client credit or particular image.
Copy this highlights selection board
| Theme point | Source project/version | Candidate moment | What it supports | Context to preserve | Repetition or gap | Approval owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Add the intended audience/use, agreed source productions, essential credits, proposed opening idea and final takeaway. Identify any point that has no supporting material. That is a story decision to resolve, not an instruction for the editor to invent coverage.
Arrange the rows into a rough progression. The board should explain why the viewer moves from one project to the next.
A fictional example: organising by decisions
A fictional team initially proposes one short summary of each of four projects. On review, every summary starts with a building name and a general statement about teamwork. The group instead organises the film around three decisions: understanding the constraint, coordinating the work and explaining the finished contribution.
Each selected moment has a different job, and project labels keep the sources clear. This invented example is an editorial possibility, not a report of a Live Images programme or a claim that every collection suits that structure.
Review the compilation as a new film
Watch without relying on memory of the source case studies. Ask whether the theme is clear, project transitions are understandable and any statement has become broader through juxtaposition. Check short credits and context at the pace they actually appear.
Provide one consolidated response using the feedback worksheet. Separate factual concerns from preferences and identify requests needing additional work.
The current Quarterly Partnership describes a highlights film edited from its four productions, without additional filming for that highlights edit. Use the material genuinely available and confirm the written scope. A strong selection board gives production a coherent brief without promising footage, permissions or outcomes that have not been established.
Sources and editorial note
- Live Images Quarterly Partnership — supports the specific source-production and no-additional-filming description of its highlights edit, subject to agreement.
- Live Images feedback worksheet — related review process. The theme/selection method is original editorial guidance.
Prepared with AI assistance for Live Images. This is original general planning guidance; the relevant owners and written production scope determine the arrangements.