Monday, 29 April 2013
7. Looking back at your preliminary task what do you feel you have learnt in the progression from it to the full product?
Within my preliminary task it was a conversation between me and Demi. For this we did an eye-line match, shot reverse shot and we kept to the 180 degree rule. For my opening compared to my preliminary I think that the editing is a lot smoother, the camera work is more fluent as there is less of a shake in it and the shots are also better framed.
As you can see between short clips of both you can tell that in the opening sequence it is better lighting, and also the right side is chosen because in the preliminary both characters are somewhat silhouetted against the background; this is because of the natural lighting coming from the window. To fix this in the opening sequence we made sure that the natural lighting was coming in from the side. The framing within the opening sequence is also better as there is not too much headroom and the shots are better edited together as they are more fluent when being watched and pace is maintained within the opening sequence. Sound is also improved on the opening sequence as in the preliminary sound got cut off on one of the shots, and it is a random ending for the piece whereas in the opening sequence it is more thought about and no parts of the sound seem irregular. Our opening sequence showed a young female character lying on the floor of a cellar and then a different female character walking towards an abandoned house. Comparing our preliminary task to our opening sequence, we didn't have to focus on the 180 degree rule as there were no conversations or confrontations within the sequence.
Within the opening sequence we used a cross cut which shows improvement in editing as cross cutting is harder, especially when you try and make it to make sense. This is compared to just making it continuous editing.
Within the preliminary task it was more of a team effort as we helped to set up camera work and edited the footage together. However for the opening sequence it was much more of Amie taking charge informing of the shots that needed to be acquired but when it came to creating the idea and then editing it was more of a group effort.
As you can see between short clips of both you can tell that in the opening sequence it is better lighting, and also the right side is chosen because in the preliminary both characters are somewhat silhouetted against the background; this is because of the natural lighting coming from the window. To fix this in the opening sequence we made sure that the natural lighting was coming in from the side. The framing within the opening sequence is also better as there is not too much headroom and the shots are better edited together as they are more fluent when being watched and pace is maintained within the opening sequence. Sound is also improved on the opening sequence as in the preliminary sound got cut off on one of the shots, and it is a random ending for the piece whereas in the opening sequence it is more thought about and no parts of the sound seem irregular. Our opening sequence showed a young female character lying on the floor of a cellar and then a different female character walking towards an abandoned house. Comparing our preliminary task to our opening sequence, we didn't have to focus on the 180 degree rule as there were no conversations or confrontations within the sequence.
Within the opening sequence we used a cross cut which shows improvement in editing as cross cutting is harder, especially when you try and make it to make sense. This is compared to just making it continuous editing.
Within the preliminary task it was more of a team effort as we helped to set up camera work and edited the footage together. However for the opening sequence it was much more of Amie taking charge informing of the shots that needed to be acquired but when it came to creating the idea and then editing it was more of a group effort.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)