6. evaluation sf 2017

6. evaluation sf 2017

• 1.
  EVALUATION Your name
• 2.
  PRODUCTION PROCESS EVALUATION
• 3.
  Looking at myresearch document my strengths of it was the secondary research. Looking up on the internet what the target market likes in terms of genre of film and why really helped me think about what I wanted to put into my short film. I found out on the internet that most young adults like to watch comedy films so I decided that comedy was going to be the genre for my product. I feel like my weakness for my research was my primary research. For my primary research I conducted a survey for target market to fill out. Although I did get good responses, I feel like I didn’t get enough to create a proper conclusion for my research. I think If I got more responses from my survey and also carried out different types of primary research, I would of got a bigger range of answers and fully understood what the target market likes.
• 4.
   My strengthsfor this document was the story development slide in section 1. I feel like I went into detail about what my short film was going to be about and it helped me understand what I had to do in order for my short film to be successful. Even though I went into detail with my story development, I feel like I didn’t go into enough detail with my shot list. The descriptions of each shot was very basic and could have been improved for the benefit of my short film.
• 5.
   Despite thefact that I completed my short film on time, I believe I could have done a better job of managing my time with certain aspects of the project. This mainly fell into the written work category. I felt like because I rushed some documents, I failed at adding detail to some of my work. For example, in my pre production work I heavily rushed the risk assessment and contingency planning which were essential to the completion of my work. If I had additional time I would go back to those documents and make sure they are up to a good standard.
• 6.
  I'm using theshort film 'desperate' which was shown as an example short film during the introduction to the project. I have used this short film as it has similar elements to mine and also many differences. For example, I have used the same types of shots when filming the running scenes for my short film. However, in the pre existing short film, the camera was close and following the character almost throughout the production and had a lot of moving shots, whereas in my short film the majority of shots are still shots and follow the character in a pan or zoom shot. If I used more moving shots like the pre existing product did, my product would of turned out differently and would of improved the short film.
• 7.
  Comparing the audioof my product and the pre existing audio, there are rare similarities. For example both short films used music to dramatize the piece. However the pre existing product used the audio from the clips such as the sound of the characters footsteps in their piece whereas in mine I muted all of my video clips and used sound effects. I also used royalty free sound effects and soundtracks and didn’t source them using a microphone or any audio retrieval equipment so if I did the project again I would create the sound myself.
• 8.
  Looking at thetechnical qualities between the two pieces, the pre existing products uses a higher range of techniques used in the short film. For example the pre existing product uses slow motion to add a dramatic effect to the piece. I didn’t use any techniques like that and I think if I used similar techniques, then my product would of turned out differently and would of made it a stronger piece.
• 9.
  looking at myshort film, I believe that my panning shot at the start of the film is useful because it sets the scene like an establishing shot and introduces and focuses on the protagonist. In that same shot the focus of the shot transitions the depth of field on the main character from blurry to focused. This creates a more effective introduction to the character. Another shot that was effective was a close up of the characters expression. What made this effective was the change of color and the transition into a smaller proportioned screen to add a dramatic effect. It also helps center attention to the character and what their expression is. Near the end of the film where the comedic payoff is shown, the screen transitions back into a full screen proportion and adds back the original color of the shot to make that section of the scene feel relatable and realistic. To improve on the piece, there were a few shots that were blurry due to rain on the camera lens. I would of either repeated the shot in order to get a clearer view or I would of scheduled the production to a day in which it wasn’t raining.
• 10.
  I feel likeI have made a suitable short film for my target audience. My target audience is teenagers and young adults aged 16-18. I wanted to make my film not aimed at any specific gender or social group. I feel like I accomplished this because my film does not present any gender specific or any kind of stereotype. During my research I found that most teenagers prefer comedic films which doesn’t have much horror or romance. I think I met this target as my short film has a light hearted storyline and has a relatable comedic payoff. I found in my research that the social class of this particular group was the working class. My short film fits into this NRS grade because the working class are more likely to take busses so they would find the comedic pay off which is missing a bus relatable and funny.
• 11.
  PEER FEEDBAC K
• 12.
   What didyou like about the product?  I liked the build up throughout the entire film, it was a good way to increase the comedic payoff at the end of the film, the soundtrack was also a good way to provide additional build up throughout the scenes.  What improvements could have been made to the product?  I think that there could have been a better use of digital editing throughout some parts of the film to make some of the transitions between scenes smoother than they are.
• 13.
   What didyou like about the product?  The plot is funny and relatable.  The music used in the film is well suited to the actions.  What improvements could have been made to the product?  You started laughing in one of the running shots  I saw a lot of potential points for sound effects.
• 14.
   What didyou like about the product?  I like the way the moods of the film were separated by the aspect ratio changing.  The music fit well with the contents of the film.  What improvements could have been made to the product? The use of more sound effects and smoother transitions would have improved the product.
• 15.
   What doyou agree with from your peer feedback?  Looking back at my peer feedback, I agree with what they said about needing smoother transitions between shots. Some transitions between shots were jarring and sudden and effects how smooth the whole product is. Even if I added a simple faded transition between shots, my product would be improved massively.  What do you disagree with from your peer feedback?  A couple of my peers suggested that I could of added more sound effects to the short film. I disagree with their viewpoint. I think this because if I were to add more sound effects to the production the product would be too cluttered and it would drown out the effects of the music.
• 16.
   If Iwere to make any improvements, I would definitely change the transitions between shots. I think this because some transitions are too quick and look messy. Improving the transitions would make my short film more professional and clean.