Parameters and Constraints that influenced my decisions:
I had several parameters and constraints that had influenced the decisions I had made for the production of my film. One was having to follow the brief of the competition I was entering, the two main constraints I faced from the brief was that I had to keep the film 3mins or under, I felt that this was a good parameter though because it allowed me to really think about how I would have to combine the use of audio and video to present the narrative to its full potential. Another constraint from the brief was the $1000 budget I had to keep within, although my film was pretty much a zero budget film, this would have been more of an effect if I had the money for a massive production. I also had to face time constraints as there was a pretty tight deadline to enter the competition (31st December 2013) along with all submission forms. This had made me quite weary about filming at such a late date and having to shoot in a day. In the end my film was just under 2mins long which is very short in comparison to what my initial ideas were for a full 3min film.
Evaluate the quality of the finished product and fitness for purpose:
After watching my film after several weeks of entering the competition I was able to evaluate the product in depth a little more than I would have just after completion. The quality is quite obvious that it wasn't shot professionally and was shot on an extremely small budget using equipment that was already owned. Even after the post production to try and make it look like it had more of the professional touch to it. But I believe that the film is fit for its purpose as it did get entered into the competition in time with a confirmation email alerting me that the film was successfully entered into the competition.
Evaluation with client and feedback:
Here is the video of the presentation for my film, with the feedback from the audience and client after the screening.
I felt that the feedback given was really good, very helpful for myself to take and be able to produce a better film in the future. I felt that the fact that so many of the audience were left very confused is a good thing as it was one of my aims to do so, but maybe if the video was a little longer, the narrative would have been a bit more easier to understand. If I was to critically identify the areas I could improve on, I think it would be to shoot with custom settings so the footage that comes out of the camera I use isn't saturated already, giving me much more freedom with controlling colour in post production.
Review technical and aesthetic qualities of final product:
After watching the film that I have made I was able to find a few areas that I would change slightly, mainly one of the transitions where its visible to the viewer that the subject in the shot was standing still before he started walking. Also in terms of technicality I think that the film may have had a bit more of an impact if I had used some dialogue instead of using several soundtracks on top of the video afterwards. Personally I think the film aesthetically looks good, its clear it was shot on a DSLR due to the over sharp shots and the colours were already saturated when they were uploaded but I don't think it brings down the quality of the film. If I was to shoot this film again, I would set the settings on my camera so they were shooting with very low colour toning and sharpness; this would give me video clips which are very similar to RAW files allowing me to colour grade it with much more freedom without having to think I was going to over saturate the colours.
No comments:
Post a Comment