In order of preference for some changes

Lighting--not well lit--what king of lighting did you use?

Background--be careful with clutter. Clutter can be artistic or distracting. This clutter is distracting and creates the wrong atmosphere.

Color grading--too muddy for my taste, part of that is the lighting.

Some of the camera angles don't seem ideal for the scenes, framing is something I always need to work on.

Sound--didn't like the sound, it distracted me from the scene.

Makeup--not even, use nonreflective makeup

Don't worry too much about the comments, just take what you can use and throw the rest on the scrap heap of history.

For what it's worth I'd say lighting aside your v first shot has huge head room, which I don't personally like, to go wide without it you could have had the camera lower, then the actress is shifting her eyes either side of the camera, then seemed to me to look straight down the lens - oops - then you jump the line between set ups, he walks out left to right, then comes in right to left, which doesn't always work. In the next scene the OTS shots have too much of the shoulder/head we're looking over and the eyelines don't match, we're looking down on the other guy and level on investigator, then you stay too long on the investigator maybe to avoid going back to the other shot? The look to her on the creak is confusing cos they then look the other way to the observer - I hadn't noticed her in the establishing shot so that was two shocks for me! - presumably there was some action where she pointed in the other direction that we didn't see maybe? Don't know if you storyboarded first but it always works a treat for me.

@belfryman I went back and watched the footage. I totally see what you mean about the eye line. The right to left. Left to right scene I was more or less okay with.

I stayed too long on the investigator bc all the footage from the other angle was not useable. I did what I could in post, but I ended up having to use some scratch footage to cut away the one time I did.

I was the camera op for the first scene only. From creepy look - to kiss - to choke - to credits.

The walk to the kitchen was shot at a later time than the kitchen confrontation.

@producer Now no longer have the GH2. Can't get in contact with the buyer to see the origin. I do have a g6, made in China. I know apples to oranges. What was the significance of the camera's manufacturing location?

I suggest with this much fan base and support you've built up to find a better.camera.

Think you missed point. I went to you're YouTube page and saw all the views and great comments towards your project it's amazing how much interest you've generated and wish I could do that!! Taking that into consideration, I would try and shoot with a proven camera that has a decent amount of room in post to play with the image. That's all. There's so much lost in translation on the internet :)

Is there ever a point where you just decide to shirk the conventional and just do things your way; the way you want?

In my media lecturing experience, I'd class 80% of students in that category. I can't really remember anyone (amongst those, who continued to teflon their way out of learning basic skills) go on to become geniuses. However, there are cinematographers who get the idea really fast and are soon using technique at its limits.

For example, once in a while our planet gets an Orson Welles:

I didn’t know what you couldn’t do. I didn’t deliberately set out to invent anything. It just seemed to me, why not? And there is a great gift that ignorance has to bring to anything. That was the gift I brought to Kane, ignorance.

from Openculture.com

Welles' first, properly directed film was made after the DP noticed he didn't know a thing about films - and took him aside for an early lunch and a good talking-to. Welles returned to the set, having listened intently, as a film director. (Welles' words, in an audience Q and A session broadcast on French TV, circa 1982).

When I say shirk the conventional I don't mean discard fundamentals. I mean to strip them down to their core, hack away the inessentials to create something more pure. Think Nirvana versus the 80's hair bands. In a time when guitarists were trying to play faster and more complex solos, Curt Cobain took his basic guitar riffs and strained vocals to the masses; ushering a new era of popular music.

Now, he still used he same formula as those before him, verse chorus verse. It was how he used his limited tool set within the framework of that structure.

I truly long to create something powerful and compelling, but perhaps without all of the glossy finish. My issue is now learning the skills needed to recognize the frame upon which I wish to build.

I think even Picasso learned to paint with a certain amount of realism before going his own way.

It's hard to know what you want to say if you can't really speak the language.