This document provides a preliminary evaluation of a student film project. It evaluates various aspects of the film's quality, including the steadiness of shots, framing of shots, appropriate content, use of mise-en-scène, editing, sound, and actor positioning and movements. Overall, the evaluator found that shots were generally steady, framing enhanced mystery, content matched the task, editing made meaning clear, and actor work was well-done. Areas for improvement included adding more mise-en-scène elements, demonstrating film techniques like the 180-degree rule, and selecting better settings. The evaluator concluded that group organization, planning and dynamics were good, but targets could have been more challenging.

1. PRELIMINARY EVALUATION SHEET
Quality of Summary My honest evaluation- what Strategies put forward to
was done well and what was make sure a high quality is
not of good standard? Try to maintained.
cite specific example and
moments from your video
Quality of holding a shot In the first scene handshake We could invest in a camera
steady was minimal, then after the tripod or borrow one from the
second cut the quality school.
deteriorated slightly. With We could also rest the
the behind-the-shoulder shot camera on solid objects as
the camera was steady then well.
with the medium shot of
Katy there was virtually no
camera shake, the medium
shot of Aaron had slight
camera shake and then the
second shot of Katy had
some camera shake. The
final shot had quite a bit of
camera shake. Overall shots
were steady, although there
was some handshake.
Quality of the framing shots I think it was a good idea to Vary the different types of
have a long shot at the shots and include different
beginning as it gave a good styles of filming to experiment
sense of the location. The with the different techniques
behind the shoulder shot for the final film.
adds an element of mystery
to the scene, as you cannot
see the culprits face. Again,
the medium shot of Katy
increases this element of
mystery and the unknown
because you still cannot see
his face, and gives the
reader impression that we
are being interviewed. The
medium shot and matched
cut enhance the impression
of an interview. The shot
where the camera tilts up
acts as a representation of
surprise.

2. Quality of shooting material We did well to stick to the Demonstrate the 180-degree
appropriate to the task set- brief, although we may not rule.
i.e. the content of your film have demonstrated the 180
pre and post editing was degree rule, but we had the
consistent with the exam dialogue and the person
directives walking into the room and
sitting down
Quality of selecting mise-en- We didn’t do too well on this Book rooms further in
scène including colour, figure, front. There was minimal advance and include props or
lighting, objects and setting; Mise En Scene and the other elements of Mise En
setting could have been Scene.
chosen a bit better. Although
the way Aaron is sitting in
his chair clearly expresses
the fact that he does not
want to be there.
Quality of editing so that We did this rather well, the Edit right down to the
meaning is apparent to the editing was good and made smallest detail.
viewer the meaning of the task
apparent, it was apparent
that there was an interview
setting, and that the boy was
in trouble and he didn’t want
to be there.
Quality of using sound with There wasn’t much sound in I think we used a reasonable
images and editing this preliminary task, apart amount of sound and to be
appropriately for the task set; from the dialogue and the honest it was pretty accurate
diagetic sound of the various for the task.
objects in the room
Quality of positioning and The quality was good, Katy I think there was a good
movements of actors moved well form the door to quality of movements and
the table, and it was clear positioning was pretty good
that she was supposed to be for the task.
in charge of the situation,
and it was also clear from
Aarons body position that he
was the one in trouble and
was being subordinated.

3. Quality of group planning, The organization of the Make harder targets for us to
meeting targets, organization group was good, although I meet and try and get the
wasn’t able to make the filming done quicker so we
filming of the preliminary have more time for editing.
task, I was present in the
editing of the task, and at
this section, we met group
targets and organization
was good.
Group dynamics i.e. how did We worked well and
your group work together efficiently. NONE
Other points of evaluation
( e.g. equipment related etc) NONE NONE