EVALUATION QUESTION 7: LOOKINGBACK TO YOUR PRELIMINARY TASK,WHAT DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU HAVELEARNT IN THE PROGRESSION FROMIT TO THE FULL PRODUCT?BY TOM ASTLE
PRELIMIARY VIDEOhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvLSJAfJEesHere is the link to my preliminary video which we uploaded ontoYouTube.
PRELIMINARY TASKWhen we started the preliminary task, what seems a lot time ago now, wewere very inexperienced with a camera and it shows in the difference betweenour preliminary task and our finished HD opening sequence.We made various rookie mistakes filming our preliminary task such as notusing a tripod, watching our task back we can see the camera was shaking alot as I was holding it, and I don’t have the steadiest of hands. What we alsodid in our task is the editing wasn’t as smooth as it could have been, this wasdown to our inexperience at the time, and the fact that we were in a rush.Some of the cuts show some one walking the same place twice, in our finalopenings sequence it was clear we would have to smooth this out to make itlook like a professional opening sequence. Sound was also a major issuewhen it came to editing as we noticed a lot of background sound, that wedidn’t have the time or experience to edit out.
PRELIMINARY TASK CONTINUEDThe final two problems we found and would have to overcome in ourfinal opening sequence was the fact that at some points we filmed into adirect light source. ( pictured bellow). The final issue we found is thatthe acting skills were seriously bellow par, and this had a massive effecton the overall quality of our work. Jacob mostly wasn’t acting to the besthe could have.Despite these negatives we did stick to the 180 degree rule, and thematch on action rule which allowed us to make the preliminary taskfollow the basic rules of the media industry.
FINAL OPENING SEQUENCEWhen we started to compare the opening sequence to the preliminary task wenoticed, first how much we have improved our technical ability, and secondlyhow much better the opening sequence looked. When we filmed our openingsequence we changed pretty much everything so that we could produce thebest thing possible, we swapped a iPhone for filming for a good propercamera, we also used a tripod as this allowed us to keep our shots steady andwe could instantly see a difference in quality. Also the camera filmed in HDwhich allowed us to produce a even better quality video that we had intended.We also saw a improvement in sound as we added in music and additionalsound effects non-diegeticly which added to the experience of watching theopening sequence.We defiantly didn’t make any where the same quantity and magnitude ofmistakes, as the only mistakes in the final opening sequence were a couple ofglitches when Grady was walking, and a small typo involved in the credits. Wedidn’t film into a direct light source which was a major improvement in our finalproduct.
FINAL OPENING SEQUENCE CONTINUEDOne thing that we did fail to improve on from the preliminary task wasthe quality of the acting involved in the film. We again used Grady andJacob and when we did our audience feed back using various mediaproducts such as Facebook and YouTube. Many people pointed out tous that Jacobs acting made the opening sequence seem less believableas he didn’t play the part as well as he could have.Like we did in the preliminary task we again, stuck to the 180 degreerule and the match on action rule, which allowed us to make aneffective opening sequence that followed the basic media rules.
COMPARING SCREENSHOTSTo the left are two shots, theone on the left is Jacob actingduring the preliminary task, asyou can see he looks at thecamera, breaking the fourthwall. On the right is Jacob Inour finished product, manypeople said that the wayJacob walked with his armsout wide made it unrealistic,the acting was a majorproblem in both of the clips.However the qualitydifference between the two isclear in these two shots.
THE DIFFERENCESThe differences between our preliminary and final opening sequenceare:Better camera quality and stability, by use of better camera and tripod.Not filming at a direct light source as this looks bad.Getting rid of diegetic sound, and adding in non-diegetic sound to addsuspense.However some problems remained, such as the poor acting, but thiswas only a minor problem. We also sticked to the two most importantrules in media, 180 degree rule and match on action which allowed usto make a effective opening sequence.
WHAT WE HAVE LEARNTAll in all, we have learnt a variety of techniques which have allowed usto progress from making a poor quality, not up to a good standardpreliminary task, to making a HD good standard effective openingsequence.We learnt many skills including, camera work, post production, editingsoftware, sound and special effects.Learning all these skills allowed us to create a HD, effective openingsequence.