The planning for the preliminary task was brief and simplistic, consisting of a mind map and storyboard, whereas planning for the final task involved multiple iterations of ideas, an animated mind map with shot ideas, a filming schedule, location scouting, and a risk assessment. This more thorough planning allowed for a better final product. Footage for the preliminary task was shaky as a tripod wasn't used, but a tripod was used for all filming of the final task to produce steady, professional-looking shots. Lighting was also improved, making use of natural light and low-key lighting so scenes were well-lit but with tension. Editing issues around warping footage and lack of continuity between clips in the

1. Looking back at your preliminary task,
what do you feel you have learnt in the
progression from it to the full product?

2. Planning
• The planning for our preliminary task was
very simplistic and consisted of a brief mind
map and storyboard. This means we didn’t
have a chance to develop our ideas fully and
think through things like specific shots and
character backgrounds. The time and depth
invested into planning our final task was
significantly greater than that of planning for
the prelim task. Not only did we change our
ideas a few times to make sure we landed on
the final one but also improved our written
down planning such as making an animated
mind map which included specific shot ideas
but we also created things in the lead up to
filming like a filming schedule, reccy shots
and risk assessment. All of this allowed us to
be more organised and create a better end
product.

3. Filming
• In our preliminary task the footage is very shaky
and this is because we didn't use a tripod and
therefore all the footage came from recording,
using our hands to hold the camera. In our final
opening sequence we made sure that on every
occasion we filmed that we used a tripod and
that it was level so that the camera footage
wouldn't be wonky and look sleek and
professional. If the footage was at all wonky or
shaky we refilmed such as rerecoring the part
where the doorbell is pressed. This definitely
benefited us as by not using a tripod, it would
have brought out marks down. To ensure we got
professional looking quality we made sure that
our camera was set to film at the right amount of
frames per second (25 frames per second) and
that in each scene we set the shit balance so the
colour quality would be crisp and sharp.

4. Lighting
• The lighting in our prelim task was very poor and at
times it is difficult to make out what is happening. This is
because we filmed in the studio where there is no natural
light and we didn't know how to use the studio lights at
the time. This was clearly shown through the quality of
the footage and defiantly took away from the
professionalism of the video.
• When filming our opening sequence we made sure that
we used as much natural light as possible as it offers a
clear and crisp quality. I think we succeeded with this as
our footage looks well lit but is still dim enough to create
tension so the low key lighting is put into place
effectively and you can still clearly see what is happening
which you couldn’t in the prelim task.

5. Editing
• In our preliminary task, you can see that
the footage warps and this takes away
from the professionalism. This again
happened in our final footage and mainly
appeared to make the walls warp. Instead
of just accepting that that's what the
footage looked like and dealing with it we
added the black and white effect over the
top which took away from the warping
and is what we planned to do anyway so it
all worked out well. Another thing that
improved within editing is its
continuality. In our prelim task some of
the footage doesn’t flow naturally so for
our final task we made sure that the video
didn’t look like lots of individual clips put
together but one scene which seems more
appealing and easier to watch.