2. Whenever I made a change or was unsure about a part of
my short film I always asked a member of my class (my
primary audience) what they thought about the film, and if
it wasn’t to their liking I would ask what I could change in
order to improve my film to fit my audience’s preferences.
Sometimes all I would have to do was change a sound effect
or add in a transition; other times I would have to reshoot
the film as the video quality was not as good as it should’ve
been. By constantly referring to my audience for their
feedback, I believe that it has improved my short film
greatly, as it conforms to my primary audience’s
preferences.
3. I asked for feedback from my primary audience in
nearly every one of my lessons where I was editing my
short film. This allowed me to make changes and
improvements to my short film whilst the feedback
was still fresh in my memory, then once I had made
the changes I would ask my audience to watch my film
again to see if it was improved. It was harder to gauge
feelings and feedback from my secondary audience
until the film was completed and uploaded to
YouTube; and by then it would have been difficult to
edit parts of the film and re-upload it back onto the
internet.
4. For the majority, most of my audience feedback was
during face to face conversations after watching my
short film. As a whole the A2 media studies students
would organise sessions where we could watch, give
and receive feedback on each others work, so
individually we could gather a range of ideas in which
we could improve our work by.
By gathering feedback in this way, it meant it was
quick and easy to alter and improve my short film,
compared to handing out a survey then organising the
results to make decisions on what to improve.
5. S0me of the feedback I received was to make
amendments to small things such as changing a sound
effect or adding in a transition; whereas based on other
feedback, I had to go out and re-film some parts of my
film, as the video quality was poor e.g. 0ut of focus.
Yet by acting out on all forms of feedback and making
changes and improvements to small and big things, it
has aided the development of my film greatly and
made it more appealing to everyone within my target
audience.
6. My primary audience (fellow media studies students)
had access to view my short film on my school
network, and could also watch my updates and ideas
by following my A2 media studies blog.
My secondary audience was only able to view and
comment back on my short film once I had uploaded
it to YouTube. This made it harder to act upon
audience feedback from my secondary audience;
therefore most of the changes I made were based upon
the feedback of my primary audience.
7. I would like to think the majority of my primary
audience enjoyed my short film, they liked the genre
(Thriller) and the narrative of the film which I adapted
from the original feature length film ‘The Lovely
Bones’. Some of my primary audience found my short
film confusing at times and therefore lost interest or
did not like it as much. Yet the individuals who did
like it were very supportive of my work and always
helped me to make amends and improvements to my
short film.
8. For my ancillary tasks (a film poster and a magazine
double page spread) I did not gather as much audience
feedback as I did when producing my short film. I did
ask for my primary audience’s views when creating my
ancillary tasks, but I did not ask for feedback as
frequently.
This may have led to my ancillary tasks not fulfilling
my audience’s preferences as much as my short film as
I gathered less feedback in order to make
improvements to my ancillary tasks.
