Question 7

Question 7- Looking back at your preliminary task what do you feel you have learned in the progression of it to you full product?

I feel that from the preliminary task we have come on a long way as in that task we had to make a 30 second clip with a small dialogue between the two characters and I feel that it was quite basic. Below is a table to show how I have developed since the preliminary task.

Preliminary task

Final product

Shot quality: The shot types used were basic as apart from the opening shot all of the shots were at a mid-shot angle. I did uses some close ups for example a close up of the characters and the door handle in the task which showed a variety of shots but overall not many developed shots. The camera was mostly steady but shook slightly in the opening shot where the character’s feet were tracked. Image quality: The image quality was ok in the preliminary task as it was all filmed in the same period however there is a slight lighting change where the camera changes from looking one way to looking another which we didn’t notice in the shoot however this showed a slight lack of quality. The composition was again mostly good but the head space on some occasions was poor and the character wasn’t always in the centre of the frame. Editing/ Editing continuity: In the preliminary task we didn’t show much for editing as we cut the shots together to a decent standard but didn’t insert and non-diegetic sound. We did however use a dissolve to change from the feat walking to an over the shoulder shot of the character but not much else. We also used and eye line match with the two characters looking at each other and where one character looks at the door handle. We also have one match on action in this scene where the character is walking down the hall. We stuck to the 180 degree rule as best as possible but couldn’t do it all the time.  When we had the person enter the room and the next shot of him walking into the room the match on action wasn’t correct and so we had re-edit it so that it matched better however it isn’t as good as it should be as the door doesn’t match. Continuity/ mise en scene: In our preliminary task the continuity was good for the most part as the characters wore the same costume and it suited the scene as it was a serious and formal meeting. There were no props used in our preliminary task.

Shot quality: I used many different angles in the final product as in my section I began whit a mid-shot and then went into a close up looking in at the villain. Next I used low angle shot to show the villain getting out of the car which suggests he is in control and a high angle shot of the victim in the boot to connote that he is vulnerable. The camera was also very steady and only moved when I wanted it to. This therefore shows how we have developed our shots a lot between the two tasks.  We also decided to leave time before and after shots so that we could have more time to play with if we needed to and also so that we could make sure that everything was set to go before the action started. Image quality: Our image quality was much better in the final footage of the task as we have much better lighting which is relatively consistent thought especially in the scene with the villain and hero but this was mostly due to the weather being consistent for most of that day. The composition in this product compared to the preliminary task is much better as we always kept what it important in the centre of the frame by sticking to the rule of thirds, and allowed for head space. Editing/ Editing continuity: The editing of the final product was much different to the preliminary task as in my section I had the sound of the radio broadcast which I used the blade tool to cut to make it so that the sound changed depending on how far the camera was from the car. I also cut the shots together much better and created some match on action with the villain from when he leaves the car which is shown with a low angle shot to a wide shot of the whole car when he opens the car boot. I used an eye line match in my scene where the villain looks at the victim and I also used a match on action a few times but most notably where the villain walks round the car which I think I synced well, which is good as it was an issue in the preliminary task. I think through the whole product we stuck to the 180-degree rule which was important as it therefore didn’t create distortion for the audience. Continuity/ mise en scene: In the product we see that the villain is wearing the right clothes thought and the fact that he wears black clothes which denotes that he is a bad character and the victim and hero both wear light clothes to show that they are good characters, mostly. We created the mise en scene of the villain scene by using jump leads and a ragged pillow and sleeping bag to denote how he is a poorer but dangerous person. The prop of the watch was also used in the scene with the hero as he looks at it and the information comes up this is so that we demonstrated the conventions of the genre.