Evaluation - Question 3:
What have you learnt from your audience feedback?
Our feedback was mostly positive, we have had two ranges of feedback, one via the YouTube channel and a range of teenage feedback during our showcase. I think this feedback linked to our target audience and therefore was treated like the correct feedback which would then hopefully result in more effective and interesting video.
Positives:
“Lip-syncing was well executed” - This piece of feedback was positive and this was a conscious effort throughout our filming sessions to make sure this was achieved. I agree with this feedback point because we worked very hard with Sophie to ensure that she sang the song, and then was muted in post-production.
“The confidence in Sophie, as an actor, was shown, therefore making the performance effective” and “Performance was very believable” – This positive piece of feedback was again due to our casting. We cast Sophie due to her past experience with GCSE/AS Drama and Theatre Studies and role in the school production “We Will Rock You”. Sophie is a very confident performer, which worked very well during the production of our music video because of her ability to become a character and resulting in the audience obviously believing the character and being engaged within the video and narrative.
“Variety of shots/angles worked well” – This editing piece of feedback was again an effort throughout the editing process, and filming to make sure there were different angles, portraying Sophie in a different way to increase certain audience impression/emotion. Every time we filmed a shot we would always do it at least twice to ensure that different angles were used and also there would be enough material if any “blanks” occurred during the editing process. I think our music video has a various shots which increases the flow between shots and hopefully increase audience interest.
“The lighting in the music video was appropriate and showed the shot clearly” – This piece of feedback was a reliving point to get back because we had problems with our lighting, due to Josh’s accidently not checking white balance on 50% of the original footage. However we re-filmed this and these problems were soon sorted out. I agree with this feedback because of our effort during this issue and I hope that in our final product the lighting is perfect.
“The narrative was easy to follow” – This was an aim during our planning process was to make the narrative interesting, but easy to follow throughout the production. This clearly was achieved and although I was involved with the narrative planning I think it is fairly obvious when certain climaxes of the storyline occur and the symbolism stays evident throughout.
“Very sharp and great edits "to the beat" during fast sections + good variety of edits” – This was a decision during the editing process to standardise the editing when certain people did certain bits. In the end it was mostly one person, but at least this rule was put in to place to ensure continuity in the video. We used “fade to blacks” in certain sections of the video to represent the characters memory in the format of flashbacks. We did this hopefully to give the audience more information about the characters life therefore their understanding of the video was enhanced. I agree with this piece of feedback and due to our effort during those sections am happy that it was achieved correctly.
“Camera movement and placement was effective” – This piece of feedback proved our effort during the filming period. We would always check the camera screen to make sure Sophie was either centre of the screen or that none of Sophie, unless deliberate, was cut off the view, therefore I agree.
“Black and white worked "well" and suited the track and narrative” – This colour decision was made in the initial planning period of our music video, which we thought would be “unique” and “different”. Also this colour decision represents the characters “dull” and “neutral” life. I agree with this point because we tried it in colour and it didn’t have the same professional feel.
“Good use of symbolism "mannequin" – This piece of feedback made our decision of choosing the symbolic approach correct. I agree with this, because due to the relationship between the character and the acting of Sophie the connection was believable. Also due to the fact the mannequin was “breakable” Sophie could harm it, without the actor, if played by Tom, feeling any damage.
Constructive:
“Pre-song material - track wasn't appropriate” – This was a problem was an issue which we discussed beforehand , however we then decided that is created atmosphere and perhaps slight tension. But when we showcased it, our target audience thought that it sounded like “hoover” but couldn’t be silent, therefore needed to be sorted out. I disagree with this point, because if you listen really carefully you can hear a “faint” argument which reinforces the cohesion with the moving image. I think that we could have made slower, acoustic, instrumental version at the start to set the genre of the song, however this was impossible due to the track or piano music available.
"Sophie smiles at the end of the "window scene" - This piece of feedback we all realised as we watched it on YouTube before we showed other people. This was due to the fact we hadn’t thoroughly checked the final product in Adobe Premier Pro before exporting it. We cropped this shot in the commencing weeks so that the shot after was slightly longer. This was quite an easy mistake to rectify and I agree completely with what was said about it. For our final edit we learnt to check the version before exporting, which in the long run saved time in the exportation and uploading on YouTube.
"Fuzzy" bit at the start where the screen goes shaky - this problem happened during the capturing process” – This fault was due to the camera and not the editing. Whilst uploading our clips a “fuzzy line” was already on the clip before we inserted it in to Adobe Premier. We didn’t want to erase this shot from the music video because the zoom from the window, either side of the “fuzzy line”, was a perfect zoom. We tried editing effects over the top of the section in post-production however these effects just enhanced and highlighted it even more. Therefore we have tried all we can to try and hide it, but we have decided to keep it in for the final edit because unless you look for it, it isn’t too obvious. To overcome this problem we should have re-filmed this shot, if we would have had more time.
“Photo album - could be more specific and show who is in them. Ambiguity works well though” – this piece of feedback I didn’t agree with. The photo album was to give the impression that she was reminiscing on past memories, however people said that would it be clearer if there were a few shots of the pages in the album showing the people in the photos. I think that ambiguity is an important factor here because due to the blunt video, the audience know how the separate characters are feeling. But we wanted the photos to be like the argument, ambiguous. This is due to the fact that audience members could feel more engaged if they are involved in the plot line and the character’s past by thinking for themselves and wondering at certain points in the video about the narrative.
Overall these feedback points were mostly positive which we were really proud of. The majority of the constructive points were easily achieved and corrected which was helpful, however the “fuzzy line” wasn’t sorted out. This mistake isn’t enhanced by anything and a pure mistake of the camera upload.
No comments:
Post a Comment