The evaluation for the video rotation.

1. EVALUATION
Your name

2. PRODUCTION
PROCESS
EVALUATION

3.  I think my research went very well, it helped my product in a lot of
ways, firstly this being when I used my audience research to decide
on certain parts of my film, for example the question which asked
about what makes you more interested in a horror film, the most
answers to this were cliff-hangers and therefore I made the end of
my short film a cliff-hanger as you don’t know exactly what happens,
as well as this me researching standard horror production techniques
helped my product too, as it gave me techniques to use that make
the film more like a horror film, for example the use of lighting and
camera work. As well as this the existing products really helped me
while making my product, as it showed me what worked well in short
films that are horror based, as well as how to build tension in such a
short time.
 A weakness of my research could be my experiments, as I wasn’t
here for the original making of the experiments I had to use an old
thing from another project, so this wasn’t really relevant, as well as
this I also had to rush some of the sound experiment as I was trying
to catch up.

4.  I believe my planning went very well, it mostly went very well, the
story development and structural breakdown made me realise how to
put my idea into an actual film, it showed me how each scene would
go as well as what I need to do, this is the same for the shot list, as it
gave me an idea of how many different shots I actually needed for
my film, and also my storyboard is the same, as it showed me how
the film could be structured. As well as this I think that all the
contingency plans, call sheets, etc. were done well and showed me
things to avoid during production that I may not have though about
before.
 A weakness of my planinng is my production schedule, as this wasn’t
stuck to at all as I ended up not being able to do certain things at
certain times, if I were to do this again I would check and make sure
everything I put in my production schedule I am able to do.

5.  In this project I had to rush a lot, as for the first two weeks I was
absent from college, due to this my time management wasn’t the
best, as a lot of my planning and research work was rushed in
order to try and catch up with the rest of the class when it came to
filming, I have managed to finish all of the work rather quickly and
before the deadline, but some work may seem rushed as I had to
do it all very quickly. If I had more time I wouldn’t have rushed
certain parts, so if I was here for the first two weeks I would have
been more in depth with the research and planning.

6. Similarities:
• Both are the camera work to create a
jump scare.
• Both show surprises as characters
appear where they are unexpected to
be.
• The camerawork in both leaves the
reader in mystery for a few moments,
as they keep the person out of the
shot.
Differences:
• Most of the work is done in editing in
the real film, where as the jump scare
in mine was all due to camerawork
and placement.
• Different atmospheres in them, as
mine is outside and makes it
unexpected, whereas in the real
product it is inside and makes it seem
more eerie.

7. Similarities:
• Both use sound to build tension, in mine tension
is built through the weird sounds, and in the
other tension is built through showing the
viewer what is happening with the audio and not
video.
• In both the main characters use noise to show
how they are in danger, in mine you hear
muffled screams through the taped mouth, and
in the other you hear gasps and trembles from
the main character, this creates empathy for the
characters in each film.
Differences:
• The sound in one is used for showing the
viewer where the bad character is, whereas
the sound is used in mine to create effects,
such as in this scene a glitchy VHS tape
sounding effect, mine is non-diegetic where-
as the real films would be diegetic.
• Also they both use sound towards the end to
create a jump scare, and they both use a
sudden sound after silence to create this.

8. Similarities:
• They both use editing to create a
bad character, mine uses it through
the editing of the audio as well as
using glitchy effects when the
character appears, where as the
other builds the bad character
through editing the appearance.
Differences
• Mine has a lot more jumpy cuts, where as the
other flows naturally like it was all in the amount
of time that the film is on for.
• Another difference is that the editing is a lot
better in the other, they have used more editing,
such as the face at the end for the scare, and
using multiple shots towards the beginning for
the other jump scare.

9. - I think my work looks good, and the way it was edited makes any bad
shots look a lot better, I think the work was creative and told a good
story, as well as leaving it in a good place that will leave the viewer
wanting to know more about the story. The visual that I think is the best
is the ending, where the camera zooms out and the bad character
suddenly reappears in the shot, this is a good shot as it is unexpected as
you believe the main character has escaped all danger, until the
character reappears out of no where.
- If I were to do this again I would take more time in the filming, as some of
the shots could have been done better, just little things such as where
the camera is laced, things in the background, and the way the camera
is focused. As well as this I would take a few more shots from different
angles and positions so I can have them all together and see what is
best, or even possibly use all of the shots in my final product.

10. - I have appealed to my target audience in many different ways, firstly the
age of my target audience was 16-25, I think I have appealed to these
people by making the story more modern, adding glitchy sound effects to
build a character will appeal to this age group more than others, as well as
this the storyline may appeal to this group of people as it could happen to
anyone and is rather realistic.
- It also appeals to the psychographic I originally chose as the
psychographic emulator/wanna be’s like the story of overcoming a
problem, and that is what the story is based on.
- Finally I appealed to the social status’ C1C2DE as they are more likely to
enjoy the nature of horror films, such as the violent storyline.

11. PEER
FEEDBAC
K

12.  What did you like about the product?
The sound design for the film works really well to create the
atmosphere and tension of the product. Emotions like panic and
fear are portrayed very well also. The film has a very good build to
the final pay off through the story being portrayed very well with the
cuts between shots.
 What improvements could have been made to the product?
With a longer runtime, the story would be able to become more
clear.

13.  What did you like about the product?
 I liked the whole idea about the film and the clear amount of effort that
was put into setting up the shots and the props. The editing for the
bomb explosion was very nicely done and it was clear what was going
on. Some of the sound effects are clearly distinguished and can easily
be identified.
 What improvements could have been made to the product?
 Some of the sound effects volumes could be adjusted for example the
chair falling and the first breath when the tape is removed is a lot
louder than the muffled screams through the tape.

14.  What did you like about the product?
 I found this really entertaining and wanted to watch the full thing I also
thought the hand held camera techniques used were great.
 What improvements could have been made to the product?
 Make sure that when he fell the knife was actually behind him
because it was in front then suddenly behind him.

15.  What do you agree with from your peer feedback?
 I agree with most of the feedback, I agree with the statements about
some of the handheld shots and camerawork, as I also think some of
this was done well, like the bomb and the chair falling.
 I also agree with the statements about the ending, one person stating
that the ending was a good pay off from all the tension built before and
I agree with this.
 I also agree with the bad feedback, as the story could have been
made clearer with more time, as well as the volume of some sound
effects not being consistent with the others.
 What do you disagree with from your peer feedback?
 I disagree with the bad feedback from feedback 3, as in the film the
movement was shown after the character had fallen near the knife,
after the falling shot he is shown moving around on the chair.

16. - Based upon the peer feedback I would spend more time on certain aspects of
my film, firstly the shots, as some of them could have done better, for example
the bad feedback in feedback 3 states that they didn’t think it had been
explained how the knife was behind him as when he fell it was in front of him, I
had actually shown this in the film but I think the camerawork made it not seem
like it had happened/made it less obvious. As well as this I would spend more
time on the audio, as some of the sound effects are inconsistent with the others,
most of the time this being the volume, but also I would gather more sound
effects and edit them in better, with fades, speed, and volume adjustments on all
effects.