Evaluation - Question 7

"Looking back at your preliminary task, what do you feel you have learnt in the progression from it to the full product?"

I will structure this answer around the 5 processes our project undertook: the brief, pre-production, production, post-production and reflection/evaluation.

The two briefs were very different:

• The prelim brief - very specific, focus on certain continuity techniques, film a particular scene, had to include dialogue and exchange between two characters, simple, time limit of three hours.
• The main brief - room for creativity and originality, focus on all aspects of film, film an opening sequence of a film, had to include opening sequence conventions and chosen genre conventions, had whole course to film until deadline day (about two months), had to be two minutes.

What our group learnt from the way we took on the prelim brief:

• We knew we had to keep things very simple as even simple things take a long time in the film world (the whole process).
• We had to work quickly as we had a lot more to organise (actors, location, film plot).
• We did not book our location properly in the prelim and had trouble with people walking in and out of the room we were using to shoot, so we knew we had to nail down the location first and base everything else around it.
• We had to simply adapt around what we had and make use of all available resources.
• We had to communicate well as people got stressed out with each other in the limited time the prelim task gave us, because they were not communicating.
• We had a genre and audience to think about the whole time, so things were going to be different.

What we learnt from the prelim planning process:

• We were taught to write a basic script, draw a storyboard, write a shot list and then draw a shot script from the shot list, which gave us an order to shoot shots in. This helped immensely on shoot as it sped up the process and was a huge part of good organisation. We would not have thought of using a detailed storyboard and shot script on our main task if it were not for the prelim task.
• We were able to split roles between us (one on drawing, one on writing, one on script etc) during the prelim so we applied this to our main task (one on location/props/actors, one on narrative/plot/characters and one on organisation/bookings/to-do-lists/blogging). There were more roles to fill but we got through these quickly by good role organisation.
• We used a location 'reccie' (short for reconnoitre) in our prelim to get a feel for our location and test out suitable angles before the test shoot. Therefore planning for the test shoot was easier. We also used this method in our main task and it gave us knowledge of our location such as the fact we had to move so many boxes to clear the space we wanted to use.

However, there was alot more to organise for our main task (props, actors, lighting etc) and therefore there was alot more to research other than just continuity in our prelim task. It provided us with a greater challenge, but the prelim task had provided us with the basics to give us a head start and organised state of mind.

Things we learnt from the prelim production process:

• We knew beforehand how to use the equipment (apart from lights) such as the Canon cameras and on-board mics. We were given inductions before our prelim task and after the prelim we were thoroughly confident in what we were using.
• We were aware of all the things that could go wrong with a shoot, which happened in the prelim task. This involved continuity issues, time-wasting, shots not looking right that we thought might work, and not getting enough shots. We learnt to always take more than one take of each shot, to try and get as many angles of each shot (whether they look bad or not) and to improvise on the spot to add different perspective to shots that did not look right. We were also made aware of how time could fly by, as we nearly ran out of time in the prelim task and ended up rushing shots, hence not getting enough to edit with.
• We were made aware of continuity issues having learnt the continuity techniques of shot/reverse shot, master shots, 180-degree rule and match on actions. Our prelim task brought out basic mistakes in match on action when we took a shot of a computer screen, but from the shot before the website had changed on screen. We were taught how to check every little thing was in place, especially when re-shooting in the main task, so that there were no continuity errors. This was all to achieve a seemless narrative.
• We learnt how to swap roles between us all on shoot (director, assistant director and sound director) during the prelim task and we applied this to the main task (swapping between director, assistant director, sound and lighting).
• It took us a long time to set up for our prelim shoot (about 15 minutes at the beginning of the shooting hour was spent setting up the tripod). Therefore for the main task we opted to book one long 4 hour shoot instead of lots of short shoots, to minimise time wasted setting up, and to not break our focus once were in 'shot mode'.
• We were encouraged on our main shoot to tell actors to leave more pauses between sentences as on our prelim task the conversation was too quick ending in editing problems - dialogue cut together too quickly resulted in quick-fire shot/reverse shots that looked silly and over-dramatic.
• We learnt not to rush things as many shots for our prelim task were messy with cutting points. We had to precise and for our main task we were backed up with a re-shoot.

There were some differences. For our main task we had to think about our actors, treat them well and look after them. We also had a test shoot before our main shoot to get ourselves together as we had far more to think about. We did not focus on getting everything done in our actual shoot but set ourselves little targets to achieve at a steady pace.

Things we learnt from the prelim editing process:

• We learnt how to use simple editing techniques on Adobe Premiere Pro such as the razor tool, cutting and re-ordering clips to achieve good continuity. This gave us the basics to fall upon in our main task and we could progress in more complex techniques from that starting point.
• Due to limited time in our prelim task we captured one big clip of our whole shoot and cut and dragged shots straight onto the timeline from there. It got quite confusing and time was wasted searching through the whole shoot trying to find where we shot a particular shot. For our main task we split up the clips and organised them into bins, named. Therefore we did not waste time looking for particular clips as we just had to find the labelled clip we wanted from the particular section we wanted (i.e. a bin called 'conversation shots' or 'cutaways').
• In the prelim task we split up the hour we had into 15 minutes each on the mouse editing (there were four of us) but we all still had imput. This taught us the patience to help others edit without taking over the mouse, and we carried this into our main task, all of us getting our fair share of editing time. This caused no arguments or hard feelings.
• The continuity aspect of the task made us hungry for perfection (spending long amounts of time on tiny little things such as sound levels), which we carried forward into the main task. We spent days and days on very small aspects of our film just to achieve perfection.

However, for our main task we had to think of ways to appeal to our audience through subtle enigmas, filmic picture and effects, using new software (After Effects) to aid our titles, and adding music and sound effects from the internet to add to atmosphere (which the prelim task lacked). We also concentrated more on the image, changing contrast, saturation and brightness to give a cinematic look. There was more than one focus whereas our prelim task was simply about the editing. Once again the prelim task gave us the basic foundation of editing but the main task challenged us to expand our editing skills from this point.

Things we learnt from the prelim evaluation process:

• The prelim evaluation has given me something to look back upon during this evaluation, causing me to remember to think about the problems we faced and how we resolved them, other than just what we did on the task. I remembered to talk about things I would do differently because of my preliminary exercise evaluation (see relevant blog post).
• I learnt the basic analytical mind-set during the prelim reflections task and evaluation.
• I learnt how valuable audience feedback is, as we recieved some from other classmates when showing our sequences in a lesson. The criticisms gave me alot to think and talk about during my evaluation, so for our main task we held a big audience screening (more relevant to our target audience) and summarised our feedback to help us see problems in our sequence - for analytical purposes.
• We learnt to look back at what we had learnt relative to the task, which for the prelim task meant continuity theory, but for the main task meant everything (theory on audience, genre, narrative, moving image etc).

However, I found this evaluation alot harder to string together than the prelim one. For this evaluation we had to think about the whole picture and the films relationship with the audience. There was so much to talk about that we decided to have a group discussion to discuss the most important points we would bring up. We also wrote drafts of our evaluation on which I wrote alot more than I should have, and our teachers marked them and told us what to cut out and what to improve on. Furthermore, there was alot more audience feedback to include (30 questionnaires worth compared to 10 or so classmates for the prelim task).

All in all, I think we did learn from most of our mistakes because of the prelim task where we were taught the whole process, an organisational and focused mindset and a hunger for perfection. There were still some issues we found hard to overcome such as continuity issues, mainly to do with moving all the clutter (including many boxes) for both shoot and re-shoot, and keeping chains in the same place. However, we were definately more organised and prepared for most problems we were faced with. We had realised the importance of the little things such as the shot script and how to solve problems and improvise - something we had to do when faced with new problems during our main shoot. These certain issues the prelim task did not prepare us for such as winter illness, actor reliance and lighting problems. On the other hand, I do not think we could have created such a fantastic sequence (and one that I am very proud of) if it were not for doing the prelim task beforehand as it prepared us for the whole process of constructing a film - a process that is long and hard but worth it for the end product.

Preliminary Exercise: Coursework Task - Evaluation

Here is my groups preliminary coursework task - to produce a simple continuity sequence containing a shot/reverse shot technique, the 180 degree rule and match on action.

1) Who did you work with and how did you manage the task between you?

For this task I worked with Laura, Holly and Bhavika. We worked well as a team throughout the various stages of the task - planning, production and editing. During the planning process we assigned each other different tasks, with one person drawing frames on the storyboard, one person writing on the storyboards, one person doing script and one person doing the shooting script. However, before anything we shared our ideas on what to film and came to a quick decision as of our location, actors and content of the film. Problems or disagreements were discussed and then fixed or resolved efficiently. During shooting, we rotated the roles. Two of our group were actors (Holly and Laura), so they directed shots in which they did not feature, whilst shots with both actors were directed either by Bhavika or myself. We rotated between the roles of director, and sound/assistant to the director so everyone got a chance to do both at some point. This system was continued in editing with each of the 4 group members getting around 15 minutes during the hour to take charge of the mouse. Decisions in editing were still made as a group but everyone got their chance to actually do the cutting and various other editing tecniques recquired to create the sequence. The group dynamics were always high with work done efficiently and without much complaint everyone stuck to their tasks.

2) How did you plan your sequence? What processes did you use?

In planning the sequence, the main processes we used were storyboarding, script writing and shooting script. First we brainstormed our ideas in group discussion before deciding on the best idea for the narrative. Next we picked a location and our actors, as well as managing the tasks between ourselves. We then applied our ideas and decisions to the storyboard, script and shooting script. Before shooting we did a walkthrough run using our location and actors in position. We were also allowed to test all our equipment ready and provided by the media department. We shot using the order provided by the shooting script in order to minimise time spent changing location and camera angle. This allowed us to finish shooting several shots within an hour. Next we captured our shots onto editing software and edited the sequence using our storyboard as a guideline - helping us complete a simple continuity sequence. Editing techniques we used were cutting, creating titles, creating transitions such as fades and cuts and working with seperate video and audio tracks to help our sequence flow and make sense.

3) What technology did you use to complete the task, and how did you use it?

In shooting we equipment provided by the media department - a Canon video camera and mini-DV to record onto. This came with an adpatable and flexible tripod. For sound we used were given standard camera mics, whilst boom mics were available but we chose not to use them. We used this hardware, as well as a climp board and all our paperwork, to shoot the film. Afterwards, using the editing software we captured our shots on to was Premier Pro and we used non-linear and diagonal editing to put our shots together with the help of titles and transitions. We used 2 video tracks and 1 audio track, and using the process of cutting we pieced our sequence together before rendering it as one clip. Finally, we posted our sequences onto youtube and linked them to our Media AS blogs at Blogger.com with the use of simple internet technology.

4) What factors did you have to take into account when planning, shooting and editing?

During planning we had to take into account that we had only the equipment provided by the media department with no budget, and only an hours time to complete our shots during shooting, so our ideas were simple in order to cater for these limitations. During walkthrough we got a better idea of the environment of our location, with lighting, sound and clutter. When it came to shooting we knew how to avoid problems with these issues as we had encountered them already. During shooting, we had to account for amature acting, unwanted background noise, and people such as teachers and year 13 students moving in and out of the media room we were using. This did not always help our time situation. We also had to account for simple equipment meaning we could not shoot anything too cinematic (with too much camera movement) as it was often hard to keep the camera movement smooth and steady. We had to take into account shot types, making sure framing was right, as well as simple continuity to do with position and matching on action. We succeeded these techniques, often using improvisation (such as placing the handheld camera on a shelf to film from an awkward angle, when the position was unattainable by tripod). Finally, we had to take into account for other groups in our class who were using the same department. Though in seperate rooms, people could be seen through doors, which would make for bad continuity, so we had to work between groups and give each other a fair chance to film what we wanted to film, by sharing time and space. By the time we started editing we realised another thing to take into account whilst shooting would be to make sure we had at least 2 takes of every shot and a very large range of shots, as some mistakes in shots were only identified when watching them back afterwards and there was not much back up in the way of other shots or different takes of the same shot to use instead. Finally, we had to take into account the use of technology and how it can often be temperamental, especially when editing. We were lucky to get through with no technical problems using the computer to edit, but this is not always guaranteed to happen, and if it does then you have to use your iniative to get past the problem.

5) How successful was your sequence? Please identify what worked well, and with hindsight, what would you improve/do differently?

Our sequence did work well in relation to the task set for us; to complete a simple continuity task involving a character opening a door, crossing a room and sitting down opposite another character to have a short conversation with. The story of our sequence featured all of these things, and this simple story was obvious due to the matched on action in every shot. This was particularly good at the beginning with the character looking through the door at the other character, then entering the room and sitting alongside her - the matched on action was perfect here. We used all the techniques mentioned in the task brief - match on action, shot/reverse shot and the 180-degree rule. The match on action helped the whole sequence flow and make sense, keeping constant continuity. We used the shot/reverse shot technique in the direct conversation between the 2 characters, lasting for about 4 shots. This worked well as we established both characters and saw their facial expressions at MS/MCU whilst they were talking, bringing more meaning to the conversation (with one character trying to be friendly but being more sympathetic of the other character who just wants to be left alone). The 180-degree rule was never broken during the shot/reverse shots, with the camera being shot over one characters left shoulder and then the other characters right. This was to keep perspective from looking the same and preventing characters from being in exactly the same position as this would confuse the reader giving the impression the characters were swapping positions and that the shots were not from the same conversation. The continuity techniques we used are not obvious, which is good as it shows they have been done well and the audience takes notice of the actual story. The basic continuity is there so I believe we have created a successful continuity sequence. We tried to add more excitement to it by making it funny in an ironic style, referring to the "blogging" side of our media coursework and playing on the fact that blogging has taken up alot of our time. This was shown in the sequence by the character chosing to blog rather than hang out with friends (something probably more funny to people involved in this media course than your normal audience). I believe this worked well mainly due to the awkward silences, sarcastic expressions of the sympathetic character and the acting in general. There were a few minor things that could have been avoided or done differently next time, one being to shoot more than one take of every shot, as one of our shots was interrupted by an arm in view in the bottom right hand corner, and we had no back up for this shot but was vital in our sequence. Also, the conversation was too quick and next time I would try and convince actors to leave slight pauses between each setence or mid sentence but still keeping the conversation flowing. A moment of our shot/reverse shot is too quick, flashing back and forth from each character too fast, and a slight pause would have prevented this. As well as this, the cutaway shot to the blog on computer screen is too still, and we could have filmed the whole conversation from this point of view in order to show the characters head turned towards the other character then back at the screen. This could have worked better in running with the rest of the sequence as well as producing another oppurtunity for a match on action. Other things that could be improved were the shaky camera movement and sound, but would be hard to improve with the equipment available to us. The conversation can be heard so it is just background fuzz that interupts the sequence (not a great deal). Other than that, framing, continuity and acting are fine and I believe our sequence both works well, is amusing and meets the brief.

6) What have you learnt from completing the task? Looking ahead, how will this learning be significant when completing the rest of your foundation coursework, do you think?

The task gave me practise in actually going through the whole filming process in order to provide our sequence. In effect, producing this sequence (as being 30 seconds long) was like producing a quarter of an opening 2 minutes such as we will do for our projects. The processes I got practise in included using shooting in a different order to the storyboard using a shot script, providing actors with a script, using equipment such as mics to capture the sound and using the headphones on shoot ("sound, camera, action!"), using basic camera movements and learning to improvise to prevent a shaky camera or to shoot from an unusual angle, editing a sequence on Premier Pro following a storyboard and finally working in a group of 4 by taking everyones ideas into consideration and making group decisions. I learnt improvisational, technical and teamwork skills that will be helpful when shooting for my project, as well as basic organisation, knowledge and decision making that is vital to a filmmaker. Evaluating this preliminary coursework had also made me more aware of all the things I will have to take into account throughout the shooting process. I now understand how completely thorough, organised and professional you have to be on shoot, and this can be helped buy really organised and effective planning. I will have to make sure I have locations completely booked and certain people and equipment definately available for my use. I will have to use test shoots to my gain by doing thorough walk throughs as if I was actually on the real shot. Therefore, anything that does not work then I can fix for when it comes to the real thing. The most important thing is to be able to use your iniative and I believe I have learnt that and now have a greater understanding of what it will take to make my project sequence successful. There is so much to think about, but I have summed all this up in this evaluation, and can now use my experience of filming this basic continuity sequence throughout the rest of my project, and refer back to it to make sure I do not make the same mistakes whilst doing everything I got right the same. This task has been very beneficial to the rest of my foundation coursework.