The document provides feedback from a pitch presentation to three judges. It notes that the presentation showed increased confidence and detailed storyboards and locations compared to last year. However, the judges criticized the lack of target audience research presented, and said the presentation lacked depth. While attire was also questioned, the document argues this and criticisms of target audience research were unfair given the context of the presentation and that other groups faced similar issues but were not called out. The document concludes the main useful feedback was to improve how the work was presented, though time constraints may have been a factor.

1. Pitch Presentation Feedback
Analysis

3. Positive Points
 Confidence has increased since last year
 Detailed shot list and storyboard
 Good locations
Negative Points
 Lack of target audience research
 Presentation lacking in depth
 Attire

4. Analysis
In the pitch presentation we presented our ideas to three “judges”. For the
positive points, it shows that we have increased in confidence since last
year and that we have put more detail into our work. However, for the
negative points they talked about target audience even though I said we
would be making changes to our work from the target audience research
we were going to do, our attire was also in question but I do not see how
this is relevant as it was not a professional pitch and the whole idea of the
presentation was to gain feedback on work, not what we were wearing,
these points however were not directed towards the other groups that had
the same issues and they did not receive the criticism we did, which did
seem unfair. Overall I think the only useful feedback we could take back
from this is that we should have presented our work better, however I feel
like the time restraint was a factor in this as I tried to shorten the
presentation as much as I could.