PRELIMINARY EVALUATION SHEETQuality of Summary My honest evaluation- what

was done well and what was not of good standard? Try to cite specific example and moments from your video

Strategies put forward to make sure a high quality is maintained.

Quality of holding a shot steady

We used a tripod, which held a steady shot. We balanced the tripod on the table at one point in order to create a low shot camera angle of the conversation taking place.

The tripod on the table was not professional. A tripod with longer legs could have been used.

Quality of the framing shots We filmed over the character’s shoulders, enabling the audience to feel like they are watching through the eyes of that character

Characters should be positioned correctly and perhaps more close up shots could have been used.

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

Our shoot was to be set as a casual conversation. However, our filming and contextual dialect made the shoot unnatural

We could’ve paid more attention to the conversation and the movement of characters.

Quality of selecting mise-en-scène including colour, figure, lighting, objects and setting;

We were able to get a table situated in the middle of the room. However, we did not pay specific attention to costume, lighting and color. A piece of paper signified the will

We should distinguish who the characters are, where they are, and age in order to supply costume and significant mise en scene. Lighting should’ve been acknowledged. Perhaps a dim light could have been used to enhance bad news

Quality of editing so that meaning is apparent to the viewer

We edited the shots so that the character that was speaking was in shot. We also used different angles when filming the scene. However, we did not spend much time on editing

We could have used more close up shots on Jordan to show facial expression and emotion to the audience.

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

We did not use any sound effects but we did use the sound of the door opening in order to create a reaction shot in the other character (to turn around)

We could have perhaps used music in minor key to enhance the effect of the news to the audience

Quality of positioning and movements of actors

The characters were positioned opposite each

We should’ve engaged movement in the characters.

other, which made the conversation more formal. We did not pay specific attention to the movements of the characters. For example both characters stayed seated and in the same position throughout the scene which may have been un natural.

The boy could’ve stood up as he said the news. The girl could’ve buried her head in her hands to exaggerate emotion.

Quality of group planning, meeting targets, organization

We filmed in class only, so the process of filming was quite long

We could’ve organized meeting in our free periods or at lunch/break to film and edit which would’ve just taken one day instead of three.

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

The grouped worked very well together. We discussed who would film, who would act in it and together we decided on the script so everyone contributed equally.

We did not discuss who would edit the film until we had filmed the shot. This caused disagreements and preventing this, we should’ve organized this factor at the beginning, rather than the end.

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