Evaluation of Previous Students Short Films

The only way I can appropriately evaluate previous student's short films, that I can see, is to judge them against the marking criteria for film/television/video. This will enable me to have a critical prospective on my own work as well as pass students as I'll be able to understand what is needed from me to gain the higher levels. From evaluating past students work I can see and understand what worked well and what didn't work as well to improve and develop my own skills in creating a short film.

I am evaluating these short films on the following criteria:


The candidate's use of technical skills:

• shooting material appropriate to the task set; including controlled use of the camera, attention to framing, variety of shot sizes and close attention to mise en scene
• editing so that meaning is apparent to the viewer and making selective and appropriate use of shot transitions, captions and other effects
• recording and editing sound with images appropriately.

The levelling for these technical skills are as follows:

Level 1 (0-14 Marks) - Work is likely to be unfinished. There is evidence of a minimal level of ability in the creative use of any of the technical skills.

Level 2 (15-23 Marks) - There is evidence of a basic level of ability in the creative use of some of the technical skills.

Level 3 (24-31 Marks) - The candidate is expected to demonstrate proficiency in the creative use of most of the technical skills.

Level 4 (32-40 Marks) - The candidate is expected to demonstrate excellence in the creative use of most of the technical skills.

Lewis Underwood's Short Film

For this past student's work I would evaluate it as being a Level 3 product with 30/40. I feel that the use of editing to create meaning was excellent, the use of cross dissolves and fades to create the appearance of the protagonists death was creative, definitely in level 4. However, though the candidate used a variety of shot types and framings, there was moments when the camera wasn't controlled, and especially with the tracking shot the protagonist went out of frame, which indicates to me that the candidate did not have controlled use of the camera, therefore I would give a Top Level 3 for the use of camera. As well is this I did not feel that the mise en scène or the recording and editing of sounds was carefully considered in the production and post-production stages. Especially in regard to the editing of sound I could identify the non-diegetic sounds even though it was being presented as coming from with in the scene, as the levelling did not have a consistency. For both sound and, mise en scène I would give a mid level 3.

Graham Forward's Short Film

For this candidate's work I don't think it is as strong as the previous candidates and therefore I believe it's a Level 3 with 25/40. I have based my judgement on the fact that I do not feel that both the editing and the recording and editing of sounds are sufficient or even proficient. I consider both as a basic level, the editing did not create any sufficient amount of meaning with basic transitions (fades) and traditional cheat cuts, and the sound, again that was supposed to be presented in the scene, yet was non-diegetic jetty the levelling for these elements such as the mobile phone ring tone was distinctively post-dubbed. However I consider the camera and the mise en scène to be a medium use of proficiency within the work as through out the product the candidate had controlled use to the camera with varying shot movements and angle but not a variation of framing that is needed in my opinion to reach a level 4. The mise en scène shows a proficient creativity through the use of location and costume yet the use of lighting and decor is not suffice for a Level 4.

Daniel Parslow's Short Film

For this short film I consider it to be a Level 4 product with 36/40. I believe that it shows excellent use of camera, through the varying shot types and framing and through the excellent control that is given, creating the appearance of a point of view style on filming. I also consider the sound and mise en scène to be an excellent use of creativity, through the recording and editing of sound to create the appearance of a ghostly nature and the use of the voice-over creates the mystery's thrilling atmosphere that I believe the short film house. In regards to the mise en scène, the choice of decor, lighting, space, costume and location all creates a similar atmosphere which adds to the eerie and spooky nature of the short film and intensifies it, and demonstrate an excellence use of technical skill. However I believe the editing to be proficient as there could of been an alternative way, that this short film could be put together to create more of an intense meaning to emphasise the supernatural and foreboding atmosphere.

Steven Jones' Short Film

Comparing this short film to the other three that I've watched previously I consider this to be a Level 2 with 18/40. For me the recording and editing of sound showed a minimal level of creativity, as only the diegetic sounds while filming was used and non-diegetic music was use to reinforce the mood of the product. As only parallel sound was used, the music was not as significant where as if contrapuntal music was used it would've made it unusual and possibly may have even reinforced deeper the meaning of the product. In regards to the camera, editing and mise en scène I consider it to be a basic level of proficiency, though there was a controlled use of the camera there wasn't a wide variety of framings or shot movements, angles and types that I believe are needed for the proficiency or excellence. As well is this the mise en scène send lacked some vibrancy and range, to end level three, it felt a little bit static/ reserved lots expands the full range of decor, lighting, space, costume and location. The editing lacked a certain sophisticated meaning and the transitions were insignificance to the narrative, I feel that this plot could be explored through an alternative routed and then the split screen approach that was used.

Laura Budden's Short Film

I consider this candidate's product to be a Level 2 with 23/40. I believe that the camera shows a efficient use of creativity, as there is a clear control that is used and a variation of framings and shot movements tight and angles, but without the flair that an excellent piece would have shown. The mise en scène is on the borders, I consider, between proficient and basic creativity as there are moments when the concepts of mise en scène are exploited to its full but there are moments where it is lacking and doesn't feel as considered or planned. In regard to the editing and sound both I believe are a basic level of proficiency as the editing doesn't explore advance means of creating meaning or advanced transitions. The sound is also a low level of creativity switching between diegetic and having no diegetic sound within the peace and there being a constant non-diegetic music signifies to me that there is a lower level of creativity that has been considered in regards to the recording and editing of sound.

By analysing these five short films, created by pass students I have identified that the key concepts of camera and mise en scène are what the students have excelled that and it is the concept of editing and sound, what have let them down in achieving the higher levels. I now know that the key areas that I need to focus on is to ensure that my editing & sound is as carefully considered and planned as the camera and mise en scène with in my product.

I now need to evaluate the past students ancillary tasks to ensure a similar idea, of what stopped them from achieving the higher levels, based on the mark scheme for print.