Video EvaluationRobbie Hickman

Have you met the aims of the brief?• The class was asked to create a video product of any genre e.g. action, horror, comedy etc. The video could

have been a short film or a trailer and was required to be produced during lesson time using equipment supplied by college staff. The footage taken during filming was then required to be edited in Final Cut Pro.

• The film was required by the brief to be 1-5 minutes in length, be suitable for 16-19 year olds, and filmed on college grounds. No dialogue was allowed, although music and ambient sound effects were permitted. Our film met some of these requirements; sound effects and music were used and there was no dialogue. The film looked suitable for teenagers aged 16-19.

• The only requirement which wasn’t met was the time restriction of the video, which was supposed to be less than five minutes. There was so much footage taken during filming that a lot of it couldn’t be added to the timeline. Also, all the filming needed for the project wasn’t even completed due to crew absence. We clearly forgot about the time limit for the project and ended up adding as much as we could into the timeline in the editing program without surpassing five minutes. The finished product was 05:12 minutes in length.

• The film could have been changed to match this requirement of the brief. If all footage taken during our filming was added to the timeline, the video would greatly exceed five minutes. A large, unnecessary amount of footage was also taken on the first day of filming. Therefore, much less footage taken and/or deletion of footage could have made the film less longer and not exceed five minutes. Some sections of the storyboard could have also been removed to lessen the amount of filming needed.

Does the final film match your original idea?• A number of ideas came in at first, but these were dismissed due to the fact that they were too simple

to produce; this might have lowered the grade for the project. Also, these ideas seemed too inappropriate to make e.g. lots of violence, adorning of bad behaviour. We were planning to produce a comedy and this is the idea we stuck with.

• The idea for the short film was slightly different from our original ideas. Initially, we thought about making a response to a video we viewed on YouTube, but we clearly didn’t consider the fact that the video was mean. The nature of the YouTube video was too inappropriate to make as bullying was highlighted.

• We were hoping to produce a film that would amuse our audience throughout and leave many questions by the end of it. That was our final idea. This idea differs from our previous ones because it is simply more appropriate and the final production would have only been a light-hearted comedy.

• Changing our original idea clearly made the film much better. This is because our original idea for a short film would result in people hating it and the two of us obtaining a low grade. It may have also misled those who viewed it, encouraging them that bullying others is not only okay, but hilarious with good results. We decided to produce something slightly different which shows mischief rather than bullying. This would be more likely to result in people enjoying the final film rather than hating it.

Planning• There were many strengths of our planning. We created storyboards and a proposal to show details for our film, as well as our own ideas. We

produced a schedule to plan ahead for the stages of filming and predicted issues or unexpected events which might affect our filming. These aspects can be considered strengths because they show that we were prepared. We each chose to bring in our own resources (football, plastic bottle etc.) This can also be considered a strength as both of us took responsibility and shared tasks between us. Because of these strengths, we were able to film easily and work our way around events if any occurred (and they did).

• The planning made filming very easy because we already knew what items to bring in and we knew the locations we would need to film at. Storyboarding was useful because it ensured we remembered the sequences of our film and didn’t get confused while filming. The schedule helped us decide what we would film on one day, then the next. Pointing out potential issues which would jeopardize our filming (as well as our own safety) and remembering them ensured we were careful whilst filming and that we were safe. The schedule also helped us to determine the days in which we would edit and what jobs the two of us would do. Our overall film benefited from the schedule because everything on the project (including filming, editing, and finishing the film) was on there and it helped us all the way through and we were able to determine when the film would be finished.

• There were some weaknesses of our planning. Because there were only two of us in one group, there were less ideas coming in and the small number of crew members can be considered a weakness. We were quite overconfident when it came to storyboarding and we didn’t consider the time limit of five minutes or the fact that we would need to film inside college which is very busy. This can also be considered a weakness.

• There wasn’t much we could do about the lack of crew members. There were originally four people in our group, but two of them decided to leave and our group only had two members from then on. We could have improved our film by not being too overconfident and careless during the entirety of the planning, particularly the storyboarding. Also, if we considered the time limit and how difficult some locations would be to film at, then we would have done a lot better on our project.

• The film might have been exactly the way it appeared in the storyboard and the way it was envisioned if we took the time limit into consideration and didn’t film so much. The film might have also gone smoothly if we didn’t include too much in the storyboard because if we managed to fit all finished footage into the timeline, it would appear rushed and the people who watched it might not have understood what was happening throughout. If we considered this, the finished film would have been successful in maintaining a flow of action and it might have had a coherent story.

Strengths of the filming• There are certain shots that worked well including close up shots of the victim at 01:48, a panning shot of

the field at 01:49 - 01:52, and a long shot of the bully at 02:14. These shots work well because they create meaning in different ways. For example, the long shot at 02:14 of the bully would have made him look small and vulnerable, and perhaps cause the audience to assume he isn’t the bully, just a lonely character at first.

• There are many scenes I think worked really well in the film. The opening scene with the motorway was quite effective because it shows how the film doesn’t introduce the characters straightaway. It just gives the audience a bit of time to realise where the film is taking place rather than jumping straight into the action. The scene with the victim practicing his skills on the field worked well because his character is introduced and his hobbies (football) and personality (prefers to hang out on his own) are shown to the audience. The scene where the bully pushes the victim over and steals the football worked well because the relationship between both characters is immediately shown to the audience.

• I think the sequence where the bully pushes the victim to the ground and takes the football away worked really well because the relationship between both characters is immediately shown to the audience. The sequence featuring the victim recovering from being hit in the face before chasing after the bully, staggering and clearly in pain, worked really well because it shows his desperation and mild disorientation.

Areas for improvement for the filming• Some shots could be improved, including the close up of the bully’s face which shows his expression and sudden

thoughts (02:22) and the two different shots of the bully throwing the ball at the victim at 03:34-03:37. I think these shots should be improved because they were initially supposed to look different from the way they turned out. The shot of the bully is actually a still image taken in a classroom, but it could be taken again outside and the facial expression could be different so it looks almost like the way it was meant to.

• The two shots of the bully kicking the ball in the victim’s face could be improved because initially, there should have been one shot of the bully kicking the ball upwards to hit the victim in the face (though not too hard). In the end, we decided to shoot two different things with both characters in the frame: one with the bully kicking the ball past the victim, and the other with the bully throwing it upwards into the victim’s face. We failed to combine these shots to make it look like one shot of the bully kicking the ball at the victim’s face, and the final result was: the bully prepares to kick the ball, and then chucks it into the victim’s face.

• The sequence with the bully practicing his own skills after stealing the ball (03:07-03:28) could be improved. The finished sequence looked quite clumsy and not sophisticated because several areas of footage were edited together with text in between (1 hour later…) to indicate time passing. To improve on this, we should have simply not made this sequence because it seemed like a waste of time.

• If we had more time to film, we would practice the ball-kicking scene and maybe bring in an object that would suspend the football from the ground slightly e.g. a ball base stand. This might have made it easier to kick the ball upwards and we wouldn’t have needed to take multiple shots.

Editing Evaluation

What worked well on the edit• There were lots of edits that worked well throughout the film including accelerated motion, high-key

lighting, etc. The close-up of the bully’s face at 02:22 was edited into black and white. Light was distributed so bright tones dominated the shot. These editing techniques worked well because they allowed for the bully’s expression to be shown clearly and gave the impression that he wasn’t thinking about everything around him and was fully focused on attacking the victim.

• The use of accelerated motion towards the end of the film worked well in some places, but didn’t work well in others. It worked well because it shows the desperation of the victim as he chases after the bully who had taken his football. Throughout the whole film, there were many cuts as footage was selected before being spliced together. Some of the cutaways worked well because they ensured the film followed a continuous flow of action that went uninterrupted. For example,

• Transitions were also made as pieces of footage were edited together. Most of these worked well because of normal cuts from one shot to another in rapid succession. A good example of this is the scene with the victim throwing the football which hits the goalpost and falls to the ground (00:35-00:45)

Areas for improvement on the edit

• There are certain edits which could be improved. The close-up shot at 02:25 was edited into black and white and brightened to give an effect. However, this shot was meant to have a ‘zooming in’ effect to show the emotions and thoughts of the bully, lasting only 1-2 seconds and accompanied by music. This edit could have been improved by simply attempting to add a zoom.

• If we had more time, we would try different editing techniques and see which ones we wanted to include in our film. Final Cut Pro has a lot of basic editing programs which could have been explored and used to provide effects for our film to make the sequences more effective, especially the part where the bully runs away with the football (03:47).

Choices made during production

• There were lots of changes made to what we originally planned to make in the end. During the edit, we were hoping to feature effects in our video e.g. zooming in on a subject, speeding up footage, and adding subtitles to show the thoughts and feelings of the characters. We also hoped to add credits with outtakes featured in them.

• However, due to the trouble of going through the footage and trying to fit the clips into the timeframe on Final Cut Pro, not much attention was paid to editing. The ‘zoom in’ technique on a single clip seemed too difficult to do, and there didn’t seem to be any point in adding subtitles. But we did add text between clips to indicate time passing (5 minutes later…) and we managed to speed up some of the clips and add sound effects, however these only appeared twice (03:35) and (03:36) when the victim was hit in the face.

• Because we couldn’t add any more footage to the timeline, the addition of credits and outtakes wasn’t an option. This can be considered a change to the film.

Justification of style for format• In our short film, we used classic continuity editing. This style of editing is well-known by its

emphasis on maintaining a continuous and seemingly uninterrupted flow of action. We chose this style of editing because new wave editing seemed quite complicated for our film and we didn’t prefer to use completely different techniques which might have ruined the film and are part of New Wave Editing e.g. disobeying both the 30-degree and 180-degree rules.

• During the editing of our short film, we used the match on action technique, in which two shots would be put together, with one shot picking up the action from where the previous shot left off. This is a common technique of continuity editing. A good example of this technique in our film is the part where the bully walks across the field towards the victim (02:33-02:41). There are multiple shots and it is obvious to the audience that the bully is thinking the same thing and heading for the same person in each one.

Intended purpose of the edited material

• The purpose of our film was to entertain and amuse the audience. We managed to achieve this through use of both action and comedy which would have done well to keep the audience intrigued throughout the film. The film was to be aimed at 16-19 year olds; this age group is the primary target audience. The presence of teenage characters who are in the same age group also keeps the audience entertained. We provided the film with humorous tones at many points, which we knew would be another aspect of the film that would entertain those who watch it. The purpose of the film could be to educate in one way: it gives people insight as to what life can be like for many students at school.

• Editing ensured we fulfilled the main purpose of our film which was to entertain. The use of accelerated motion, fast cuts, and fast-paced music during editing gave the overall film a great feel which was sure to keep the audience entertained and make them want to keep watching.

Use of selected editing techniques• A variety of editing techniques were used in our film. One such piece of editing we used is

one where the footage was cut in a style so that the change from one shot to another goes unnoticed by the audience. This was successful. We used classic continuity editing techniques including match on action, cut-ins, and many others.

• Cut-in: The film cuts into a point of focus in a shot in some scenes. For example, a shot of the victim is shown, followed by a shot of the football at his feet. These two shots are effective as they are connected to give the impression of one event taking place from different angles.

• Match on action: Shots are edited around an action several times in the film e.g. The bully heading for the victim is shown from different angles, and the victim running for the college is also shown from multiple angles.

• Eye-Line Match: At one point, there are two shots in the film. One shows the victim looking around and then off-camera, and the other shows what he is looking at (the edge of the field).

• We used these techniques in our film because we knew they would be effective and make the film more enjoyable for the viewer. The styles of editing used in our film were similar to the ones explored by Georges Melies e.g. Filming in sequence, stopping and starting filming, and capturing and editing what was needed. That is what we ended up doing during the production of our short film.

Ability to convey intended meaning/atmosphere

• In some places, the edits used in our film (consisting of accelerated motion, non-diegetic sound, high-key lighting, and cutaways) created meaning and atmosphere by adding tension and suspense to the scenes. For example, the use of accelerated motion at the end of the film creates an atmosphere that is quite tense.

• Non-Diegetic Sound was used in our short film. We added audio which wasn’t happening within the film world e.g. soundtracks. The soundtracks used managed to convey the intended meaning to the scenes they were heard in. For example, the ‘Drive Faster’ soundtrack was played at the scene where the bully steals the ball. The soundtrack is fast and intense, and it sounds suitable for a scene in a film which features something bad happening. The scene in our film where the soundtrack was heard could be considered featuring a problem.

• The use of high-key lighting at 02:26 creates an eerie atmosphere because for the two seconds it occurred, the short film appeared to take on a more sinister nature and looked quite different. This could have created apprehension within the audience.

Peer Feedback

Feedback 1

• What did you like about the film?– What I liked was the variety of camera angles used.– The use of different music for each sequence

• What improvements could have been made on the film?– An improvement that could be made is smother

transitions between shots and scenes as they’re too jumpy and poorly edited.

Feedback 1

• What did you like about the editing of the film– What I liked about the editing is the music fitted

with the scenes and flowed well.

• What improvements could have been made to the editing?– Make the film smoother and less jumpy. – Make the music transition better to help the film

flow

Feedback 2

• What did you like about the film?– Through the film I liked how the film flowed and what was

being presented was entertaining, the film music was used very effectively and showed mood and tension in the film.

• What improvements could have been made on the film?

The lighting in certain shots seemed to block out what was happening through the film especially at the beginning when the first character was kicking the ball quite high.

Feedback 2

• What did you like about the editing of the film– The way the film flowed and how the shots

transitioned from one to another worked nicely, I also like how the shots seemed to have gone from the previous shot to the new shot and repeats that.

• What improvements could have been made to the editing?

Because of how the camera was shot the transitions in the running scene seemed a bit off.

Feedback 3 • What did you like about the product?

– Camerawork movements are chosen well with panning and close ups giving great artistic style to the short film.

– You use a variety of shots and frame them well and in focus.– Your editing is clean and is synced well with the music, action and pace of the film.– The narrative is clear and the relationship between the characters is evident through the

camerawork and editing.

• What improvements could have been made to the product?- The pace of the trailer is quite slow and doesn’t bring the audience in or excite them straight

away, title slide is introduced for too long.- The characters are introduced quite far apart, this separates the audience from initially

understanding the narrative and becoming involved emotionally and invest within the characters.

- Filming equipment bags were left in the shot.- At times the camerawork was shaky, mostly during zoom shots. This can be improved by

having the camera on MF (Manual Focus) setting instead of AF (Auto Focus).

Peer Feedback Summary• What do you agree with from your peer feedback?• I agree that the shots in the film were too poorly edited and

jumpy. I understand that the camera angles made the transitions look clumsy and the music could have been improved. I also agree that the opening sequence was too long and the characters seemed quite far apart.

• What do you disagree with from your peer feedback?• I disagree with the fact that some shots were blocked out by the

lighting because people can still easily determine what is happening in the scenes. Also, there wasn’t much that could have been done to change this during the editing.

Peer Feedback Summary

• What changes would you make to your film based upon your peer feedback and why?

• Based upon feedback from the audience, I would improve the film by not including too much shots because these clearly confused the people watching. I would also include slower transitions to give the film a better flow. I would also place the camera on Manual Focus so that most of the shots don’t appear shaky. I might shorten the opening sequence because it seemed too long in the film.