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

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 film which is a

common convention used in horror films – sound is used to build apprehension. An example of a film that did this was

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 film so we could visualise how the film was

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 film lose 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.