Evaluation 1


Published on

Published in: Art & Photos, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Evaluation 1

  1. 1.  Google - for information on research and image searches. ( I found this useful as it helped me gather information rapidly to do my work efficiently faster) Wikipedia - for confirming dates and faces found about artists we searched for. (convenient for double checking!) Blogger - for hosting our coursework portfolio. PowerPoint - for making work look more interesting on the blog, splitting up walls of text and to add more of an interactive interface to the portfolio.
  2. 2.  Through this section of planning, an issue I came across was the reliability of sources used; but this was only the case of Wikipedia, but following citations at the bottom, it quickly resolved that issue to more reliable websites (e.g. Official homepages) Also; magazines are based on only opinions, though those subjective interpretations of things are useful in our work.
  3. 3.  Youtube - to find the inspirational videos and to use the embed codes to use on our blogs. Powerpoint - for making work look more interesting on the blog, splitting up walls of text and to add more of an interactive interface to the portfolio. Sources - e.g Music magazines, artist websites etc. Camera- To take WIP stills and the photo-shoot.
  4. 4.  The main piece of technology we used throughout our work was Final Cut Pro, as if we used the same program as last year, Imovie, the skills shown would have not been enough, as you need a more complex program to do more interesting things that we used in out video more professionally, e.g Chroma keying.
  5. 5.  To use Final Cut pro to its full potential, we used the colleges HD camera for our filming. This got the most crisp images and easy to work with shots to use with editing, green screens and image manipulation. However; a downside we faced to all this was that due to the HD footage and editing, the videos rendering took a very long time, sometimes even a whole lesson, which was very inconvenient, though worth the hassle.
  6. 6.  The camera was very easy to work with, using the manual or automatic focus, and it was interesting to use white balance, where as last year, it wasnt that much of an issue in my work, as working outside its not completely necessary. Lighting was also fun to use as we could try new things, with the camera angles also, so we could create different feels to shots and manipulating was an interesting use of technology.
  7. 7.  In the Ancillary tasks, the main technologies used were Adobe Photoshop and InDesign. I also used my graphics tablet; The Wacom bamboo pen and touch.
  8. 8.  With these programs I drew images of Jessica, edited them, used photo manipulation and removed the backgrounds from the photos from the photo-shoot. In Design came into use to make the inner panels, though I didnt use them personally, as I am more used to Photoshop and could do the same on there. On Photoshop, I used the colour replace tool lots, and used different layers manipulating textures and opacity to create my space theme. These programs were used as they are very high standard editing programs and can give the best possible results of photo editing, to make the work look much more professional.
  9. 9.  Powerpoint, Youtube and Blogger where the main things used here in the evaluation, blogger to host all the evaluation, Youtube for having video embed codes to show other videos as comparison in the how does our media product conform/break conventions part. Powerpoint was used for making work look more interesting on the blog, splitting up walls of text of our evaluation and to add more of an interactive interface to the portfolio. Also, using different media types for our product allows for easier information processing, as its not all boring to look at.
  10. 10.  For the evaluation, we also did a directors commentary, which we recorded the same as the footage, on a HD camera and edited on Final Cut. This helped the interaction between audience and our product through the use of another form of interface. An issue I found from this was that it was far too time consuming for just one task, as Final Cut was only on the college Macs. Rendering also made things irritating and having to wait for the footage (HD) to convert to a usable file on FCP. I should have used a standard definition camera to film my footage, it would have resolved time issues.