Preliminary Task Evaluation

The jump cut which messed it up

 I believe that our film demonstrates continuity editing at a basic level, but had we spent more time filming then we would have been able to show our understanding of continuity in a much better way, and the flow of the clip would have been much more smooth. An example of where we used continuity editing well is the match on action between the gunman opening the door and walking into the bar. This worked well because we trimmed the clips to  the exact length they needed to be in order for the clip to flow. However, this good piece of continuity editing was then ruined by the jump cut immediately after he walks in. This jump cut had to be placed in because he had moved about a foot to the left for the only decent shot of him saying the line, so it interrupted the flow of continuity editing. Had we ensured we had good clips whilst we were still filming, this wouldn't have been a problem. This means that we could not use continuity editing throughout the clip, as the editing has been clearly shown up by the use of a jump cut. The lesson that this has taught us for making our final piece is that we need to ensure we have more than enough shots of each scene before editing if we want it to flow properly with no use of unrealistic jump cuts.

The first shot of the effective match on action

The shot which immediately followed it

We have demonstrated match on action very well in the clip with the shot of the man walking through the door. This is a use of match on action because we see him start to open the door on one side of it, and then a quick cut shows him walking in on the other side of the door. By using match on action we were able to put these two shots together and make them flow from the first shot into the second in a way which is almost unnoticeable. It is effective when used here because it shows the viewer exactly where he is and where he has come from, which would not be clear if we had just used a single shot of him walking into the room.

Shot-reverse-shot has been used in our film during the conversation between the two different people. It has been used quite well, although had we scripted a longer conversation and given the actors predefined facial expressions to pull then we could have shown it in a much better way. It works by filming one characters lines, then immediately cutting back to the other character to show their reaction to what has just been said. Whilst we did include an over the shoulder shot of each character, we should have done it multiple times in order to properly demonstrate our understanding of it's effectiveness. Additionally, we could have cut the clips slightly shorter to make it less noticeable, as some of the clips are left hanging a tiny bit too long.

The 180 Degree Rule was broken here as the camera
went on the other side of the actor

The 180 degree rule has been followed almost completely throughout our piece, although there is one small part where we have broken it and thus disorientated the viewer. The idea of the rule is to always keep the viewer in one place so that they do not become disorientated about where each character is in relation to the camera.  Had we not broken it in the place shown in the screenshot, then it would have been used well throughout meaning that the viewer stays orientated.

I feel that our group worked very well together. This is probably down to the fact that there was only two of us, so we could decide what needed doing quickly without having to debate it with lots of people as we would have had to if we had been part of a larger group. Whilst being in a group of two meant that there was a larger workload for each of us, we knew that we were getting the work done properly and shared a common aim, as it becomes harder to ensure that everybody is working towards the same thing with the more people you have in your group. Finally, I believe whilst we did work well together, the only problem we encountered by having just two members was a lack of ideas and creativity, if we were to incorporate more people then we would have been able to include many more ideas in our piece.

If we were to film this piece again, there are many things which I think we could improve on. Firstly, we could spend longer choosing the cast for our piece, as we didn't put much thought into this and just used who we could find as actors, which is evident whilst watching the film. Additionally to this, I think we should have put much more thought into designing the mise-en-scene of the piece, as we didn't include many props and only one character had a costume. We also didn't consider using different types of lighting, which would have changed the mood of our piece dramatically. Another thing which could have been improved is the editing, which I think was rushed slightly as we didn't spend much time considering different titles, credits, transitions and reviewing each different shot. We should have spent much more time editing the piece, as this would have made it look more professional rather than something which was rushed. A final thing I would improve upon had we filmed it again would be the number of times we filmed each different shot. It is recommended that you film each different shot three different times, and had we done this then we would have had many more shots to chose from and wouldn't have just had to rely on the one shot we took of everything.

This part of the film was not planned out
on our storyboard

I believe our film was planned very well, as a good plan is one which can be adapted whilst the filming is taking place in order to make it even better. We had our storyboard on set with us, which meant we could ensure that we filmed every shot which we had planned out on it. Despite this, we could have planned the film better, as one shot of it (the part where water is splashed as shown in the screenshot) was only thought of whilst we were filming, so we had not planned for it on our storyboard. This wasn't a huge issue, but it did make editing a bit more difficult as we weren't sure where to put the clip in in relation to the other clips while looking at the storyboard. Because of this, we did plan our film well, but I believe if we spent even longer planning and thinking of ideas whilst making our storyboard, then we will be able to plan out the different things which we could include in our film, and so won't suddenly think of them whilst filming and then have to find a place to put them in, as we did with this film.

The "blur" transition we used to connect the opening
shot of the piece to the next shot

We did not use many transitions in our piece as I believe it interrupts the flow of continuity editing, and an overuse of transitions can make the clip look very unprofessional. However, there was one place in our clip where we used a transition, as it was effective to use one here. We used a blur transition to show that the shot is moving from inside the bar to outside of it. Had we just used a straight cut, this would not have been clear, and the viewer would have been left wondering where it is that the video has cut too. Even though this transition was only a fraction of a second long, it makes this part of the video work much better than it would have without it. We also used a small transition between the opening title and the first shot, as this helps the two clips flow into each other much better. Transitions are only needed to connect two clips which are completely different, for example two different rooms with different lighting levels, or a title clip and a video clip, and this is the sparing way which we have used them in our piece.

I have already used iMovie quite a lot in other projects, so did not learn very much about the editing software, but there were a couple of points which I had not picked up on before. I found the zoom feature very useful when cutting the clips, as for some of the editing techniques such as match on action the clips have to be cut in a very precise way in order for it to flow properly. Additionally to this, I found video and sound effects in the software which I had not used before, so when editing we were able to recolour the clips, a very useful feature, and change the way which the sound in the clip came out, using effects which greatly reduced the hiss and hum of background noise. Whilst we will probably use Final Cut to make our main video for the coursework, I think that iMovie was a good software package to use for the editing of this clip as it did everything that we needed it too.

The main thing which we have learnt about media technologies from constructing this film is how much technology is really needed on the shoot of a film. We only used a camera and a tripod in the way of technology, but making this has opened our eyes up too the amount of technology which is used when making a film, technology such as lights, microphones and advanced camera rigs such as cranes, not to mention all of the technology which is used during the editing of the film. We have also learnt about how using a no-frills camera effectively in the way that we did can still produce a good result, even without the help of a lighting rig or proper microphones to pick up what the actors are saying. The final thing which we learnt about the technology used is that when the media product is finished, its construction only looks effortless if the maximum amount of effort has been put into constructing it using technology.