Progression from it to the full product


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Progression from it to the full product

  1. 1. Quality Summary 7. Looking back to your preliminary task, what do you feel that you have learnt in the progression from it to the full product? Quality of holding a shot In our preliminary task, we did not use a tripod so this steady meant the cameras were not stable enough. As a result of this, to improve the steadiness of hands when holding the camera we placed upon a stack of books, though the shot was not as steady as we would have endeared. In contrast, the quality of our holding shot was much better compared to that of our preliminary task because we had a tripod meaning camera steadiness was ensured, as well as developing personal skills in terms of different camera techniques. For example, learning the tracking shot, to help establish the main character, Horatio, and as to where he is going, why he is going there, and what he is going to do when he is there. However, a much better example that relates to using the tripod for camera steadiness would be the tilting shot, as the tripod can move up and down. Quality of the framing shots In our premliminary task, the quality of our framing shots were in general pretty sound, nevertheless, during the editing process, we encountered a major problem. This major problem was that t he two characters’ heads were cut off, and this was in large due to the fact that we had no tripod to use, so, as I said before, we used a stack of books to improve the frame of our shots. Therefore, Jemima’s head was cut off during the scene, and my face was not exactly in the middle, meaning the rule of thirds was non-apparent. Despite these struggles, we were able to improve greatly come the final product as we had a tripod to use, thus improving the quality of our framing. Quality of shooting In our preliminary task, we were required to show a material appropriate to the character walking through a door, a conversation task set- i.e. the content of with a suspect, and the eventual guilt exposed by your film pre and post the suspect himself. In our final product, we were editing was consistent with required to follow the codes and conventions of our
  2. 2. the exam directives specific genre- a psychological thriller. In the preliminary task we were not told, nor did we intend to research any other similar preliminary tasks, we just wrote a script, and continued from there. However, in our final product we watch six different psychological thriller movies, to help us understand the conventions of the genre. Overall, our final product was appropriate to our exam directive. Quality of selecting mise- Even in the preliminary task we found that the en-scène including colour, quality of our mis-en scene was pretty sound, and figure, lighting, objects and this carried onto the final product. We never really setting; had any major problems with the colour, figure, lighting, objects and setting, and they were all, most importantly, appropriate to our specific genre. Quality of editing so that Although we did not have a lot of time to work meaning is apparent to the within our preliminary task, our editing was apparent viewer to the viewers. I think everyone knew what the plot was about so we did not encounter any serious issues. In our final product, our editing was even more apparent to the viewers as we had researched all the codes and conventions of a psychological thriller. In addition, the quality of the editing was great as we had much more time to tinker with any areas that were negative and transformed them into positive areas for the viewer to debate. Quality of using sound with Unfortunately, and as I mentioned earlier, due to images and editing the lack of time on our side, we did not include appropriately for the task sound in our preliminary task, therefore it did not set; match with our images. The same thing could be said about the editing although it was not as bad. Despite this problem, we progresses through to our final product, and the sound did match the images you witness in the film. Furthermore, the editing was very effective because it was appropriate for the task set. This included the camera angles, shots, the positioning and movement of the character etc.
  3. 3. Quality of positioning and In our preliminary task, the quality of the positioning movements of actors and movement of the actors were in general good. However, we had to cancel the last scene, as I was always out of position, and I delayed my movement. This combined with the fact that I was continuously laughing and smirking. In our final product we did not experience any issues that were of the same magnitude compared to that of the preliminary task. Ever since the preliminary task, I had promised myself not to laugh or smirk continuously in the final product as it could have a major impact on my group mates’ marks and grades. Therefore, I did not laugh inappropriately. Quality of group planning, The quality of the group planning from the meeting targets, preliminary task right through to the final product organization was good and efficient. We were all punctual in meeting our targets, despite having so little time to work with during the preliminary task. As ever, our organization was excellent, we all have different strengths, and ploughed on through our positive areas to combine and deliver a top class final product, in my opinion. Group dynamics i.e. how The group dynamics and teamwork were very did your group work good, especially as 3 of the 4 of us had worked together together to make a min-film in September, which turned out to be very good. Since then, we decided to work together for the final product. Even when Jemima joined, there was not much of a problem, as we all knew her very well, and knew that she would be fully devoted to obtain a high grade. We all have a god work ethos, combined with good teamwork and friendship which are the foundations upon good group dynamics. Other points of evaluation (e.g. equipment related etc)