Tuesday, 26 April 2011
Friday, 8 April 2011
Tuesday, 5 April 2011
Evaluation- Question 3
What have you learned from your audience feedback?
The feedback I received in question 2 shows that the combination of my main product and my ancillary texts did work well together. The audience did feel intrigued by my poster, due to the combination of the tagline and the photo of Matthew and they also felt that once they had been prompted to watch the film due to the poster that any questions they had before watching the film were answered. Therefore, my film gave people any in depth insight into what living with a sibling with autism is really like, which was my main aim.
The audience feedback I received earlier in on in my project from my classmates, I learnt that it was important for the introduction of my short film to set the tone of my piece and for it to try and hint at the content of the film, before revealing it more explicitly (in the opening titles.) My classmates also said that my narration did not leave them with any unanswered questions, reiterating the point that my film was clear and gave an in depth account of my family's life, which satisfied my audience's curiosity. In my short film, I had just recorded a narration rather than shown use video diary style interviews to the camera which would have allowed the audience to see my facial expressions whilst I was talking. Before showing my classmates my short film, I was worried that it would seem less personal and my feelings would not be portrayed as well. However, my classmates felt that this was not the case and on reflection I think it fitted in with the conventions of an expository documentary more closely. Therefore I learnt that the narration was a powerful tool and that I could create the same meaning and set the same sort of tone just by using my voice. I also learnt that it was important to juxtaposition my narration with appropriate clips of Matthew, so that the audience were not too distracted by what was happening on screen and were focusing mainly on the content of my narration.
The feedback I received in question 2 shows that the combination of my main product and my ancillary texts did work well together. The audience did feel intrigued by my poster, due to the combination of the tagline and the photo of Matthew and they also felt that once they had been prompted to watch the film due to the poster that any questions they had before watching the film were answered. Therefore, my film gave people any in depth insight into what living with a sibling with autism is really like, which was my main aim.
The audience feedback I received earlier in on in my project from my classmates, I learnt that it was important for the introduction of my short film to set the tone of my piece and for it to try and hint at the content of the film, before revealing it more explicitly (in the opening titles.) My classmates also said that my narration did not leave them with any unanswered questions, reiterating the point that my film was clear and gave an in depth account of my family's life, which satisfied my audience's curiosity. In my short film, I had just recorded a narration rather than shown use video diary style interviews to the camera which would have allowed the audience to see my facial expressions whilst I was talking. Before showing my classmates my short film, I was worried that it would seem less personal and my feelings would not be portrayed as well. However, my classmates felt that this was not the case and on reflection I think it fitted in with the conventions of an expository documentary more closely. Therefore I learnt that the narration was a powerful tool and that I could create the same meaning and set the same sort of tone just by using my voice. I also learnt that it was important to juxtaposition my narration with appropriate clips of Matthew, so that the audience were not too distracted by what was happening on screen and were focusing mainly on the content of my narration.
Monday, 4 April 2011
Evaluation- Question 2
How effective is the combination of your main product and ancillary texts?
Evaluation Question 2
View more presentations from itsamy93
Friday, 1 April 2011
Evaluation: Question 1
In what ways does your media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real media products?
My documentary was an example of an expository documentary, which aim to inform the audience about a place, event or in my case a person with which they are not familiar. Expository documentaries often form an argument and are not objective. My documentary fits in with all these conventions; it aims to inform my audience about living with a sibling with autism and I make my personal opinion clear at the end. Some of the short films I watched in my research, such as 'Roz & Joshua' were examples of expository documentary. The techniques I used as well, such as a voiceover narration which described the images and directly addressed the audience, fitted in with these conventions.
My documentary was an example of an expository documentary, which aim to inform the audience about a place, event or in my case a person with which they are not familiar. Expository documentaries often form an argument and are not objective. My documentary fits in with all these conventions; it aims to inform my audience about living with a sibling with autism and I make my personal opinion clear at the end. Some of the short films I watched in my research, such as 'Roz & Joshua' were examples of expository documentary. The techniques I used as well, such as a voiceover narration which described the images and directly addressed the audience, fitted in with these conventions.
Film Poster on Prezi
Sunday, 30 January 2011
Production: Film Poster
After speaking to my media teacher about my poster and reflecting on my choices I decided to make some changes. My teacher suggested that the original photo I had used of Matthew made him look too exposed and vulnerable and may not have been used in a real film poster as his family may not have been happy with that image being released. When I thought about it I agreed; if I really was releasing this film, my parent probably wouldn't have been happy with my choice of image!
Instead, I chose to use a still from the beginning of my short film of Matthew in the car. I liked this image because the consumer could still see Matthew clearly and identify him as the subject of the film, but there was a shadow falling across his face, meaning that he appeared less exposed. I also thought that the fact you could see the outside world through the window fitted in perfectly with my tagline; 'see the world through his eyes.' The fact Matthew's face was cast in a shadow, in contrast to the bright light that can be seen out of the window conveyed the idea that he is isolated in his own world well. It also represents the idea that there is still some mystery surrounding autism as a condition and that hopefully my film will shed some light on the subject. Below is the new version of my poster.
Friday, 21 January 2011
Production- Third version of my short film
This is the third (and hopefully final!) version of my short film, with my re recorded narration.
Wednesday, 19 January 2011
Production- Re-recording my narration
During the week I have shown my short film to my classmates and to my media teacher and one piece of feedback that I frequently got was that the narration was too quiet. My media teacher suggested that I therefore re record it, using a dictaphone, which would give me much better quality and eliminate any background noise. I record my narration for the second time this evening and will put the new version on to my short film tomorrow. My teacher also suggested that I added in an extra title at the beginning of the film stating 'Matthew is my brother' as she did not feel that the fact he was my sibling was made clear enough at the beginning of the film.
Monday, 17 January 2011
Evaluation: Second version of my short film
This is the second version of my short film, after I had made the changes suggested to me by my audience feedback group.
Wednesday, 12 January 2011
Evaluation- My Short Film with comments
This is the first draft of my short film with the comments I received in my audience feedback put over the top of it using the YouTube 'annotations' tool.
Monday, 10 January 2011
Evaluation- Audience Feedback
This is two of my classmates Melania and Ceiridwen giving their opinions on my short film.
I will take their advice and suggestions into consideration, as I think they had some good ideas about how to improve my short film.
I will take their advice and suggestions into consideration, as I think they had some good ideas about how to improve my short film.
Thursday, 6 January 2011
Evaluation: Audience Feedback questions
In preparation for the audience feedback lesson I prepared some questions that I wanted my classmates to answer about my short film;
1) Do you think the juxtapostioning of the clips of Matthew and the non diegetic sound of his Leap Pad at the beginning of the film works well?
2) Is the content of my narration clear and interesting? Does it leave you with any unanswered questions?
3) Instead of recording myself talking to the camera as originally planned, I decided to record a narration instead. Do you think some 'video diary' type clips would have been better? Do my emotions and feelings still come across?
4) Did you find the mixture of diegetic sound and narration confusing?
5) Do you think the clips I used of Matthew were varied and interesting? Does it detract your attention from the narration?
6) Do you think the content was effective? Does it fit in with the conventions of short documentaries?
7) Do you have any other suggestions?
1) Do you think the juxtapostioning of the clips of Matthew and the non diegetic sound of his Leap Pad at the beginning of the film works well?
2) Is the content of my narration clear and interesting? Does it leave you with any unanswered questions?
3) Instead of recording myself talking to the camera as originally planned, I decided to record a narration instead. Do you think some 'video diary' type clips would have been better? Do my emotions and feelings still come across?
4) Did you find the mixture of diegetic sound and narration confusing?
5) Do you think the clips I used of Matthew were varied and interesting? Does it detract your attention from the narration?
6) Do you think the content was effective? Does it fit in with the conventions of short documentaries?
7) Do you have any other suggestions?
Tuesday, 4 January 2011
Production- First Version of my short film
This is the final version of my short film which I will show my classmates so that they can give feedback. Overall I am happy with how it has turned out, but I will be interested to know what others think of it and what suggestions they have for how I could improve it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)