Banter

2. What We Leaned About The
New Technology !

3. Photoshop
 Photoshop:
 What we have used Photoshop to do:
 We used Photoshop in our introduction task to test skills with
the software and decide whether it would be good to do the
print brief over the video if we could use the program well.
 The Photoshop program was only used primarily for the print
brief and since we chose the video brief we did not have much
use for this program till the evaluation stage of the project.
 We then used Photoshop to produce an advertising poster to
promote our film and allow for an idea of how our project would
be publicised if produced for real.
 Photoshop helped throughout to provide a detailed media
product that advertised and promoted the film but although it
allowed for this the limitations preventing importing online
images made

4. What was good:
 The good parts of Photoshop included a high
quality image and editing ability to construct
good quality advertising material for the film
production.
What was bad:
 The program at times had problems to resize
certain images from the internet such as age
ratings or star ratings that would create
problems when producing a poster.

5. Final Cut Pro X
Final cut pro X
 Final cut pro X was used to edit together the film from start to
finish and allowed for a high quality rendered output and simple
upload to display the footage.
What was good:
 The program allowed us to complete the film into editing in a
professional and simple way allowing for vast editing
techniques such as cuts, transactions, alteration to footage,
titles and also to import sound files we produced in garage band
simply.
What was Bad:
 The program had one main floor we discovered when trying to
use quick time player to record the screen of the mac. This
resulted in the program crashing multiple times and preventing
us making progress with the tasks.

6. Prezzi
Prezzi:
 We used Prezzi to produce animated power points to display
some of the research and planning throughout the production.
What was good:
 It allowed for a professional looking presentation and worked as
a good alternative to the standard PowerPoint’s created in
Microsoft office.
What was bad:
 The program was good to use but when it came to uploading it
to blogger to present we encountered issues consisting of the
embed code being difficult to find and once on the blog would
occasionally not appear and have technical faults.

7. Websites
Blogger/ YouTube/ Slide share/ Weebly:
 The main platforms for the work we have completed have been compiled
onto the blogger and Weebly websites and then using slide share and
YouTube we where able to upload the content to link into the sites.
Good things:
 The good things about these sites is that it allowed for quick uploading and
organisation of the project through pages on blogger allowing us to create
individual pages to cover the topics or the ease to find an embed code from
the uploads on slide share and Weebly.
Bad things:
 The negatives we have found with the sites is that on a few occasions the
upload site slide share has been down for maintenance meaning the
uploaded content on the blogger can’t be accessed. Another issue with
blogger was figuring out how to setup pages initially was challenging and
presented challenge to figure out how to use the website layouts,
consequently impacting on time taken to organise the blog leaving lots of
posts unlinked and meaning we had a lot of hyperlinks to create on the
pages.

8. Garage Band
Garage band:
We used the program garage band to produce un
copyrighted sound tracks for the film that suited the genre
and meant we now have good quality music that is catchy
and makes the footage work better.
What we found good:
Un-Copyrighted, originality, ability to suit the sounds to the
theme.
What we found bad:
Similarity's with other groups audio who used similar
loops.

9. Microsoft word/ PowerPoint
Microsoft word/ PowerPoint:
 We used PowerPoint and word to produce documents for the
research and planning and also for the planning out of the
evaluation questions to produce documents to help with the
production of the film.
What was good:
 Word and PowerPoint worked well to produce high quality
documentation for the research and planning and helped to
present all the information in a simple way.
What was bad:
 The variety of features available in the programs where minimal
and did not allow for creativity whilst producing the research
and planning which made the information look plain and not
have anything unique to make it standout.

10. Padlet
Padlet:
 We used Padlet to produce the mind maps for genre
research in the initial research that we completed.
What was good:
 This program allowed us to produce a high quality
display of the genre information we had gathered
and produce it in a unique way.
What was bad:
 The program was strange to use and took time to
figure out how to use and import pictures into which
made the mind map difficult to construct.

11. Survey Monkey
Survey Monkey:
 Survey monkey allowed us to gather information from a
wider audience than our peers and use that information to
target the overall outlook of the film.
What was good:
 Survey monkey was good because it allowed us to collect
a lot of research data that we used in our planning to
influence how we designed the media product.
What was Bad:
 Survey monkeys only issue was that for the free access
we had we where limited to 10 questions and as a result
where limited to the amount of data we could collect.

12. Summary
We used a number of new technology's
throughout the project to develop the
quality of our written analysis and also the
creation of our media product.
The knowledge learned throughout
significantly improves our technical ability
with the new technology such as final cut,
garage band, blogger that we previously
has little experience using and improves
our ability with them for future work.