Skills

Film Post-Production

10 weeks · 0 milestones

Completed edited film sequence with colour grade and sound mix delivered to broadcast or festival standard. Triad: technical execution artifact (finished cut — minimum 2 minutes — with colour grade applied and sound mixed: dialogue clearly audible and balanced, music bed at appropriate level for dialogue, sound effects present where relevant, and overall mix appropriate for the intended output medium — cinema, web, or broadcast), documentation/critique artifact (post-production decisions log: edit structure rationale — what was cut, what was kept, and the pacing decisions; colour grade intent with reference images — what look is being achieved and why; sound design choices and their narrative or emotional purpose), concept/ideation artifact (post-production brief: the tonal, emotional, and pacing objectives the post-production process was designed to achieve — the document that guided all editorial decisions). Proof Accessibility Rule applies: DaVinci Resolve free tier provides professional-grade editing, colour grading, and audio mixing in one application — no paid software required for this outcome. Studio critique: professional film editor, colourist, or film school tutor reviews the finished cut and post-production decisions. Proof: post-production brief, finished cut (video link), post-production decisions log, critique notes. Verifier: professional film editor or colourist, or film school tutor.

Part of: Creative & Design · Proves for: UG

Milestone map

3 milestones

Assemble rough cut and identify structural problems

1–2 weeks (2–3 hrs/day)

Assemble a rough cut of your film using your circled takes and dailies notes as a guide. The rough cut should be complete story-to-end: every scene present, in order, even if timing is rough. Produce a structural notes document (minimum half page) identifying the three most significant problems in the rough cut.

Proof required

Submit: (1) a screen recording or export of your rough cut (unlisted YouTube link or shared video file), (2) structural notes document identifying three specific problems.

What gets checked

Rough cut is complete — all scenes present, no black gaps or placeholder titles
Structural notes identify three specific problems with time codes — not vague observations
Problems are structural (scene order, pacing, story clarity) not just technical (shaky shot, bad audio)

Common mistakes

Rough cut skips difficult scenes because coverage is weak — masking a coverage problem until fine cut
Structural notes focus on shot quality rather than story problems
Rough cut is abandoned after one attempt — structural problems require multiple rough cut iterations

Resources

Masteryfor the dedicated

What a verifier looks for

Check rough cut is complete (all scenes present) — a partial rough cut is not a rough cut
Verify structural notes identify three specific problems with time codes — vague observations don't demonstrate editorial thinking
Ask student: what is the biggest structural problem in your rough cut? If they say 'not much', they haven't diagnosed it seriously

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Produce fine cut with sound design and colour grade

2–3 weeks (2–3 hrs/day)

Address the structural problems identified in your rough cut notes to produce a fine cut. Layer your sound design (dialogue clean-up, sound effects, music) and apply a colour grade to every scene. The fine cut must be picture locked before sound mix is finalised.

Proof required

Submit your fine cut as an exported file or unlisted YouTube link (minimum 720p) with a brief production note (minimum half page) documenting: structural changes made from rough cut, sound design decisions, and colour grade approach.

What gets checked

All three structural problems identified in rough cut are addressed — at minimum with documented reasoning if not solved
Sound design is present in all scenes — no scenes with only location audio
Colour grade is consistent across scenes — not random per-shot correction

Common mistakes

Structural problems from rough cut not addressed — the same problem appears in the fine cut
Sound design started before picture is locked — sound edit changes after the picture is relocked
Colour grade corrects individual shots rather than establishing a grade for each scene

Powstik Guide

A fine cut with sound design and a colour grade.

Steps

Lock the edit before grading.
Build sound in layers: dialogue, effects, music.
Grade for consistency between shots.
Export at 720p or higher.
Write a short production note.

Template

Cut length:        Export resolution:
Sound layers:
Grade approach:
Production note:

What gets sent back

Below 720p.
No sound design.
Ungraded footage.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

Masteryfor the dedicated

What a verifier looks for

Verify all three rough cut structural problems are addressed — if not, the fine cut is a rough cut renamed
Check sound design is present throughout — not just under title cards
Ask student to describe their colour grade approach for one scene — inability to describe a grade decision indicates the grade was corrective rather than expressive

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Submit to director review and deliver final master

1 week

Submit your fine cut to your director, tutor, or an experienced film professional for a final review. Implement final notes, produce your deliverable master (minimum 1080p, correct aspect ratio), and submit a delivery note documenting the technical specifications of your master and the final changes made after review.

Proof required

Submit: (1) final master file link or export (minimum 1080p), (2) delivery note (technical specifications: resolution, frame rate, audio channels, codec; plus final changes made after director review).

What gets checked

Master is minimum 1080p at correct aspect ratio — not exported at reduced resolution
Delivery note names the specific technical specifications, not just 'HD'
Final changes from director review are documented — not just 'made changes'

Common mistakes

Director review skipped because 'it's finished' — final notes often identify problems the editor is too close to see
Delivery note uses generic descriptions — 'HD, 24fps' without codec and audio channel specifications
Master file is not properly backed up — post-production work lost

Powstik Guide

A final master after director review, with a delivery note.

Steps

Screen the fine cut for final notes.
Make each change and log it.
Export at 1080p or higher.
Write the delivery specs.

Template

Reviewer:        Date:
| Note | Done? |
|------|-------|
Master: resolution ___ frame rate ___ codec ___ audio ___
Link:

What gets sent back

Under 1080p.
No delivery note.
Notes not addressed.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

What a verifier looks for

Check delivery note includes specific technical specifications (resolution, frame rate, audio channels, codec)
Verify master is minimum 1080p — lower resolution indicates export settings were not checked
Ask student: what were the final changes made after director review? If they can't name specific changes, the review was not productive

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Part of

Film Production →

Related outcomes

Milestone map

3 milestones

Assemble rough cut and identify structural problems

1–2 weeks (2–3 hrs/day)

Proof required

Submit: (1) a screen recording or export of your rough cut (unlisted YouTube link or shared video file), (2) structural notes document identifying three specific problems.

What gets checked

Rough cut is complete — all scenes present, no black gaps or placeholder titles
Structural notes identify three specific problems with time codes — not vague observations
Problems are structural (scene order, pacing, story clarity) not just technical (shaky shot, bad audio)

Common mistakes

Rough cut skips difficult scenes because coverage is weak — masking a coverage problem until fine cut
Structural notes focus on shot quality rather than story problems
Rough cut is abandoned after one attempt — structural problems require multiple rough cut iterations

Resources

Masteryfor the dedicated

What a verifier looks for

Check rough cut is complete (all scenes present) — a partial rough cut is not a rough cut
Verify structural notes identify three specific problems with time codes — vague observations don't demonstrate editorial thinking
Ask student: what is the biggest structural problem in your rough cut? If they say 'not much', they haven't diagnosed it seriously

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Produce fine cut with sound design and colour grade

2–3 weeks (2–3 hrs/day)

Proof required

What gets checked

All three structural problems identified in rough cut are addressed — at minimum with documented reasoning if not solved
Sound design is present in all scenes — no scenes with only location audio
Colour grade is consistent across scenes — not random per-shot correction

Common mistakes

Structural problems from rough cut not addressed — the same problem appears in the fine cut
Sound design started before picture is locked — sound edit changes after the picture is relocked
Colour grade corrects individual shots rather than establishing a grade for each scene

Powstik Guide

A fine cut with sound design and a colour grade.

Steps

Lock the edit before grading.
Build sound in layers: dialogue, effects, music.
Grade for consistency between shots.
Export at 720p or higher.
Write a short production note.

Template

Cut length:        Export resolution:
Sound layers:
Grade approach:
Production note:

What gets sent back

Below 720p.
No sound design.
Ungraded footage.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

Masteryfor the dedicated

What a verifier looks for

Verify all three rough cut structural problems are addressed — if not, the fine cut is a rough cut renamed
Check sound design is present throughout — not just under title cards
Ask student to describe their colour grade approach for one scene — inability to describe a grade decision indicates the grade was corrective rather than expressive

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Submit to director review and deliver final master

1 week

Proof required

What gets checked

Master is minimum 1080p at correct aspect ratio — not exported at reduced resolution
Delivery note names the specific technical specifications, not just 'HD'
Final changes from director review are documented — not just 'made changes'

Common mistakes

Director review skipped because 'it's finished' — final notes often identify problems the editor is too close to see
Delivery note uses generic descriptions — 'HD, 24fps' without codec and audio channel specifications
Master file is not properly backed up — post-production work lost

Powstik Guide

A final master after director review, with a delivery note.

Steps

Screen the fine cut for final notes.
Make each change and log it.
Export at 1080p or higher.
Write the delivery specs.

Template

Reviewer:        Date:
| Note | Done? |
|------|-------|
Master: resolution ___ frame rate ___ codec ___ audio ___
Link:

What gets sent back

Under 1080p.
No delivery note.
Notes not addressed.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

What a verifier looks for

Check delivery note includes specific technical specifications (resolution, frame rate, audio channels, codec)
Verify master is minimum 1080p — lower resolution indicates export settings were not checked
Ask student: what were the final changes made after director review? If they can't name specific changes, the review was not productive

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.