Tuesday, 12 April 2016

Monday, 11 April 2016

Sunday, 3 April 2016

Thursday, 17 March 2016

Survey Results of Large Scale Exhibition

At the time of writing I have received an ample sample of responses for my questionnaire. As I have collected my feedback digitally, it was very simple to collect and evaluate the comments made on this version of my short film. Below are the results of each question in graph form and a conclusion detailing what my next steps will be based upon the feedback:

Question One:
As you can see from the results above the majority of my audience understood my narrative to an extent however a worrying proportion found parts of my film confusing at times. I plan to edit the timings of some shots in order to deliver the narrative quicker so this may address this problem. Also with a film like mine, it has to be watched possibly more than once for a full understanding to be obtained.

Question Two


Even when editing I knew that the flashbacks may become a problem. Due to the unique and different way I present my protagonist's past the meaning behind the images are sometimes lost and the comments for this question resemble this. Despite not having any plans to remake my flashbacks I am now concious of the potential problems they cause and I have the option to edit and change their form.

Question 3



After I received the feedback for this question I began work in addressing the comments. From the moment I began working upon the soundtrack I knew that the dialogue was going to become a problem when I started layering up the soundtrack. I went back to the cut the audience saw and I agreed that that narration was at some points too muffled. To begin rectifying the problem I altered the volume levels of not only the narration but the ambiance as well. As this problem was brought up in a previous feedback session I have realised that problem is still prominant.

Question 4:

Similarly to how I addressed the previous question, I decided that I need to edit the sound levels and perhaps compress or equalise the audio in order to create a clearer sound. I plan to do this extensively before I finish my final draft. The fact that no major issues were brought up ensures that I have made the right decisions with the type of audio I have selected since the last feedback session.

Question 5:

 Conclusively I feel that the feedback to this question is very positive. Despite the large amount of care I took while editing I felt that more problems would have been risen due to me missing something. The only problem which is highlighted within the feedback for this question is the scene where my protagonist falls over. I feel that the issue can be addressed through editing down the shots to a smaller amount of time

Wednesday, 16 March 2016

Post Alternation Poster Feedback

After essentially rebuilding my poster from the beginning, creating each element again at a much higher resolution, I printed out the product A4 and A3 for my peers to reevaluate. The major difference other than the resolution was the billing block at the bottom of the page. I had rewritten the credits and included my production studios as well. Below is a presentation with each persons feedback on the poster:

         

Post Exhibition Evaluation

After showing my short film in assembly I saw my product in a different light. With the oppotunity to see my film on a bigger display and to hear the audio at a much higher quality, I was able to spot any errors I have made. Below is a photo just before the exhibition.



One of the main issues I spotted or rather heard were the audio levels. Compared to the sound effects the narration was too quiet and came across as muffled and poor quality. As the voice over is critical to the way my narrative is presented this issue must be addressed. Despite this being relatively easy task it will take time to go through the entirety of the film concerning the sound.
            My next step will be to collect the responses from my questionnaire and, based upon the feedback, react.