Quality summary 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 The shots were held steady throughout the film; however, the group was unable to use a tripod during tracking shots, which meant that the shot was not as steady as it could have been. In the preliminary task we were able to use a tripod for the whole film because we did not use a large variety of shots, where as in the main task, we used a number of different shots that sometimes forced us to hold the camera by hand. In future tasks we will try and acquire an item that allows us to use a tripod during tracking shots (perhaps a trolley)

Quality of the framing shots The quality of the framing shots improved drastically from the preliminary task as we used a larger variety of shots and we made sure that the characters where in the right positions and that we got the whole of the character in the specific shot.

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.

In the main task, the group were very specific about the location in order to follow the conventions of the genre and to create a certain mood for the film. Where as in the preliminary task the location and the script did not make the film as realistic as it could be compared to the main task.

Quality of selecting mise-en-scene including colour, figure, light, objects and setting.

In the main task, we where a lot more aware of mise en scene and lighting compared to the preliminary task. We used a white t-shirt in the main task in order to show innocence and purity where as we did not pay attention to the costumes in the preliminary task.

Quality of editing so that meaning is apparent to the viewer.

The editing in the main task is a lot more in depth than the preliminary task. We also used more editing techniques like fading in and out of shots, and distorting the original camera shot. We also made the transitions a lot smoother in the main task because it became apparent that the preliminary task did not flow as well as it could have between the shots.

Quality of using sound with images and editing appropriately for the task set.

We used a lot of non-digetic sounds in the main task, as we wanted to cause tension to follow the conventions of the genre. However, the preliminary task had no non-digetic sound at all because the group were not trying to follow the conventions of a specific genre. We learnt from the preliminary task that music can change the mood of a film so we decided to focus heavily on the music for our main task.

Quality of positioning and movements of actors

Both the positioning and movements of the actors improved drastically for the main task compared to the preliminary task. In the preliminary task, the movement was very limited as the actors were confined to a small room and they were also seated where as in the main task they were able to move a considerable distance which allowed us to convey certain things. E.g. when the female character turns to face the killer and walks slowly towards them.

Quality of group planning, meeting targets, organisation.

The group had to be more organised for the main task as we were filming in locations outside of school so we had to work round the timetable and plan meeting times and locations.

Group dynamics i.e. how did your group work together

Just like in the preliminary task, the group worked very well together, we all get along very well and we motivate each other to complete the work quickly and to a high standard.

Other points of evaluation(i.e. equipment related etc)