Use of the Camera
Generally, our shots were okay. They were heavily inconsistent, sometimes being very well framed, others where portions of the actors head was cut off. We had a number of well framed shots, especially our long shot 0:27, which I feel gave across a sense of seclusion and loneliness. We adhered to the general conventions of using a camera, e.g. Rule of thirds, head room and lead room etc, however there were occasions where we deliberately broke these rules, like using a canted angle shot to illustrate confusion in the character and the abnormality of the preceding events, and other occasions where we broke them accidently (0:39). The shot where we track the character walking toward the pond was not given enough lead room, yet somehow worked to an eerie effect. However, the one error we consistently made in a number of our shots that only worked out occasionally was cropping body parts of the character due to incorrect framing. This went unnoticed during the shoot but because a problem in the editing process
We used a variety of shots, including Close Ups to focus the attention of the viewer to specific points, Mid Shots to give an illusion of normality and Long Shots to show seclusion and loneliness. I believe we used an effective range of shots which kept the audience interested and used the right shots in the right places to create an affective atmosphere. We used basic camera movements such as pans and tracking, but we also used an active movement of the cameraman/woman running toward the character. This was done from a POV (Point of View) Shot at 0:43, from the POV of the attacker. We did this to show the attacker approaching the character without showing the attacker. Not seeing the attacker creates an element of fear toward the attacker, which is essential and imperative in a horror clip
The main issue we had to face with the camera was handling it steadily. In a lot of our shots, there were sharps jolts or sways, or static shakes whilst tracking the character. Not all of these could have been prevented, but it is something to look on and seek to improve in future.
Use of Editing
Editing was a key part in our process. I believe the editing really brought the piece together, and gave it atmosphere. The shots flow very nicely, without jumping or moving on too fast. The clip has a very steady pace and keeps the audience on their toes. I key highlight of the editing would be the subtle sound effects in the background that loops for the majority of the piece, and particularly the MS/POV shot steadily walking toward the character sat on the bench. The fade into black and white proved an effectual technique in drawing and sustaining the audience’s attention. The shot was simply a slowed version of the latter, but because of the way it was edited it seemed to be a completely different shot. The sound editing was strong and well formulated, with sound clips extracted from different clips (some recorded but unused) and applied to new ones. Slight changes were made to the sound in a number of clips, which gave the piece a very awkward and eerie atmosphere
Selection of Content
We were very limited to actors, with few people being available and even fewer people having a form of acting ability. The actor that was eventually used had no acting experience but was available so we had to settle with him. Though his acting was not brilliant and he looked at the camera on numerous occasions, his contribution was sufficed to us achieving our task. The costume was in direct contrast to the mood of the piece; bright and well relaxed. This could have been improved by wearing darker colours to suit the tone of the piece; dark and dreary. The location was great for our piece, as it was well isolated, it had every component that we required for the piece and conveniently had an unknown man walking nearby who we captured in our piece. The location was very natural, and did not require any artificial input from the team. The pendant seemed quite feminine and delicate, but in terms of size, weight and general attributes it worked well. Because the accessory was light, the wind blew easier on it, making the final scene seem more realistic and almost natural
Self Assessment
My contribution was to the editing stage. I was not able to be at the shoot and both Catherine and Emily were better suited to planning than I, so I focussed on my strong point which consequently was editing. I cut up the shots and separated them, applied the necessary effects and extractions, and pretty much pieced the final product together. I personally am quite pleased with my contribution, working efficiently and effectively under a timed condition whilst making a few improvements to the original piece. On the flip side, I feel my contribution would have been better if I took part in the composition of the piece and attended the shoot, but my group worked well without me
Overall, I feel our piece is very good and well devised, though it could have been improved in terms of acting quality and camera adjustments. Generally, a job well done
#Go Team!!
Josh Livingston
No comments:
Post a Comment