Using several comparative screen grabs from both the preliminary and the main product, show and explain how your technical and creative skills have developed over the course.

1. Task 7
I think that I have learned a lot since filming the prelim task. When I did my prelim task, I was
the cameraman and director, so everything happened as I wanted it to, and after working on the
main task I realised that I wasn't as good a director as I had previously thought, as almost every
shot on the main video was better than the ones I filmed by myself for the prelim. I think that the
problem was that in the prelim I tried to be really clever with the shots, and in the end we ran out
of time to film, which is actually quite similar to what happened with the main task, but we
finished in the end.
A lot of shots were similar to those in the prelim, but they were done better, I think. The one on
the left wasn't actually a still shot, it pans around to see the man sitting down, and it's a bit
wobbly. The one on the right is just a still shot and then it cuts to the same shot from another
angle, keeping continuity and looking much more professional.
Both videos had door handle opening shots, unlike in the prelim, in the main task version you
can actually see the door opening and then the character walking through after from a different
angle. In the prelim task I noticed everyone was doing the door opening from the outside where
the character could be seen, so I tried to be different by showing the inside when the door was
opened, I personally think that it worked better in this particular situation, but we did it the other
way in the main task which was definitely a good decision.

2. I think that our use of space improved from the prelim to the main task, the first shot shown is
from the prelim, and to the right of Jack there is a lot of space that could draw the viewers
attention away from what is actually going on, also a hand can be seen which is very
unprofessional. I also think that the shots from the main task are more on eye level with the
camera than the shot from the prelim, which just makes it feel a little bit more immersive. During
the main task however, we didn't keep to the 180° rule, or at least it isn't entirely obvious as there
is a lot of camera movement between and during shots, and to be honest, it was hard to keep with
rule and film what we wanted to because we were limited by the layout of the filming area, so for
that reason I forgive myself for making the rookie error.
I think that overall our main task video was a lot better, technical wise, as the one thing we kept
really well was continuity. Mise en Scene was better during the main task, as obviously we had
proper sets and props, but I think we used the facilities available to use very productively, the
acting and body language also greatly improved, the emotions displayed through facial
expressions was much better during the main task, I think that Jack gave a worthy performance
in both the prelim and the main, however some critics may slate his character in 'prelim' for
being wildly comical in appearance. He definitely made a more professional account of himself
in 'Adversity', as required by the role in a much more serious film.
During the main task there are some really good match on action shots, like when Jack opens the
door, and puts his headphone in, these parts look very professional, and I don't think the group
would have been able to pull stuff like that off 5 months ago when we did the prelim, so it just
shows how far we've come. We used lighting more effectively during the main task, as we had
been supplied with the proper tools to do that, however, rather comically, the lighting equipment
can be seen in what is quite literally the very first shot of the film, which I personally wasn't
made aware of until I was informed by a comment made on YouTube.