q7

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 steady In our preliminary task we had an issue with a lot of shaky
shots and camera angles. We recognized that this might give
off the wrong idea to the audience. We thought that maybe
the use of a tripod would fix this issue. Indeed, this did fix the
tendency to record shots that were shaky. By using the
camera on a tripod, we were able to do this such as panning
effectively and smoothly – giving our opening sequence a
professional feel. Also, the fact that the shots weren’t shaky
(unless they needed to be) was a good thing as it wasn’t
giving off the wrong signifier of feelings such as panic or
distress, which is what was happening in our preliminary task.
Also, the quality of our shots was a lot better, with less
unintentional shallow focus.
Quality of the framing shots In our preliminary task, in several of the shots, there was a lot
of idle space in the frame. As a group, we didn’t plan the
location well or watch back on the shots we took. As self
evaluation, a strategy I came up with was making sure
everything was positioned correctly and that we followed the
story board as closely as we could. Also, we made sure we put
our belongings well out of the way so they were not recorded
in the back, like in the preliminary task. Looking back, I feel
that we have learned to frame our a lot better, with the right
messages being given off, with the correct mise-en-scene on
show for each shot. The knowledge we have now gained can
be used in the future.
Quality of shooting material
appropriate to the task set- i.e.
the content of your film pre and
post editing was consistent with
the exam directives
Even though we stuck to our story board in the preliminary
task, we had done no research into out to film and the genre
of the task. This then lead to our preliminary task being
disorganized and lacking actual meaning. The sequence didn’t
seem to be part of the plot or lead to anything vaguely
interesting. To avoid this happening again, before we started
filming, we looked in psychological horror films. We
researched psychological horror released before, the codes,
the conventions, the signifiers, who our target audience was
etc. This enabled us to be able to effectively attract the
audience we want and any other horror fan, regardless of age.
The benefit of conducting research before shooting is that we
know the codes and conventions; therefore we know what
the audience like and expect. This enabled us to create an
opening sequence that would please the end-user. For
example, we learnt from our opening sequence analysis we
learned that a common convention of a psychological horror
is to have a fast paced first few seconds to intrigue the

2. audience, to capture their attention. As an effective technique
used by many films in our genre, we decided to incorporate
this into our film’s opening sequence, by using fast cutting
rhythm, this was achieved.
Quality of selecting mise-en-
scène including colour, figure,
lighting, objects and setting;
The quality of our mise-en-scene previously was extremely
poor. Nothing made sense and the whole atmosphere was
disjointed. The mise-en-scene did not add anything to the plot
of the film, rather it confused the audience. However, learned
from this and made major improvements in creating mise-en-
scene. For example, we made sure that there was nothing in
the background of our shots that didn’t add anything to the
meaning of the film. Through the use of establishing shots,
long shots and medium shots, we made sure the audience
could see the seemingly safe setting the girl was found dead
in which would make the audience curious as to how she got
there.
We dramatically improved the lighting of our film compared
to the lighting in the preliminary task by making sure we were
not filming into the light and that the actors were facing the
right way to be fully seen in the shots.
Quality of editing so that
meaning is apparent to the
viewer
Compared to our preliminary task, our shots worked perfectly
together and the editing was smoother and less jumpy. We
used fast cutting rate and rhythm at the beginning to convey
to the audience that there was someone watching several
women without their permission. This will make the audience
become intrigued and have a desire to know what happens
next. Also we used motivated cuts when the detective is
inspecting the body to show the seriousness on his expression
to show the audience that this is a very grim case he is dealing
with. I think the editing was at a high quality, with continuity
editing present throughout the sequence.
Quality of using sound with
images and editing
appropriately for the task set;
In our preliminary task, there was no sound used apart from
the actors’ dialogue, some shots had background noise of
people taking and one of the shots has muffled sound due to
us accidently covering the microphone. We learnt from this by
when we were filming, we made sure everyone on set was
silent and we edited out the wind as much as we could in the
editing process. Also, we found out where the microphone
was located in the camera and made sure we did not cover it.
By taking on all these lessons, our final task was at a much
higher level. We used non diegetic sound at the beginning
(when the cctv-looking images were being displayed) and the
end of the sequence (when the title of the film was displayed)
to convey the danger coming within the filmwhich is a
common convention used in horror films – sound is used to
build apprehension. An example of a film that did this was

3. Saw 1, as one of the characters woke up in the bath sound
was used to convey that there was some kind of trouble and
indeed there was.
Quality of positioning and
movements of actors
In our preliminary task, the acting seemed forced,
unprofessional and unnatural. Their body language too was
stiff and didn’t add any significant meaning to the film. We
learnt from this and decided to enlist an actor that we know
has had a lot of experience in the industry and someone that
could offer some helpful tips to our film. However one of our
actors wasn’t a professional and that affected the authenticity
of our product as she looked like she was trying to remember
her lines. An improvement would be to use people who are
professionals.
Quality of group planning,
meeting targets, organization
We learned from our preliminary task that more location
planning is required so we checked out our location before
going there to filmso we could visualise how the filmwas
going to be set, which also saves time on the shooting day.
We also learned from our preliminary task that we should
acquire committed actors. We organized our selves well to
make sure the directors and the actors were available on the
day so everything will run smoothly.
Group dynamics i.e. how did
your group work together
We worked better together compared to our preliminary task;
everyone had more of an instrumental role. However, not
everyone was fully committed to getting the work done and
done to a high standard.
Other points of evaluation
(e.g. equipment related etc)
After filming, we discovered we had a severe problem with
wind in the background. The actors couldn’t be heard and it
made our filmlose its quality. However, we were unable to
use Final Cut Pro to edit out the wind by putting the sound
from the shot up and down for when the person was talking
and instead we put ambient sound over it to over that up.
This way, we saved our production as we were not able to get
back in contact with one of the actors to re-film anything.