Evaluation

I have answered the first evaluation question on Prezi. http://prezi.com/ddffphu2lv4m/evaluation/

How Effective Is the Combination Of Your Main Product and Ancillary Texts?

I created a two-page spread for a magazine as well as a poster for my documentary. The style of the magazine article was fairly professional and made use of a sophisticated colour scheme. I incorporated images relating to the topic which my documentary covered, and included an interview with the director as well as a film review.

The poster I created used a rough, graffiti-esque font for the title which fitted in with the theme of urban exploration. The poster appears well-designed, however it's fairly simple and does not contain too much information. I kept the poster in black and white to create a noir atmosphere whilst still maintaining the image of urban exploration, which hopefully attracts my target demographic of a younger generation.

What Have You Learned From Your Audience Feedback?

Audience feedback plays a crucial role in analysing the success of a project, so it was important for me to ask a wide range of people what they thought of my documentary, magazine article and poster. I showed my documentary and print products to people of varying age, gender, social class etc., (including my target audience of 16-24 year olds with college backgrounds) and received positive feedback as well as constructive criticism.

I decided that a questionnaire was too much of a closed methodology for receiving feedback, I felt that it would be more efficient and successful if I were to simply have a conversation with them and take notes on their thoughts.

As I had hypothesised, the older generations had more difficulty in grasping the concept of urban exploration, and it was primarily 16-24 year old males who were interested. I will now quote some of the comments which were made and analyse my findings.

I will quote some of the transcripts from the conversations I had with the members of my target audience which were more constructive, particularly the ones mentioning different media elements.

“The topic was interesting, I’ve never heard of urban exploration before now and the footage in the actual buildings drew me in.” Comments such as this were common throughout the feedback process, the target audience all mentioned that the topic of the documentary was new to them, and that it succeeded in keeping them interested through the use of exploration footage.

“The camerawork was pretty shaky, but it worked well.”, “During the actual exploring, the camera shots fitted in with the style of the documentary” and “There was a ride range of shots throughout the whole thing” are three quotes which pinpointed on the camerawork in the documentary. From these quotes I can see that the live, edgy style of the documentary came across to the viewers in a positive manner, and some viewers enjoyed the wide range of shots i.e. establishing shots, close up. One viewer also mentioned that the “interview [with “Oxygen Thief”] was framed well”, confirming that we made the right decision with regards to shot length.

“The music fitted in with the documentary” and “The voiceovers were informative” are two positive comments I received about the sound in the documentary. However, others said that “The voiceovers could have been clearer” and “The music could have been in more shots”. From these two comments I can see that some viewers found the voiceovers hard to understand, and some felt that the music could have played in the background of more shots than it did. I’m pleased that the viewers mentioned that the non-diegetic music fitted in well, however if I were to make it again, I’d have to ensure the voiceovers are clear and have good sound quality.

There were also some comments made about the mise en scéne, such as “The lighting was good throughout, it reflected the topic well”, “The main person presented the documentary well” and “The places they explored were so interesting”. These three quotes told me that the lighting quality was effective, the acting was believable, and the chosen locations were interesting enough to hold the attention of the viewer. One viewer commented that “it was hard to see when they were in the air vents”; it was difficult to provide any proper lighting during this scene, however there was only one person who mentioned this.

“I liked how there were lots of quick cuts, it kept the pace of the documentary up” and “The scene transitions worked well to keep the film flowing” were two comments I received about the editing of the documentary. These quotes let me know that the jumpy style I incorporated to speed the documentary up was effective, and that the fade ins/outs flowed well. One other viewer said that he “likes the way the name fades in the during the interview [with “Oxygen Thief”]”, which confirmed that the editing during this interview was subtle, as intended.

I will now quote some miscellaneous quotes that were made about the documentary:

“It kept my attention throughout, there was never any bits where I got bored.”

“The interview should have been with someone different.”

“I would have liked to see more places that they explore.”

“There should have been more exploring.”

“I really liked this documentary, it’s the first I’ve seen about urban exploring.”

Overall, the feedback I received for the film was mostly positive, and I was happy that so many people were interested in it.

I also received feedback for the magazine article which I produced. Here are some of the comments made about the article:

“The article looks really well put together, it looks pretty professional.”

“It looks like it would be from a proper film review magazine.”

“The colour scheme looks really good.”

These were some of the positive comments I received, and although I was happy with the positive nature of the comments, it’s the negative ones you can learn more from, such as:

“The magazine article appeared to be oddly highbrow considering the topic of the documentary” – This viewer thought that the magazine article seemed quite serious through the use of its content and colours, and didn’t match with the theme of urban exploring. This was an extremely good point, however I feel that the relaxed style of the interview with the director and the use of large images acted as a counterbalance to his points.

A few others mentioned that “the picture of the writer in the top right corner seemed a bit jagged round the edges”, or made comments to that effect. If I were to do it again, I’d have to ensure that I do a neater job with regards to cropping the edges of the image, however it is not hugely noticeable and does not affect the overall quality of the article.

How Did You Use Media Technologies In the Construction, Research, Planning and Evaluation Stages?

I have used various new media technologies during the various stages of this project.

Planning and Research

I have used “Blogger.com” to act as a diary for this project, where I created posts containing the research I had done into different media products. I found the website to be fairly efficient at storing posts which can contain text, images and videos.

YouTube played a big part in acting as a service through which I could view and analyse music videos, documentaries and short films. I used a popular social news website “reddit.com” to decide which media products to analyse. On this website I posted a thread asking people about their favourite music videos etc., and analysed the three highest rated videos.

Construction

During the construction phase, I used a Nikon D3100 and tripod to film. This camera was excellent for filming as it provided a good sound quality as well as long battery life and video quality. Copying the files over onto a computer was also easy as it was all stored on an SD card. I ensured that I made good use of various camera functions throughout the recording process, especially with regards to focusing.

I used Final Cut Pro on an Apple iMac to edit the documentary. I thought the software provided me with a lot of options, and I was able to edit the sound as well as the video clips. I trimmed and cropped clips, applied shot transitions and fades, and applied certain colour filters for when certain shots seemed off-colour. I was also able to add in a song to play quietly in the background of certain shots.

I used Adobe Photoshop CS4 to create my two-page spread magazine article and poster. As I have had previous experience with this software, I was able to make good use of all the functions available to me. I applied subtle gradients to spice up the colour scheme, and used the lasso tool to crop certain images.

Role Allocation

As Jamal and I were working together to create this film, we felt it necessary to divide the tasks between us equally.

Jamal recorded most of the shots for the film (with the exception of the interview with Sam), as well as completing the drawings for the storyboard.

I was the presenter in the film, and was in charge of editing the documentary which also included music. I also completed the write-up for the storyboard.

Initial Shot List

Below you can see a very roughly put together shot list, along with a transcript.

Shot 1 - Quote "exploration

Shot 2 - Montage of buildings

Shot 3 - Introduction - Urbex is.... Speech Shot > Voiceover

Shot 4 - Medium (/long) shot of protagonist on laptop

Shot 5 - Cut to information on pad close up

Shot 6 - 12 - Quick cuts of travelling via train

Shot 13 - E.S of SH

Shot 14 - HH continuous shot > walk over to Sam

Shot 15 - Focus on brick cracks Steady out of focus as we walk past

Shot 16 - HH Sam laughing as person walks past

Shot 17 - Quick cuts climbing in. Sam > Alex > Jack

Shot 18 - Jack on triangle "Come look at this" Me helping Jack over, Sam checking road

Shot 19 - Brought into focus, pans round gear, ends on me talking about hi vis jacket

"Cut out roof"

Shot 20 - Camera - steady - bottom/top of stairs

Sam me, walk up, climb up vents long shot Sam pulling me up

Shot 21 & 22 - Camera overlooking ledge & on ground running inside

Shot 23 - Sam walk past

Shot 24 - Jack's feet, HH running

Tilt up, cut > Sam looking over edge

Shot 25 - Sam jump off ladder, I walk down a few rungs

Shot 26 - In town ramp, walk past police

Shot 27 - Formal interview with Sam

Shot 28 - Interview with expert

CCTV archived footage

29 Quick Cuts - Climbing over gate, dropping down, walk towards wall

Shot 30 - Sam explains as we walk how to climb

Shot 31 - Steady climbing

Shot 32 - Tilt, climbing in

Shot 33 - Changing rooms, out onto swimming pool.

As you can see, this was a very rough plan which was later developed into a full storyboard, viewable in the next post.

Conventions of Documentaries

Bill Nichols’ books Introduction to Documentary and Representing Reality claim that there are six different types of documentary. These are – poetic, expository, observational, participatory, reflexive, and performative. There are also sub-genres of documentary, which are categorised by either the topic they revolve around such as nature, history, science, or the style in which they are created, such as investigative, fly-on-the-wall and objective.

One thing which each subset of documentaries has in common is their codes and conventions; whether that documentary challenges them or not is a different issue. Conventions of documentaries include (but are not limited to) –

Voiceovers – Where a narrator (such as David Attenborough from Planet Earth) discusses the topic of the documentary, allowing video clips to simultaneously play in the background. This is done to inform the viewer, or to perhaps sway their thoughts on an issue.

Archived Footage – This is where the creators of the documentary implement already-existing footage to aid authenticity and to perhaps add further information which they were unable to obtain themselves.

Vox Populi – Latin for “voice of the people”. This is where people on the street are asked a question regarding the topic of the documentary, possibly to show what the thoughts of the masses are, or to act as a stepping-stone to which the presenter/narrator can elaborate upon.

Interviews With Experts – These are usually included after a view has been expressed through the documentary, to back up a point already made. They are also included to reassure the viewer that what they’re being informed of is authentic.

Natural Sound and Lighting – Documentaries will often choose not to alter the natural sound and lighting offered by a scene or location, as this could affect the “realism” they are trying to portray.

Facts and Figures – Statistics are typically used to enforce a point that the documentary is making (such as in Inside Job), however these figures should not always be trusted. If the documentary is critical of an issue/topic then figures will be incorporated (such as in Supersize Me, to make McDonalds appear worse than it is) but not justified.

Camerawork – This is usually affected by the style and nature of the documentary, for instance handheld shots are more common in documentaries about world events. As for interviews, the camera is typically positioned at a medium length, with the interviewee’s eyeline 1/3^rd of the way down the screen.

Initial Audience Research

Methodology

Audience research is a crucial element involved in a media project, and is undertaken to establish who the audience of that project piece (i.e. a music video, short film or documentary) is. There are many audience research methodologies, and each can be categorised as either qualitative or quantitative.

Qualitative criteria cannot be measured; the quality of each criterion is subjective and can be rated differently dependent upon each observer's personal opinion. Qualitative research methods can come in many forms, including:

- Desk research, which involves textually analysing pieces which already exist.

- Open questions asked on a questionnaire, be it digital or paper.

- Interviews, either group or one-to-one.

- Focus groups, where a group of people discuss sample pieces.

- Observation.

Quantitative criteria, as opposed to qualitative criteria, are objective and can be measured. These methods involve:

- Closed questions on either a digital or paper questionnaire.

- Desk research, with regards to analysing figures.

Chosen Method of Audience Research and Justification

As I already delved extensively into the textual analysis of each format (short film, documentary and music video), and I needed to address a large group, I chose to create two questionnaires. The initial questionnaire will identify who the people completing the survey are, and their views on documentaries. The second will introduce the idea of urban exploration, and their opinions on that.

One of the main advantages to questionnaires is that the respondents have more time to think, and can complete them in their own time. It also allows a large, wide audience to be reached so that many people’s opinions are identified. However, I had to ensure that the questions I asked were all clear and easy to understand, as well as ensuring that I minimise the amount of open-ended questions, as these tend to be skipped.

What Do Questionnaire Results Tell Us?

What questionnaire results tell us is naturally dependent upon the questions it asks, twelve questions which the results of a questionnaire typically attempt to answer include:

1. How large is the audience - both as an average, and as the reach (number of different people)?

2. What kind of people make up the audience? How do they differ from the whole population - e.g. in terms of age group, sex, occupation, etc?

3. Where is your audience? In each part of your coverage area, what percentage of the population are members of your audience?

4. When does your audience use your publication (or tune into your station) - what time of day, what day of week, etc?

5. How do your audience members spend their time? How much of their time is spent being part of your audience, and how much with your competitors?

6. What type of content (e.g. radio and TV programs, newspaper articles) interests your audience most - and least?

7. What styles of presentation do your audience prefer, and what styles do they dislike?

8. Which activities, attitudes, and other effects do your publications cause among your audience?

9. How will your audience react to a new kind of program or article that you might introduce?

10. How can you increase your audience? Is it best to try to find new listeners? Or to bring lapsed listeners back? Or to persuade existing listeners to spend more time with your broadcasts?

11. What percentage of the population in your area knows about your station - and how much do they know about it?

12. What is preventing people from using your service as much as they might?

Clearly there are a lot of questions, sub-questions and potentially more here, and a questionnaire would have to be tediously long to answer them all.

My Predicted Target Audience

Due to the topic of my documentary, I predict that my target audience will primarily be young, possibly between the ages of 16 and 24. Having already researched the topic of Urban Exploration, my original thoughts that it was mostly a male community were wrong; the numbers are actually a lot more even, something like 60-40. As for their education, I don’t think that their level of schooling received will have a giant effect on how interested they are in this subject, however I do think that they will have received at least college-level education.

Results of Questionnaire

Analysis of Results

This survey was posted to a sub-forum specifically created to discuss media pieces on popular social news website Reddit.com, where 43 people completed it. Questions 1, 2 and 3 were asked to identify who the people completing the questionnaire were. The results show that the respondents were a very even mix between male and female, however the age range wasn’t very sparse, with 80% being between the ages of 16-24. The level of education was primarily university degree level, however there were results for each option. We can conclude that most of the members of the forum who responded were university students, who I hypothesised would be my target audience due to the topic of my documentary (urban exploration), so they were the perfect respondents for this survey.

Question 4 was asked simply to identify if there was a general interest in documentaries, and 80% of respondents said they preferred documentaries to music videos and short films. Question 5 was asked to identify what the generally preferred medium of learning about new films was, and although the results showed that the most popular choices were trailers and forums, I have decided to stick with my initial choices to create a poster and magazine article to promote my film, as I feel that the question was worded wrong. In my next questionnaire I will change the question to “Which medium do you feel is best for film advertisement?”, as the purpose of that question was to identify which medium would be best for advertising a film, not teaching a consumer about the details of the film.

Question 6 was asked to see which TV station was favoured by the masses, and the results unanimously showed that BBC1 was the top choice. E4 and Channel 4 also got some results. The result of question 7 showed that the respondents are mostly regular viewers of documentaries, so their opinions were well-rounded.

Question 8 received many different results; however the most popular choice was Planet Earth, which would explain why the results of question 9 showed that David Attenborough was the most popular presenter.

A2 Media Advanced Portfolio Pitch

Wikipedia defines urban exploration as “the examination of normally unseen or off-limit sections of urban areas or industrial facilities”, and goes on to say that “the nature of this activity presents various risks, including both physical danger and the possibility of arrest and sequential punishment.”

Thanks to increased media attention, urban exploration has seen a sudden rise in popularity, even prompting the release of a show on the Discovery Channel called Urban Explorers; however a lot of current explorers see this as an issue as not all viewers of the show who become activists are noble enough to abide by the unwritten laws that urbexers have created, which could arise negative connotations towards urban exploring and it’s participants in the future.

One of the unspoken rules is to “take nothing but photographs and leave nothing but footprints.” This simple line is key for many reasons and when followed, lowers the risk of being caught, creates an illusion that you were never there, retains the state of the site and gives no reason for property owners to become stricter. Genuine explorers will never steal, vandalise or damage the property or the building itself, their sole intention is to explore and photograph.

Even so, the involvement in this hobby is still seen as being rather obscure, and I have selected it as the topic for my documentary for this very reason, that it’s a relatively untouched subject that I can really expand upon and explore.

The vast majority of explorers run in extremely close-knit groups that occasionally converse via online forums, and are known to post reports on the buildings they explore. Rarely do they expand on the report itself, and it’s extremely uncommon for them to give out directions or tips on entry. This is because they wish to maintain the low-risk of property owners or authority clocking on to people exploring the buildings, however they will generally advise and warn others on security to avoid detection.

Luckily I already explore regularly with several friends, so I have several locations currently available for exploring. I will record footage from several buildings, including an abandoned orphanage, swimming pool, TV studios, factory warehouse and mill, allowing me to pick and choose from a wide variety of locations.

The target audience for my documentary is hard to pinpoint, however I do expect the general demographic to be young and open to the idea of urban exploring, as several members of older generations I have spoken to have been slightly too closed-minded to completely accept it as an authentic hobby. The younger generation is generally more accepting of the idea of adventure and exploration, however it is not limited to them and I have found some success in reaching out to older generations.

I have drew inspiration and influence from Steve Duncan’s “Undercity”, one of the few existing documentaries on urban exploration in which he explores New York’s transit tunnels, scales Brooklyn Bridge and traverses through The Freedom Tunnel, the name given to the Amtrak Tunnel running underneath Riverside Park in Manhattan, New York.

Short Film: Review 3 - Charlie Bit My Finger (The Horror)

Director Background

Jeff Chan is a Canadian director, producer and writer, who before his Charlie Bit My Finger – The Horror film, had directed two shorts, one of which he wrote. He also produced two more separate shorts in 2009. He graduated film school in 2008 and last year admitted to being a broke filmmaker ever since graduating, even with the success his shorts have garnered.

Reception & Audience

The film has received nearly a million views since it was uploaded to YouTube on May 2011. The short was a big hit with the online crowd, due to it being a horror parody of the popular viral video Charlie Bit My Finger.

Jeff Chan, being a “Redditor” himself, uploaded the short to the “videos” subreddit, where it hit the front page, gaining nearly 2,000 upvotes. There are over a million subscribers to that particular subreddit, which was a major reason it gained the amount of views it did.

Narrative & Textual Analysis

The film’s opening is completely silent, as three lines in a thriller-esque font fade in, introducing the film. The actual lines act as a bit of a juxtaposition, the original viral video is hilarious, and is a complete contrast to the serious tone which the opening lays out.

The entire short is filmed from the point of view of the protagonist, Charlie. The opening fades in to the small child Ethan calling Charlie over to investigate what’s happening outside. Daylight pours through the thin curtains into the low-key lit house, and together with the furniture barricading the windows, suggests that the building is a stronghold to whatever dangers lurk outside.

The entire scene is silent until Charlie draws back the curtain and a zombie unexpectedly bursts through. High-pitched non-diegetic music now plays in the background of the shot, to promote the sense of urgency.

Ethan and Charlie are forced to retreat back into the safety of the house. The camera pans quickly round as a fellow defender of the house throws Charlie a baseball bat. The camera pans quickly again to reveal another zombie entering the room. Charlie waits for the zombie to approach him and swings the bat, creating an over-emphasised video game-esque sound in doing so and knocking the zombie to the ground. The short is also parodying the popular zombie game Left 4 Dead here, via connotations such as the first person point of view, as well as the weapons used and the sound effects which accompany them.

Another zombie lunges at Charlie, knocking him to the ground whilst he uses his bat as a barrier between himself and the zombie. The music picks up now to increase the tension.

The fellow defender of the house grabs Charlie and pulls him back into the recluse of the room to protect him. The camera pans down to Charlie’s arms as he rolls up his sleeve, revealing a deep bite mark.

The camera edges begin to show pulsing red lines, which eventually transform into a red filter covering the entire shot, to represent the transformation which Charlie has made into a zombie, and his sudden craving for blood. The cries from Ethan’s mother as she urges him to run up the stairs to safety are distorted, perhaps representing the zombie’s inability to comprehend the language it once knew.

Just as Charlie reaches the top of his stairs in his bloodthirsty stupor, and the non-diegetic sounds of the high-pitched music climax, Ethan’s mother pulls out a shotgun and fires directly at the camera.

Instead of having the camera spin round or fade out to signify Charlie dying, the camera cuts straight to the lines shown in the screenshot below, the ending to a short which purpose it was to promote the festival. The ending is a morbid take on the originally light-hearted viral video.

Production Trivia

The film is a horror parody of the viral video Charlie Bit My Finger, which was also shown on Rude Tube, a television show which plays popular viral videos from the web. Chan was asked to create the short film for CFC’s Worldwide Short Film Festival of June of 2011.

A SI2K camera was rigged to a baseball helmet to establish the incredible point of view shots, and was counterbalanced by adding a 5 pound weight. The camera operator was said to have a very difficult job because not only did he have to hit his marks and frame the shot properly, he had to act as well.

The short was shot on a budget of $1500.