Tuesday, 6 October 2009
Preliminary Task and Evaluation
One of the required features of our preliminary task was to ensure that we used the "shot/reverse shot" technique at least one within our continuity piece. While we included one definite use of it, moving from a face to a face to an eyeline to another eyeline, we ultimately believe that it was a fairly weak attempt and could have either been improved by refilming the sequence and making sure we used a less restrictive shot, which would provide the audience with a more clear understanding and confirmation of where each person was looking (rather than what could be interpreted as a random selection of facial close-ups.) As well as this, it would have been productive to capitalise on the conversation scene more and instead of the quite distanced shots which showed both characters at once, it would have been beneficial to use the technique here, not only for the mark but for improving the dialogue scene too.
As well as this, we had to demonstrate the ability to follow the "180 degree rule." I believe we done this relatively effectively as the dialogue scene features two different camera angles around 90 degrees apart from each other, on one consistent side of the speakers. This shows we understood not to place the cameras at any point past either person. However, this could have been improved by spacing the two side cameras further apart along the semi-circle axis and by introducing a third camera. The film would look better with multiple angles anyway, but by having more cameras and still following the rule it shows a clearer proof that we understood the rule.
Finally it was required that we provided evidence of the "match on action" technique. This was easily our most successful feature, with reasonable editing providing a smooth transition on a few scenes. The most prominent example of this technique is when the protagonist is running down the hallway, to when he kicks the doors open and the shot cuts to the door being kicked open from the opposite side. This is relatively fluid and we have no criticisms for how we did this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment