The document summarizes feedback received from an audience on a rough cut of a music video. The feedback was generally positive, praising the use of mise-en-scene and how it advanced the narrative. Some areas for improvement mentioned were filling gaps in the video and fixing some transitions. In response, the creator added after effects to blend shots, filled gaps, and kept grainy footage that some liked. A focus group of teens also provided positive feedback and mentioned specific scenes they enjoyed, though some transitions could still be improved. The creator was unable to fully address issues due to time constraints but acknowledged room for a better edit.

1. What have you learned from
your audience feedback?
Evaluation question 3- Louie Clark

2. Rough cut hot desking
I asked people to view the first cut of my music video on premiere as it would not
upload to youtube and answer 5 questions, the general consensus from their
responses was:
Favorite Images and connotations : The majority commented on the use of mise en
scene and how this aided the narrative. Giving mention to the fake
moustache, gun, alcohol and graveyard. They also understood that the character who
revealed his presence in the graveyard was in fact a a ghost. One person made the
connection that the styling was reminiscent of a 70’s cop.
Aspects of the video promote the track: it was largely a response detailing how the
lyrics related to the visuals. A couple of responses simply voiced agreement of this
fact. One person went into further detail, offering that the location suggested to them
that the main character didn’t want to be alive. This was not an intended response but
one that I am open too, as part of the negotiation aspect of Stuart Halls reception
theory. It was not however the preferred reading.
How does the music video use genre conventions: Again people mentioned the mise
en scene, leather jacket, smoking, shades and the graveyard for it’s gothic
connotations. One response suggested that there could be more conventions shown.
Use of technical skills: Most people mentioned the lip synching parts positively, at this
stage there were still gaps in the video which needed to be filled.
Areas for improvement: Gaps needing to be filled were mentioned, after effects were
suggested, one person mentioned grainy footage for improvement, previously this was
brought up as a positive.

3. Response
I added after effects upon receiving the feedback and was pleased with how they
turned out. Altering the opacity in order to layer shots over one another .
This gave the music video another dimension as I
was able to blend narrative and performance in the
same shot. This also made the performance
footage I had shot to fill the gaps easy to transition
into the video, as sometimes a sharp cut would
look dispositional.
I didn’t fix the grainy footage as I had a 50/50
reception with regards to liking it and disliking it and
most didn’t mention it, it also suited my approach to
the ancillary products by making it look
weathered/gritty etc.

4. Focus Group
I then assembled four people, ranging in age from seventeen to nineteen, of
varying tastes who could all be considered in some way alternative and had them
answer the same questions as before after watching my final music video and
viewing the ancillary products. They focused mainly on the music video in terms of
their feedback, remarking mainly that I had connected the three pieces of work
visually and that it worked well.
Favourite images and connotations: The overlaying shots were well received, and
the use of props and actors. A specific scene was mentioned where the ghost is
visible in the mirror, was told it was a good way to introduce the character.
Parts of the video promote the song: The guitar playing was mentioned as it related
to the music and looked like the song was being played in the video.
Uses genre conventions: This specific question didn’t receive much feedback, there
was a general consensus that it made use of genre conventions.
Use of technical skills: The footage of guitar playing was mentioned again, having
the subject out of shot was received well. The overlaying of shots was also
mentioned again.
Areas for improvement: Some of the transitions were off according to the group.
Suggested filming some parts somewhere with more light.

5. Response/Katz and Blumler
I was able to alter some transitions but not all as I was working to a
deadline. The filming was not an option to re-shoot as the actors I used
were both working at this time. I also didn’t feel it necessary as I thought it
looked good in relation to the ancillary products. Though I did agree in
some cases as a matter of continuity, I could not address this.
As I have briefly mentioned, there are many readings to a text, and Katz and
Blumler’s theory of uses and gratifications applies particularly well to the
fragmented narrative found in my music video. As music videos are post
modern in their nature it seems most logical to accept the pluralism in
giving feed back, one person previously said they liked the footage that was
grainy it was later on when I found out more people thought it needed to
be fixed and by this point it was pretty much too late. There Is however no
question that the edit could be better, as a matter of fundamentals. If I had
of cut the song down more, and allowed myself more time for the edit, I
would have been able to fix these problems.