The document summarizes feedback received on a documentary created by the author. Viewers provided positive feedback on the opening sequence, variety of interview subjects, and camera shots. Negative feedback addressed poor framing of one interview subject and a lack of descriptive narration. A questionnaire indicated the documentary was informative and entertaining but could have improved technical quality and been more eye-catching. Overall, the author was pleased with the mostly constructive feedback and learned to focus more on technical aspects, descriptive narration, and properly framing interviews.

1. Q3.
What have you learned from your audience feedback?
By Joseph King
Audience Feedback Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CV14mnA25f4#t=91
For our audience feedback we decided upon interviewing 3
people that fitted inside our target audience criteria and
interviewing them on their opinions after watching our
documentary and also asked them to fill out a questionnaire
regarding key questions that may not have been answered
in the interviews.

2. Positive Feedback:
“The opening sequence was really professional”
“In your interviews you
got 3 different types of
people. And got a
different perspective of
the people that worked
there”
“The thing I liked this
documentary was the
different camera shots
at the beginning”

3. Negative Feedback:
“The one thing I would change was there was one interview where the guy wasn’t in a rule of thirds shot he
was looking away from the camera rather than across the camera”
I agree with this as we had also realised that we had got the framing of the interview wrong when deciding our
edit decision list and initially decided to not include it in the documentary. However after watching it again we
realised that he had said some key things we wished to include. After consulting with our teacher about it we
concluded that we would involve the interview regardless of its framing as we wanted variety to our interviews
and the interview with the editor allowed us this and also gave us relevant information relating to the topic.
Incorrect Framing:
This is incorrect as the
editor is talking out of
the shot (looking left)
whereas he should be
talking across the shot
(looking right)
Correct Framing:
This is correct as it has
the person being
interviewed talking
across the shot and
also fits in the rule of
thirds

4. “There wasn’t much description apart from the interviewing of people”
This is valid but was done purposely as we tried to keep narration to a minimum throughout as we wanted to
convey our information through interviews. This didn’t work as we found that without any narration it was very
awkward with extended parts of just music, so we chose upon having a small amount of narration but even with
this at parts you feel there should be more clearance on what is being talked about in the interviews.
“It was a bit short” and was “more like an advert”
I believe that the first part of this feedback is invalid as I don’t think that the person has realised that we only had
a five minute allocated time to create the documentary. I do believe however that the documentary is more like
an advert and less like an introduction to a documentary as it is to quick jumping from topic to topic and also the
constant music in the background makes it seem more indicative of an advert.
Negative Feedback Continued:

5. Questionnaire Feedback:
The feedback from the questionnaire’s in summary was very positive scoring high in being informative and
entertaining, I would agree that these are our strongest points as the interesting choice in topic makes it entertaining
and the interviews produce lots of information. However these questionnaire's highlighted that we could of done
better to improve areas such as technical quality and making it eye catching, I would agree that technical quality
could be improved in the way that shots could be better framed and be more stable but would disagree that it isn’t
eye catching as I think it is full of good aesthetical features and establishing shots. The last question was whether or
not it had obeying features of which we scored some average threes but was happy that we obtained a higher
amount of fives. I can understand why we got an average rating as some of the conventions of a professional
documentary were not involved such as vox pop and green screen interviews but I’m glad that we have more
positive than negative on this as one of the key things we set out to achieve was to make it as professional as possible.

6. Overall Feedback Summary:
Looking over our feedback I am pleased with the results obtained from our target audience as they
gave much more positive than I had initially expected, as I thought that the people who were kind
enough to give feedback would have picked up more on error in framing with the interview and also
the lack in narration, but more so gave positive and constructive feedback. I am glad with the negative
feedback our documentary received as it was mostly things that we were already aware of such as the
editors interview, narration and the final edit being more like an advert than an introduction.
By receiving this feedback it has allowed me to develop within media as If I was to do this same task
again I know the exact way I would go about it and due to feedback I would focus on the areas such
as making it more eye catching and technical aspects and make sure that these were all applied
appropriately and correctly. The main lesson I have been educated on through this however would to
be much more careful when setting up and arranging an interview together as often in the haste of
things you can get it very wrong, therefore this time I would be much more calm in my approach to
interviewing and would assess the shot before recording.