Whilst my preliminary task was good, considering I had no previous knowledge of using a camera and camera angles, it

did look unprofessional, and there was little consideration for

anything other than the camera angles.

We addressed these issues by planning our opening sequence well, accounting for any possible problems, and

using a wider variety of micro elements; such as

consideration for the misce-en-scene and sound, aswell as

using props and costumes to our advantage.

When filming our preliminary task, we were aware of only three shots; The 180 degree rule, match on action and shot reverse shot. Subsequently, the variation throughout the sequence was limited.

During the filming of our final opening sequence, we were had gained knowledge of an extensive variety of shots, thus creating a much more professional looking, varied sequence.

The tripod’s job however, did not change much, it was simply used to stabilise and angle the camera.

The quality of the camera we used and the wider knowledge made it much easier to produce an opening sequence of a

good standard, as is evident below. The camera used for the

preliminary sequence (right) was not HD and this deeply

affected the quality.

We filmed our preliminary task during the day, with good natural lighting, henceforth, this was not a concern, nor was it

greatly considered throughout filming.

On the other hand, whilst filming our final opening

sequence, we initially had planned to film at night.

However, due to the lack of natural, or professional, artificial

outdoor lighting, this did not work, as the camera only picked

up on what we shone a torch directly at. As a consequent of

this, we had to film during the day, whereby the natural

lighting gave us a sufficient amount for the camera to pick

up on. A filter was later put over the top to make the outdoor

scene look darker.

As the preliminary task was filmed over a mere thirty minutes, continuity in costumes, location and props was not

an issue

During our opening sequence however, there were some

slight continuity errors, the majority of which are minor and

would go unnoticed by and audience.

For example; the bag Maria carries in the outdoor scenes, is

not the same bag that she picks up in the indoor scenes.

These minor errors do slightly compromise the quality and

professionalism of the overall sequence, but they’re not

major, noticeable errors

Like camera angles, during the creation of the preliminary visual, we were aware of very few types of sound, and I feel

that this is reflected in the task, as opposed to the final

piece, where there is a lot more consideration, and various

types of sound.

The only sound in the preliminary task was the dialogue, with the exception of any unintentional ambient sound that the

camera microphone may have picked up on.

In the final opening sequence however, there are examples

of diagetic soundtracks, placed over the

action, asynchronous sound effects, such as the twig

snapping, and a sound bridge, from the establishing shot of

the house, to the action inside.

Overall I would say that it is much harder to film a

two minute opening sequence, than an eighteen

second video clip, due to the fact there is more

planning and consideration for the micro elements

necessary; when filming the preliminary task, we

really only had to consider camera

angles, whereas in the opening sequence, the

misce-en-scene, sound, editing, and camera

angles had to be accounted for.