Kaleidoscopia Vision RPP ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Excellent pre-production, planning and visualisation work, the development of drafts and the process including the behind the scenes all give a very strong impression. The research side is extensive but as previously commented could do with some application of media concepts and better use of media terminology. Nevertheless overall. !Level 3 but with potential once rened for Level 4. You have provided extensive but chaotic research which doesn't create a really clear 'journey' - so level 4- but potential for!leave 4+ MAIN PRODUCT ! ! ! !Highly innovative and creative MV with a strong concept mostly well executed. Still some minor issues with sync when viewed on YouTube and probably an opportunity to improve through some minor changes. Animation included - eyes but NOT stars in version 4 on MV page - so NOT COMPLETE. Hence currently low level 4 - (but clear potential for high level 4 if completed and all points addressed) DRAFT 4 is good but not the nal version I think - what I have seen needs to be uploaded and is high level 4 ANCILLARY 1 ! ! ! ! ! !Digipak is a creative design which ts extremely well with the MV, genre of music and overall feel, some technical discrepancies with the shape and format which reduce the mark. Also, interior design only shows 1 panel behind the CD. High level 3 Signicant development to level 4 ANCILLARY 2 ! ! ! ! ! !Advert choice is interesting and the design effective with a clear tie in to Digipak and MV. Look again at the choice from the various versions. Low level 4. Some development to secure level 4. EVALUATION ! ! ! ! ! !unnished - signicant evidence of work though incomplete - script plus one video in evidence - must be uploaded to secure the best mark General: The imbalances between the work done by the three of you has changed signicantly. The overall package is good and approaching professional (or will be when complete) and the opportunity therefore for a top grade is there. Things to consider: structure and organisation of the blog to reduce the confusion of where to nd things as well as the last 10% to complete all products.!You are nearly there and once evaluations are complete and the notes above addressed.! Kia: RPP: - 4- ! !17 Main: - 4 ! !36 Anc1: - 4+ !10 Anc2: - 4 ! ! !9 Eval: ! 2+ ! !10 Total: ! ! ! ! !82 Sci: RPP: - 3+ ! ! 16 Main: - 4 ! ! 36 Anc1: - 4+ !10 Anc2: - 4 ! ! !9 Eval: ! 3- ! ! 12 Total: ! ! ! ! ! 83 Tarryn: RPP: - 4- ! ! 17 Main: - 4+ ! 39 Anc1: - 4+ !10 Anc2: - 4 ! ! !9 Eval: !- 2+ ! 10

Total: ! ! ! ! ! 85 ! ! ! Fork and Knife RPP ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Extensive and well prepared pre-production. Clearly you approached this with a lot of thought and attention to detail. No separate research page which is a problem because your research into MVs doesn't clearly link with the pre-production. It is rather tagged on the end of the page. Level 3 You have moved this into level 4, I am not convinced that your research is as detailed as it might be but it is!signicant and now less tagged on. MAIN PRODUCT ! ! ! ! Fluent and well controlled video with a clear and developed narrative. The concept is clear and all decision with regard to casting, mise en scene, camera and editing give a sense of professionalism. The sound at the beginning lets it down a little during the intro. Low Level 4!Unchanged ANCILLARY 1 ! ! ! ! ! ! Digipak for EP is carefully constructed and both front and back show clear industry element and controlled use of photoshop, the interior pages are less sophisticated but the ideas are interesting. I wonder if improvements can be made to these. Mid Level 4 well developed and planned with some!signicant changes ANCILLARY 2 ! ! ! ! ! ! Magazine Advert is again carefully constructed and there is a clear link across both ancillaries and MV through the casting, mise en scene and industry iconography. Low Level 4 - well developed EVALUATION ! ! ! ! ! !unnished - nothing uploaded General: I think you need to look at the type setting of the ancillaries - especially the positions kerning, line gaps and closeness to the edge. It is not a huge deal but it might be worth a mark or two. Both of you seem to have engaged fully in the process from beginning to end and the balance of work between you appears from the blog to be reasonably fair so marks will most likely reect this with your separate evaluations of course having a bearing. You have addressed many of these points. Farhana: RPP: 4- ! ! 17 Main: !4- ! 33 Anc1: !4- ! !9 Anc2: !4- ! !9 Eval: !1 ! ! ! 0 Total: ! ! ! ! 68 Raa: RPP: 4- ! !17 Main: 4- ! 33 Anc1: 4- ! !9 Anc2: 4- ! !9 Eval: 1 ! ! !0 Total: ! ! ! 68 OFC Studios RPP ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Research is both generic and specic but a bit thin and some elements seem to be borrowed from others - your research really needs to connect with the products in a direct and tangible way. Your independence in this respect means that you choose your own texts to analyse not simply ones we have studied in class. Pre-production is detailed but making links with

the research would benet the overall. High Level 3 (potential for 4) I have the sense that this has developed and that there is both more and that it is more focussed. Organisation and!levelling would benet the presentation and secure the higher marks MAIN PRODUCT ! ! ! ! ! Professionally lmed, edited and produced nished product which show many of the necessary qualities and skills of Level 4. Though it is short it has a clear narrative and is well structured. The links with the ancillaries are clear and condent. Low level 4. Unchanged ANCILLARY 1 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Digipak for single (is this a change from LP previously?) is also highly professional but to my mind incomplete having only 3 panels and missing one inside and the CD itself. It is also a little confusing that one of the inside covers appears upside down. High level 3 (potential for 4)!Some developments but clarity of organisation makes it hard to know exactly what you want to be marked - presuming it is draft 2 - 4ANCILLARY 2 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Magazine advert nal version shows excellent development from earlier version. I think this does make it clearer that the MV is for the single but you need to make it clear that the Digipak is also for the single rather than an EP or the LP. Advise from the exam board accepts EPs but I haven't checked regarding singles. !Level 4 As above -!organisation makes it difcult to know what to mark. EVALUATION ! ! ! ! ! ! ! unnished - no evaluations uploaded? General: Very comprehensive and well presented. Good links between all products and professionally created. Solid Level 4 is there for the taking if you tidy up the loose ends as identied. It also appears that you have worked very evenly across the AP and this means that currently you will be graded similarly. The mark of course doesn't take account of your evaluations. Humaira: RPP - 4- ! !17 Main - 4- ! 34 Anc1 - 4- ! 9 And2 - 4- ! 9 Eval - 1 ! ! !0 Total: ! ! ! !69 Sheida: RPP - 4- ! !17 Main - 4- ! 34 Anc1 - 4- ! !9 Anc2 - 4- ! !9 Eval - 1 ! ! !0 Total: ! ! ! 69 Key Unsigned RPP ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !There is some evidence of research from Alice and Lacey but nothing from Keri currently. Again with pre-production while there are a few group elements, most are submitted by Lacey and a few by alice. This must be changed by the nal deadline or Keri will get level 1 for RPP (1-8 marks), Lacey Level 3, Alice Level 2. A lot better organisation and structure needed. Still very unstructured which makes it difcult to mark - overall there is greater balance between the three of you though I question if!everything uploaded is completely relevant - you should scrutinise this. Level 3+ (level 4 - if better organised)

MAIN PRODUCT ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Carefully structured and executed narrative/performance MV with a well judged and professional approach to production. However, I think it is still confusing at the end and you need to look at making this a little more obvious. We should see the moment when they bump into each other again as well as the moments after. Despite this and niggling elements like the chewing of the main singer, this is above procient and edging into level 4. Good attention to detail and creative use of camera, lighting, location and codes and conventions. A good match with the ancillaries which continue the inde-rock identity of the band. Low Level 4 - higher possibly. Clear to see the nal video - would be good to see the previous edits with reections to demonstrate your progress.! ANCILLARY 1 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Digipak is 6 panel instead of 4 and is well formated and the concept matches with the other products. However, it is unclear if this is a single, EP or album and it does feel incomplete. Technically, it is also very difcult to assess as it is so small and another way of displaying it is essential. Level 3. Still quite hard to assess so I would prefer it if you were able to make it bigger - in terms of fullling the brief you have done well. Level 4.! ANCILLARY 2: ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Magazine advert is also well constructed but still some confusion over whether this is advertising the album or single - name of album isn't mentioned - clear links with other products. High level 3. Again effective and clearly works well as part of the package. level 4 EVALUATION ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !unnished - still nothing General: the potential is clearly here for a solid level 4 across the board but it is not yet there on the blog and the points above need addressing. All marks are based on what I see - no evaluations and there is work to be done. Keri RPP - 3+ ! 15 Main - 4 ! !36 Anc1 - 4 ! !10 Anc2 - 4 ! ! 9 Eval - 1 ! ! !0 Total: ! ! ! !70 Lacey RPP - 3+ !14 Main - 4 ! 36 Anc1 - 4 ! 10 Anc2 - 4 ! !9 Eval - 1 ! ! 0 Total: ! ! ! 69 Alice RPP - 3+ !14 Main - 4 ! 37 Anc1 - 4 ! 10 Anc2 - 4 ! ! 9 Eval - 1 ! ! !0 Total: ! ! ! !70 Sound Shoot RPP ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Excellent and very comprehensive research, planning and preproduction which demonstrates a really extensive and detailed approach to your work. Very

impressive. There seem to be some links between research and planning. All of you have contributed considerably and there are a range of approaches including the intelligent use of video. You have improved the academic writing and use of media terminology though I think there is room to develop your application of theory in the research side. Level 3+/4MAIN PRODUCT ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !This is nally, really nearly there and you have created something carefully constructed with a credible narrative and conceit, suitable editing and use of camera, text and matching of lyrics with visuals. You have developed this and nally nished it - I don't think it is clear enough how to nd the nal version as you have all the drafts or all the production elements on one page - can you sort this our with separate pages for the products. Level 4ANCILLARY 1 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Digipak - which I found on the marketing page, maybe makes this clearer and consistent - has many strengths and while you have gone against linking directly with the advert, you have a good link with the MV. I don't think overall it quite works. High Level 3. really not sure where this is or which draft is your nal one...? ANCILLARY 2 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Advert - on the production page and needs to be with the other ancillary - the conceit of it is amusing and works quite well. The photoshop manipulation shows prociency rather than excellence and I think the opportunity to make a connection with the DigiPak clearer has been missed. High Level 3 - again the fourth draft doesn't look nished to me and hasn't really progressed far enough...? EVALUATION ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !2 evaluations (written) only so difcult to make a detailed assessment but on the basis of what you have there currently - level 2+ General: the potential in the nal phase of the AP is to secure level 4. There is a work to do still and the evaluation will be vital in ensuring that the top grade is achieved. There is a balance between all of you in production, research and pre-production. As mentioned before, the consistency in using media terminology and rening your academic writing. Some improvements but clearly not!complete yet so there is work to do both completing the Evaluations, organising the blog pages and ensuring that all the ancillaries are complete. Estimated grades for the nal AP - once products completed and evaluation created. Manisha RPP - 3+ ! ! 14 Main - 3+ ! !31 Anc1 - 3- ! ! !6 Anc2 - 3- ! ! !6 Eval - 2+ ! ! !9 Total: ! ! ! ! !66 Harpreet RPP - 3+ ! !15 Main - 4- ! 33 Anc1 - 3- ! !6 Anc2 - 3- ! !6 Eval - 2+ ! !9 Total: ! ! ! !69 Palwasha RPP - 41 ! ! 17 Main - 4- ! !32 Anc1 - 3- ! ! 6 Anc2 - 3- ! ! 6 Eval - 2+ ! ! 9 Total: ! ! ! ! 70