Peer feedback of rough cuts

This feedback sheet shows that we have met most of the criteria to a satisfactory standard. They feel that we have produce very steady shots but we need to increase the binary opposites in our video. We will do this by increasing the amount of narrative in our video so that we can continue our use of binary opposites. 

This feedback shows that we have performed strongly in a majority of the criteria including variety of shot types used, variety of angles used and inclusion of binary opposites. But we didn't perform as highly in our use of a variety of shot movement, framing and semiotics. We will improve in these areas by using more camera movement during the performance sections of our video, taking more time to check the framing of each shot and think about how to include more semiotics. 

This feedback shows that we have performed well in some criteria; steady shots, variety of shot angles and framing, But we have not performed as well in the other criteria including variety of shot type and variety of shot movements. We can improve these scores by, like above, increasing shot variety and movement.

This feedback shows we have performed well in the top 4 criteria, including shot type and movement. But we need to improve the framing in our shots, semiotics and binary opposites. We can do this by, like above, taking time to checking the framing of our shots, including more semiotics and binary opposites.

 This feedback shows that we have performed well in all of the criteria and very well in one criteria- our variety of shots. This shows that so far we have created a varied and interesting video.

This feedback shows that we have performed well in a majority of the criteria including steady shots, shot variety and framing. But there is room for improvement in the shot movement, we can do this by using more movement. We also need to improve on our use of semiotics and binary opposites, we can do more research and planning into these criteria to find inspiration.

This research shows that we have performed well in a majority of the criteria but we need to improve our use of shot variety and angles. We can do this by using creative shot types and angles to make the video more interesting. At the top of the sheet we have received a comment saying that we need to move the objects that were behind the dark curtain which in behind our band during our performance sections. We can rectify this when we re-shoot this footage.

This feedback shows that we have performed well in two criteria, steady shots and framing. But we need to improve on the other criteria including variety of shot type and shot movement. We can do this by trying out different and interesting shot types and movements. 

This feedback shows that we have performed well well with our variety of shot type and angles.
We could do work to improve the shot steadiness by increasing our use of the tripod. We have   performed less well in the other criteria including shot movements and framing. We can improve in these criteria by increasing our use of movement but ensuring that the shot is steady and we should take time to check the framing of each shot. 

This feedback shows that we performed well in just over half of the criteria including shot angles and movement. But we need to improve our framing, semiotics and binary opposites. We can do this by checking the framing of each shot, increasing semiotics used and adding more binary opposites.

This group feedback board shows that our peers felt that we used a good variety of shots, had good content, had a good balance between narrative and performance and high quality editing technique.



This group feedback shows what our peers feel needs to be improved. They felt that we needed more footage that's linked by a running theme, more binary opposites needed, develop narrative further, speed up some narrative shots, move boxes from behind curtain in performance shots (framing) and use more close ups.