j

1. Performance evaluation
Kieran Beal

2. Initial plans + Research
I think my idea generation was complete and well detailed followed by an evaluation of each one. In addition to this I did
relevant research for my project which I then used in my project extensively. However with that being said I don't think that I
put as much detail into the research that I should've done, I found several sources addressing the issue that I was trying to
tackle however I feel that I could have done additional work for my research. Specifically I think the numerical side of my
research could have used some additional detail, this is because I included many points from external sources in
my video. however very few times did I use statistics to backup what I was saying and this is something that I believe I could
have done more. With that being said I believe that the research that I did do was incredibly useful and my video did not suffer
too greatly not having this numerical data there, for example I could have included the current trend of automation, a more
extensive list of jobs that are at risk of being taken, how quickly it would happen and a number of jobs that robots have already
taken.
I think the evaluations that I have created for each idea hare well done but I think research could've been further improved
upon again, this is because for the first subject I have made extensive notes about the areas that he was talking about, however
when reading through the other research slides that I have made it is quite clear that I have made significantly less notes on
them, this as result makes the pages seem empty and certainly I did take less information away from them so as a result it may
have been better if I had used different sources of information for my project, sources that could have provided me with better
data. I think that while the format of my film was well produced and assembled, I could have improved upon it further by
investing more time into the research part of my project. For the most part I stuck to low budget or Lecture based talks for
research, however I believe that I could have improved by looking into full feature documentaries to see what filming
techniques they used and what could have been more effective/suitable for my videos' concept.

3. Idea development
I started off trying to further refine the idea that I chose through a mind map, and while I have done this to a large extent, much
of the mind map that I created is simply things that I repeated in my shot list, as a result it likely would've been better to cut this
out altogether so as to save time in the pre-production phase. I covered the basic part of the style that I wanted my video to
follow, such as the music and the visual style however I don't believe that I developed upon it enough. I think that this section
would have benefited from me further explaining why I think it would have been good to use these styles in my video, how they
worked in relation to the topic at hand and how they collaborated harmoniously with the tone that was set by the narration
and the presenter in the video. My target audience was a crucial part of my video to ensure that through extensive research
and my own interpretation that I was indeed aiming for subject at the right audience.
I believe that I executed this part of my idea production very well by not only explaining the basics of my audience for example
their age categories, whether or not they were male of female. But also stating type of psychographics' that my audience would
fall into, what the definition is of each psychographic I used is and why I believe these people in particular would find my video
appealing. With that being said I believe that a key way I could have improved upon my work is explaining the other types of
basic psychographics there are and why I believe that they wouldn't find my video appealing, creating a contrast between them
and my target audience.

4. Characteristics of factual production
After extensive research into the different documentaries that I found topical, there were certain styles and characteristics that
cropped up in each one that I have employed in my own video, the first and most certainly prominent of these is the narration.
Narration is a common trope used in many types of TV however in documentaries it is nearly compulsory to use it, I believe this is
the case because a documentary draws a fine line between a TV show and the morning news for instance. What I mean by this is
that a documentary has to present the facts to the viewer, but at the same time has to be visually engaging enough to keep their
attention. As a result of this you couldn't have one person constantly speaking, there has to be some variance in the visual
aspects of the footage and that will typically involve using footage that would be physically impossible to insert a person into,
however the information still has to be delivered to the audience and so a good compromise for this is to use narration over the
visuals inserted. Another reason for using narration is that using a non-diegetic voiceover can be audibly appealing for the viewer
and even help set the tone for the documentary, as a consequence to this I decided to use narration for a large portion of my
video.
However while narration is a very powerful technique that can be used for documentaries, it also has to be done correctly, with
an engaging voice to keep the viewer interested. An excellent example of someone who is renowned for his narration driven
documentaries is David Attenborough, who is highly regarded for his engaging voice and passion for what he discusses, the result
of this was that his latest documentary 'Planet Earth 2', upon release had more young people viewing it than the X Factor. This is
an example of narration done very well, however in contrast to my video while I did include narration, the execution of it in
practice turned out very poorly, with mispronunciations of words and sounding incredibly scripted, it certainly needed more
work before it was ready to be presented.

5. Characteristics of factual production
Cinematography is a crucial part of documentaries, it is important to have engaging footage to go alongside interesting narration
to keep the viewer visually entertained and satisfied, regardless of what the topic that the film is based upon, many documentary
film makers will try to make the shots as cinematic as possible. With that being said while the shots do have to be cinematic, they
also have to be relevant, for example someone focusing on a documentary of the theory of evolution, will not spend the majority
of shots using footage from the bible. While this is something that I have copied in my documentary, I also believe that I have
made the exact same mistake, my documentary is about machines and AI replacing human beings, however the majority of my
footage is of my actor walking from place to place in a non-descript city, and this isn't really relevant to what I'm talking about in
my video, so therefore I believe that my video would have further benefited by including more relevant footage, perhaps of my
presenter using some of the technology themselves, or even putting them through a computerised voice processor.
Another convention of documentaries is having a very tight cast. By this I mean that many documentaries will use just one
person for the camera and audio for the entirety of production, they do this because there is a lack of confusion, when there
are two voices talking about separate things it can sometimes prove to be disorienting to the person watching. As a concequence
to this they will generally limit it all one member of cast, I have used two separate people, one for my narration and one for
performance, this has created a slightly confusing effect due to the stark contrast in the sounds of their voices. As a result an easy
way to fix this for future documentaries would be to use one, clear and confident speaker for both aspects of my project.

6. Contexts and characteristics behind choices
I originally wanted to shoot my film in a city of advancements and technology, cities such as Manchester and Newcastle have
been making incredible advancements in recent years with things such as public transport, services and architecture that you
won't find anywhere else. However due to budget constraints and conflicting schedules this simply wasn't doable, therefore I
referred back to the city of York, a common location for most of my film to be set, because of it's convenient location, ease of
access and most importantly a city, meaning it has many filming opportunities, with it being a symbol of progress. While I
probably should have used more footage of technology in my film, I had a reason as to why I used so much footage of my actor, I
wanted my film to remind the audience of the importance of human involvement and for my video to have sole for lack of a
better phrase, I wanted the footage in my film to parallel the dialogue used in my film.

7. Professional works
A partner team called Aaron and Melissa Dykes developed their own independent media platform called 'Truthstream media', in
which they make multiple factual and phylisophical documentaries. However the video in question here is 'Obsolete' in which
they discuss automation in factories, however they focus more on the socioeconomic concequences of it more than I do. This
has led to slight topical differences in our two videos however the concept is still there, the next most noticable difference was
the footage. Some of it is actuality footage as evidenced by quality and style of film, however for the most part their film was
composed of archival footage from other outlets. Their narration is executed better than mine however it still has some flaws,
there isn't any failure in pronunciations but their voice is very flat and it sounds scripted, with that in mind though it is clear that
they rehearsed their dialougue.
Another professional product is the documentary titled 'Will robots steal our jobs?', a two part full feature piece that explores
the topics that I cover in my video but in much greater depth. Immediatley there are some similarities to our films and some
differences, the first similarity the filming technique used, much of the footage gathered is quite cinematic and indeedthe first
few minutes of the film are entirely composed of establishing shots, however that's where the similarities end in that regard.
Because the shots that they have used for their film are entirely composed of robots and technologies in development, their
actuality footage is relevent to what they are discussing, as opposed to mine which isn'tn really related to the subject at hand.
They also have interviews in their film with experts in the industry, giving their own insight on the subject. I also have interviews
in my film however I have interviewed the skilled working class and working class people, the ones most at risk of having their
job taken, in order to get a more first person perspective on the issue.

8. Professional works
The third and final professional product that I decided to look at was a multi-part documentary published by the YouTube
channel 'AJ+' the documentary entitled 'Robots And AI: The Future Is Automated And Every Job Is At Risk'. Now from that title
some may assume that this was indeed just a biased 'documentary', presenting one sided facts to try and convince the viewer to
see things their way, a common practice in the industry. However upon viewing the documentary this isn't actually the case,
presenting facts from both side of the argument, as well as showing interviews from varied sources, and unlike the previous two
documentaries that I have compared/contrasted my own work with. This one has narration that both flows well and is well
voiced, and uses a healthy mix of footage, ranging form actuality footage to infographics to help illustrate the point of the
narrator. Overall I cannot find any major fault with this documentary and it is something that I would definitely use for inspiration
in my future products if I was to make one.

9. Strengths + weaknesses
I believe that there were some parts of my work that went well however there were also some parts that certainly needed
improving upon, for example the cinematography used in my work. I think that the filming techniques that I used were both
appropriate and aesthetically pleasing to watch, however on the other hand they weren't necessarily relevant to the topic at
hand, and in addition to that I believe it could've used some more actuality footage of the task at hand.
The narration that I wrote for the film I believe was topical and very informative, and if spoken by a skilled narrator I believe
would've worked exceptionally well. However that was the main issue of my narration, the narrator that I used for it
mispronounced words on several occasions, was quiet and sounded like she was reading from a script. So while the actual
dialogue I wrote for the documentary I believe was solid, the execution could've been carried out much better. Using the
presenters voice I believe would've been better as she was a more confident speaker and spoke clearly on camera, in addition
though this using the same voice for both the presenter and the narrator. This would've made the video far less disorientating
for the viewer, having to switch between the vastly different voices.
I think the interviews that I conducted for my documentary were very insightful into the viewpoint of the skilled working class,
however while I certainly gathered clear opinions, I believe I could've gotten a wider perspective. This I would've been achieved
by asking either higher class workers, or by interviewing any experts on the matter in the local area if there are any. Somewhere
like the university of York for instance, I believe could've been a very useful source for unbiased scientific opinions. Gathering
information from more people by casting a wider net like this I believe would've greatly benefited the interview segment of my
documentary.

10. Action plan
In future I believe one of the first ways I could improve upon a documentary is to maintain the kind of filming techniques that I
was currently using. However I would adapt them to make the content in the them much more relevant. I would then also cast a
wider net when looking for cast for my film, particularly the narrator, as being able to read off script and make it sound natural is
a difficult task. Which leads me onto my next task that I would spend more time with my cast rehearsing what they have to do so
that they are more prepared for the production aspect of the project.
Another issue that my project faced was that I didn't very much actuality footage of machines, this was one of the fatal flaws of
the cinematography however, being granted access t areas where this machinery is, isn't the easiest thing to do. Therefore I
would have to establish contact with companies earlier on in the planning phase of my project so that I would have a better
chance of being allowed access to these more dangerous parts of factories and businesses. I would also reach out to any
musicians or musically gifted friends that I know, so that early on I could work on composing my own music to insert into my film.
Instead of relying on royalty free sounds that I then remix in Premier Pro to create a soundtrack, because while there isn't
technically anything wrong with this approach, it does also lack a certain degree of originality. Finally I would also try to find a
wider range of people to interview for my documentary, from baristas to professors in order to gather a wider pool of data
through secondary research, it would also help me generalise the opinion of the affected masses when it comes it this issue.