In order to get a good idea of the conventions used in typical magazine reviews and film posters, as well as actual films already on the market it was vital we carried out helpful, clearly set out research. Generally, all three of our final pieces are conventional as we didn't see the point of changing what clearly works. We did however add a few of our own little quirks and twists to make the products our own.
Our main product was of the mockumentary genre so we carried out research specific to this. We made note of typical conventions such as awkward moments and jump cuts. As we wanted our own piece to look as realistic as possible we took these conventions then added our own unique twist. Our mockumentary generally matched the conventions however, because our film was only short we used a large number of jump cuts to establish the genre.
Our review matches the majority of basic conventions we noted during our research time. We have placed one large image at the top to sell the film, have included a star rating and made the layout clear, simple and not too heavy on the eye. Going against the mockumentary convention however, we used an image taken from filming with the characters in position for an interview but not looking into the camera. As the majority of time the characters are talking directly into the camera lens we thought it would be a positive change to make the image a little different and unexpected. We took this similar idea and carried it on to the poster too. Only placing a guitar and a door on the cover meant not too much was given away about the film and no direct mode of address was used. Apart from this, the rest of our poster is conventional. One large image is placed on the front with the name of the film, critic review and star rating on the front. We never added the cast on to the bottom of the poster. We didn't realise this until last minute so it was too late to change.
Our two ancillary tasks presented no direct mode of adders from the characters to the audience. This unconventional twist was effective and ironic as the mockementary genre is recognised from its use of characters talking directly into the camera.
We attempted to make the film poster on a landscape piece of paper as we liked the unconventional style. When it came to trying this out however we found it difficult to place all of our characters on without the space looking too empty at either end. Luckily we realised that this idea wouldn't work during the early planning process which meant we were able to simply replace that draft with a new, portrait one. Although we wanted to challenge the convention it wouldn't have made our end product poster as good.
How effective is the combination of your main product and ancillary texts?
We believe that our main product, as well as our two ancillary texts worked effectively together. We unintentionally ended up with a set colour scheme through out, with black white and red used in contrast with each other. In the two ancillary tasks we used these colours purposefully as we believed they were striking and worked well together, however when we came to edit the film we realised that the ambiance of the room was generally dark, matching the colour scheme we had already come up with.
The poster we created looked like an advertisement with the guitar leaning against the white door which is seen in the film. The door alone links with the setting of the film as it is nearly always in shot in the video. We are also made aware of the mockumentary genre as the poster looks like its advertising a competition, similar to the layout of the 'Drop Dead Gorgeous' poster we looked at during the research task.
The use of no direct mode of address in the review image which could be seen as unconventional. As the majority of our review was conventional we wanted to add our own twist. The film poster contains no actors which the just the door and guitar which meant again no direct mode of address was used. These linked together but contrasted to the mockumentary style of our film where the actors talk into the camera lens.
When asking peers if they believed the ancillary tasks matched the main product they agreed, commenting on our use of colour scheme to create a sense of continuity through out. Each task sells the other, working well effectively together.
What have you learned from your audience feedback?
Audience feedback was important to us not only at the end but through out the project so we were able to get an honest opinion of what the audience thought of our work to make it better. This started with questionnaires at the beginning of the process and ended with the final pieces being marked by the examiner. As we have carried out similar tasks in media before we both understood the importance of audience feedback as they will be the consumers of our products, making or breaking them.
We created questionnaires to hand out during the research part of the project. The questions centred around both ancillary tasks, as well as our main piece, the 5 minute film. We had already carried out a little bit of research into conventions so we Incorporated this into the questions we came up with. We asked opinions on colour schemes and film poster preferences. Twenty two questionnaires came back to us to annotate, a good and reasonable size sample for us to look at. Asking the majority of 17/18 year olds, our target audience, allowed us to get a good idea of what they want to see in and from our products. Using excel, we put the results into graphs then copy and pasted them into word, allowing us to write up what they told us. Throughout the planning process we were able to look back at our results to make sure we we incorporating audience ideas into our own work. They were a vital part of the research process, giving us strong primary research.
As well as the questionnaires, we asked the advice of our peers and teacher throughout the project. When ever we weren't sure of an idea we could present it to our friends who would give us an honest opinion of what they thought. The fact they weren't always media students was helpful as the were looking at our work as potential consumers. We asked what they thought of our initial band mockumentary idea and their views on our first drafts. Our teacher also wrote comments on our blogs as we worked through the project, noting down anything we had done wrong and bit we could improve on. All of the comments we received we worked on to try and come up with the best pieces we could.
We handed our cast the script a week before we were set to film. This not only gave them a chance to look through it and learn lines, but it allowed them to give us any advice if they didn't like the idea of certain bits or they needed re written. The week in between then gave us a chance to change the script. As well as this, when we were doing the actual filming, the cast did some improvisation of situations.
All in all we have received positive feedback on our completed final pieces. The only negative comment we received back was that our finished film didn't have a very good picture quality. This however was beyond our control as that was the only camcorder we were able to use. Our audience understood that.
How did you use media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation stages?
We used a number of media technologies throughout this project in an attempt to record our work easily for marking and assuring our two ancillary tasks and main product looked as professional as possible.
We relied on BlogSpot to record all of our work and present our finished pieces. I had never used a blog to store my work before so I had no idea what to expect and whether I would like it. The blog was quick and easy to set up, with a password and user name making sure our work was protected. It also meant we could access the work from home through the Internet, allowing us to add things we had done at weekends/holidays without it piling up to add on at school during valuable lesson time. My teacher and peers were able to look over and check my blog as I was going along, pointing out any flaws. The blog also meant I and my partner could see exactly what each other were doing in terms of research and planning at what time, making sure we were up to the same point and not allowing each other to fall behind. Posts were easy to add and edit and any work I did in the lesson on paper could be easily scanned in and added. I encountered no major problems when using the blog. At times the internet was down at home which meant I couldn't add to my blog out of school. When this problem occurred however, I simply wrote up what I wanted to put on my blog in a word document and cut & paste it into the blog when I was next in school, which was quicker than having to type up the work when I needed to be getting on with something else. As well as this, the school accidenty blocked the BlogSpot website which meant we were unable to add images and view the blog at school. This went on for about two weeks. At first I thought it would cause me to fall behind but text could still be posted up, I just had to wait until I got home to view it online. This didn't turn out to be a major problem and didn't affect the time it took to complete my blog. I would definitely consider using this method of storing work again if I carried out a project similar to this. The blog was simple to use and presented my work neatly and effectively.
When work wasn't ready to put onto the blog, I relied on my pen drive to take work from school home to finish off. I also used it to store all of my files for back up just in case something happened to them in my school documents. I don't believe that I would have been finished by the deadline if I didn't have my pen drive as I would have only been able to carry out work at school.
As well as using the internet to publish my blog, I also used it to carry out the majority of research, using google as a basis for most of my searches. The images I annotated of the band members posing and film posters already out at the minute, were found through 'google images'. It was easy just to save the images onto my pen drive to paint. I also used the internet to annotate reviews and look at band interviews. I used this method as it was easy and could be done at both home and at school.
We also briefly used Word to compose the questionnaire as part of our research, as well as the results. We are very familiar with this programme so they were quick to complete and were present well. Word let us change colours to suit our project and pick fonts and their size. Once we had completed our questionnaires we printed them out ready to give to people to fill in. We needed to put our results on our blog so thought it easiest to present the results in word, then print screen them as a picture file. It took us approximately two, 55 minute lessons to get our questionnaires out, then back in to write up the results. No problems were encountered when using word, however it would have been easier for us if we were able to create the graphs here. Instead we had to use Excel to produce the graphs, the cut & paste them into word. It didn't take much longer but would have saved us a bit of time.
We used publisher to create both of the ancillary tasks, including our developed drafts. As we have used publisher before both in media and other subjects, it didn't take long to locate all of the tools we needed. We considered using fireworks as it is a more professional programme however decided against it as all of the fonts etc were on publisher ready to be used. It was also generally simpler but did the job for us and we could both access/change our work from home. The four developed drafts, two for our film poster and two for our review, took us under two lessons (110 minutes) to complete. We used images from clip art as they were copy right free. Again, we had no problems using the programme to present our work.
A hand held camcorder was vital to shoot our footage on the day of filming. As we had used a similar camera at BTEC level we knew which buttons were for what, allowing us to easily adapt and set up when we arrived on set. We didn't need a tripod as the majority of filming was shaky, fitting the mockumentary genre style. We encountered only a minor problem during the filming. Half way through a scene the camera died on us. Luckily, we had brought the charger along with us and the house setting meant it was easy enough for us to take the battery out and charge it up for 10 minutes so we could finish off. The extra 10 minutes also gave us time to inform cast of where they needed to positioned and what they needed to say. Altogether, it only took us 2 and half hours to film our material, giving us over 15 minutes to sort through in the editing process. We had difficulty gaining access to the cameras as other groups had booked them out at times when we could have used them. This was down to our poor time management and organisation, leaving us less time to edit our main product. The meant our planning and research was however up to date and carried out to a high standard. When we watched our clips back we realised that the sound quality wasn't very high. This was due to the camera we used rather that the way our actors were speaking so couldn't be prevented. We tried at the end to use the camera setting on the camcorder to try and take pictures for the ancillary tasks, however the quality wasn't very high so I used my mobile phone instead. This allowed me to easily transfer the images across to my pen drive when I arrived home to add onto the review and poster at school. I don't think I would like to use a camera similar to the one we used if I was set a filming task like this again. The quality wasn't great which meant the picture look grainy.
We used IMovie on the Mac computers at school to edit our film. As we had never used this programme before we were worried it would be difficult to navigate. Our teacher helped us to import the images from the SD Card to the computer, converting them to an mp4 format. We used 'Handbrake' to do this, again a programme we had not come across. Each clip had to be changed individually which took us nearly an hour as we had 43 of them. Once they were all converted we were able to open IMovie and import them all ready to edit. We watched all of the clips through first to refresh and check over the quality before we began to drag clips to the bottom of the screen. The editing process took us a full day to complete, made easier by the fact the majority of our cuts were messy and didn't need to flow precisely. We mainly used 'trimming' and 'split clips' not really needing to add any effects to the video except music which was added at the end. We decided it was easier to use a track from iTunes as this was copyright free, not forcing us to seek permission from other people which would have slowed us down. Overall, we encountered no major problems when we using IMovie. The programme was quick and easy to use, assuring our editing was completed on time. We had problems with some of the continuity as re took took some of the scenes then attempted to mix and match to get a variety of different angles. In some parts it worked really well and at others it was impossible to do. This leads me to think that we should have shot more material whilst we were on set.
