evaluation question 3 (3)

Download Evaluation question 3 (3)

Post on 29-Nov-2014

76 views

Category:

Education

0 download

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

  • 1. Evaluation Question 3 Group 8 Nathan Mckerlie, Jacques Thornton, Tom Hanham
  • 2. What did we learn from testing our concept before the pitch? Our first piece of audience research was a questionnaire sent out via social medias, such as Facebook. It was an entirely quantitative based study, with all questions being closed. This allowed us to create tables and find percentages which meant we could see as a group which concepts where liked or disliked by our target audience.
  • 3. After looking at the data we had collected, it helped us finalise and change several things. This included, our protagonist as we were undecided if we should use Jacques little brother Noah, aged 9. As well as this we decided to add the mother into the London section, as originally we had decided Noah would be more independent and be in the dream world on his own. However in hindsight it definitely fits the narrative more to have the relationship between mother and son on-going.
  • 4. How did it influence our pitch? Overall this meant we changed our final pitch as we felt that the opinions of our respondents would be the right ones, as the sample was made up of our target audience aged between 13-19.
  • 5. How effective was the methodology? Our method was very effective as it was representative, this is because it was a picked out sample which meant the demographic was entirely our target audience being teenagers. Furthermore it is very reliable, as it can be easily be compared with other results. As well as this it could be re-done and sent out to the same sample again, seeing if their opinions had changed over time.
  • 6. Finally it was valid as there was no element of bias in the question, meaning we got accurate results. If there were elements of bias our concept would of changed, and may have been given the red light when we pitched it.
  • 7. How did we test our edit through the Production Process? We tested our edit through the production process through the use of our rough cut. We had a deadline approximately 2 weeks before our final deadline in which we had to show the bulk of our footage to a selected audience who gave us in depth detail about the particular shots they liked and the ones that they believed we could re shoot and change to make our production better.
  • 8. How did we test our print texts through the Production Process? Again prior to the end deadline we gave ourselves a deadline where we were in the position of basically having fully completed print texts. This allowed us to receive feedback from teachers and peers to see if they liked/disliked anything that was in our print work.
  • 9. Did this help us to improve our work? Edit: For the edit we changed the opening shot and adjusted the speed of the first few shots to our production as it was widely suggested that our opening shot did not have enough impact and then the cutting rate did not match the speed of the track. Print Text: It was suggested that at this point we change the photograph on one of the adverts as you could not see the boys face, we decided it would be better if the photo showed his emotion.
  • 10. Did objective viewings help to give our work perspective? Objective viewings from other media students and teachers helped us to understand what we really need to change and gave us a strong perspective of what was good and what needed to be improved; having these viewings helped the improvement of our production drastically.
  • 11. What were the results of testing our final product to an audience? Finally we carried out a survey via Survey Monkey on our final music video and print work. We selected 10 closed questions to get a set of quantitative results, assuring all questions are not leading and gave us feedback that was constructive. The purpose was to evaluate how successful our video and print work was in terms of what our target audience expect and value from a music video. We sent this out through Web 2.0 methods and social media website Facebook, to a selected target audience.
  • 12. Was it successful? We received 42 responses to our survey. Our results show that almost everyone liked our narrative to the music video and thought it was suitable for the song we chose. Emotions like Trust, Love, Anger, Fear, Security, Sympathetic and Empathy were used to describe feelings felt from the narrative; this shows that our video was successful in portraying meaning across to our target audience. Furthermore the majority of the people that took our survey thought that our video was not typical of a conventional pop music video, which we believed was key to our production as we didnt want to sell the artist image, we wanted to present the powerful narrative successfully.
  • 13. 75% of people that took the survey also said that after watching the music video it would influence them to buy the single, therefore showing our video creates repeatability as most people would like to listen to the song again. Our results show that we had a degree of success with our quantitative questions.
  • 14. How valid were our results? Our results were very valid because we used two separate methods of obtaining results one qualitative and one quantitative. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv jyIl7JZlg
  • 15. How was your video meant to be consumed? There is no particular way our video is meant to be consumed. It is suitable for both ambient and focused viewing. It is suitable for ambient viewing as the narrative of the video is very clear and simple to understand and therefore the audience can understand and feel the positive energy that is given off from the video when watched. Furthermore the video is full of narrative fuzz and therefore each individual shot is not vital to the narrative as it only shows glimpses of the important parts, so the audience dont have to pay close attention to understand what is happening in the video.
  • 16. Was it an ambient or focused viewing? However this can also work the other way making the audience wanting to be more focused while watching the video, this is because of our fast cutting rate and recognisable locations. The audience can relate to the story and locations we film in and therefore our video can make for repeatable viewing as they want to go back and watch a particular shot or clip they think they may have missed or want to watch again.