The document provides feedback from an audience on various elements of a student documentary project. The feedback was generally positive and showed that the audience engaged well with the first 5 minutes and wanted to watch more. Elements like camerawork, editing, and sound design were rated highly, though some felt there was room for improvement. Additionally, the audience provided positive feedback on promotional materials like the radio trailer, print ad, slogan and themes, finding them relevant and intriguing for the documentary. This audience testing provided helpful insights and showed high interest in the full documentary.

1. Audience Feedback

2. Blank Questionnaire

3. After seeing the first 5 minutes of our
documentary, would you be interested in
watching the rest of the documentary?
This shows that
everyone answered yes
to wanting to watch the
documentary, this
shows that the first 5
minuets engaged the
audience, and made
them want to watch it.

4. To gain feedback that was detailed, we then asked
why they would or wouldn’t want to watch the rest
of our documentary. Some quotes include;
“Variety of shots and camera movement made it
entertaining to watch”
“engages the audience well and makes you want to watch
it”
“Because of the well filmed, steady cutaways, all
consistent flow and complete relevance with script”
“Provides good and key information about the chosen
topic”
The feedback shows that people thought there was good
shots and camera work, that made it easy to watch and the
information given in the first 5 minuets makes the audience
engaged, and want to watch the rest of the documentary.

5. Camerawork
Cutaways
Editing
Sound
Mise-en-scene
1 2 3 4 5
5
3 4
3
1
4 4
3 2 3
31 4
We then asked the target audience to rate the
different elements of our documentary, on a scale
of 1-5, with 5 being the best.
The feedback shows that on
average, most of the target
audience rated our camera work a 4,
which shows that it could be
improved, but overall is good, with
no less than 4 being the score. The
cutaways got a mixed response,
ranging from 3-5 as the score. This
shows they were relevant but could
also be improved. The editing got a
good response, with it ranging from
4-5 equally.

6. We asked why the audience rated each of the elements
what they did, and these are some of the feedback we
gained and the score they gave along with it;
“good flowing of conventions for professional
interviews (rule of thirds)”
“very well filmed, more techniques could have been
used such as zoom in & cut”
“Clear view of interviewees and mise-en-scene”
“Some interesting shot types and camera zooms for
cutaways”
Camerawork;

7. “Variety of archive material and well don’t self shot
footage”
“Interesting variety that keep audience engaged”
“Relatable to topic, enlightening however some too
short”
“Related to the topic”
Cutaways;
Editing;
“Ran smoothly throughout
“Editing flowed throughout the documentary”
“Flowed well continuously”
“Linked in together”

8. “Incorporated music for entertainment, narration and
interviews were at appropriate levels”
“Bit pitchy – noise in back”
“Clear and concise, easy to hear/understand”
“Soundtrack links to subject v/o focused”
Sound;
Mise-en-scene;
“Lots of fruit & vegetables in the background to
remain relevant”
“Like the ‘in situ’ mise-en-scene in the shops and
vegetable shop”
“Relatable to topic and work placed”
“Majority of interviews background linked to
documentary”

9. What do you like or dislike about our
voiceover?
“Liked the fact it was clear, concise and straight
forward with professional emphasis on words”
“Voiceover was clear and you could understand
everything”
“Good, clear, understandable”
“It linked well with the topic”

10. Did you think that our chosen themes
of, healthy eating and 5-a-day, was a
constructive choice for creating a
documentary?
Yes
No
One person answered no, they
suggested we could've used
themes including “Sports,
disabilities, education”.
This shows that the majority of
the target audience though our
chosen themes where a good
choice, and the themes were
relevant. We could include other
suggested themes throughout
the documentary.

11. In what ways do you feel we
successfully addressed our chosen
theme within the first five minutes of
our documentary? Feedback included;
“The cutaways and vox pops”
“Cutaways, well filmed & good camera work”
“All of the interviews are relevant, the title
sequence anchors the purpose of the
documentary well”
“Title sequence gave a clear indication”

12. Did you feel our title, U-Trition,
effectively reinforce the themes of our
documentary? Feedback included;
“Yes – It is related however some maybe
confused”
“Yes – Connotes fruit and vegetables”
“Yes and No – Maybe a different title”
“Yes – it has a young feel to it which will
broaden the audience”

13. Would you watch our documentary
after listening to our radio trailer?
Everyone answered yes to this question. This shows that our radio
trailer makes the audience want to find out more by watching the
documentary, and it enticed them.

14. Do you think our radio trailer
provided a relevant amount of
information?
Everyone answered yes to this question. This shows that the target
audience thought our radio trailer had a good amount of
information about our documentary, and that the information given
is relevant to our documentary.

15. If so, what information do you
think was relevant? Feedback
included;
“The narration made the topic clear”
“Script – informative, well spoken and clear”
“Channel and time and I knew exactly what the
documentary was based on”
“There were too many soundbites”

16. Voice Over
Music
Editing
Sound
1 2 3 4 5
1
4 2
5
2
2 5
1 4 3
We then asked the target audience to rate the
different elements of our radio trailer, on a scale of
1-5, with 5 being the best.
The feedback shows that on
average, most of the target
audience rated our Voice over a 5,
which shows overall people thought
it was good. The music we used got
a mixed response, ranging from 3-5
as the score. This shows it is
relevant but could also be
improved. The editing got a varied
response, with some rating it a 3
and others a 5. The sound also got a
varied but good response, ranging
from 3-5.
1

17. “Well narrated”
“Same as documentary which anchored the
message”
“Clear, linked everything together”
Voice Over;
Music;
“Anchors the documentary well”
“Was upbeat, positive”
“Overpowered the speech a little”
“Effectively links to the title”

18. “Ran smoothly”
“Good use of editing transitions”
“No jumps, well put together”
“Suitable, quick fire”
Editing;
Sound;
“Good quality”
“Music bed consistently playing keeps trailer ‘fresh’
sounding”
“Good range”
“Slightly louder”

19. Do you think our print ad is eye-
catching enough for our documentary?
Everyone answered yes to this question. This shows that the target
audience thought that our print ad would catch their attention, and
would attract them to want to watch the documentary.

20. We asked the audience to explain
why. Feedback included;
“Bright colours & relevant imagery”
“Image is bright and professional”
“Very professional graphic of throat”
“Colours very bright”

21. Would you want to watch our
documentary after seeing our print ad?
Everyone answered yes to this question. This shows that the target
audience found the print ad enticing, and would want to watch the
documentary based off of the information they can see on the print
ad.

22. Do you think our colour scheme used is
relevant to the documentary and the
themes of 5-a-day?
Everyone answered yes to this question. This shows that the target
audience thought the colour scheme was relevant to our theme of
our documentary, and shows the theme of 5-a-day, through the use
of imagery.

23. We asked the audience to explain
why. Feedback included;
“Green connotes fruit and veg”
“fruit is bright, and so are the colours”
“Green links with health”
“Green connotes veg & healthy food”

24. Do you think the main image we used is
appropriate for our documentary?
Everyone answered yes to this question. This shows that the target
audience thinks the image used reflects our documentary, and is
appropriate, for the audience to be able to identify what our
documentary is about, based off of our documentary.

25. We asked the audience to explain
why. Feedback included;
“Evident it is about food”
“Relates to the topic of eating healthy”
“There is a direct link between the image and
the message of the documentary, it is clear that
is underpins the concept that ‘you are what you
eat’”

26. Text
Layout
Editing
Image
1 2 3 4 5
1
2 6
7
1
2 6
1 4 6
We then asked the target audience to rate the
similarities to other Channel 4 print ads, on a scale
of 1-5, with 5 being the best.
The feedback shows that on
average, most of the target
audience rated our text a 5,
which shows overall people
thought it was good. The
layout of our print ad got a
majority score of 5,but one
gave it a 1. The editing got a
varied response, with the
majority giving it a 5. The
colour scheme got a varied
response with most of the
audience giving it a 5.
1
Colour scheme
Logo
1
1
513
71

27. “Visual, eye catching”
“Very professional, links well”
“Quite plain, could do with a different font”
Text;
Layout;
“Everything is clearly set out”
“Spacious, allows us to get a clear view”
“Similar to a professionals print advert”
Editing;
“Good, clear, well edited”
“Good use of Photoshop”
“Overall fits nicely together”

28. “Relatable, interesting”
“Striking”
“Good image which shows the genre”
Image;
Colour
scheme;
“Reflects food”
“Could use more colour”
“Bright, suits the theme”
Logo;
“Positioned clearly”
“Fits the channel well”
“Similar to professional print adverts”

29. Do you think our slogan is relevant
to our documentary?
Everyone answered yes to this question. This shows that the target
audience thinks the slogan used reflects the themes of our
documentary.

30. We asked the audience to explain
why. Feedback included;
“It links to the radio trailer”
“It asks the audience a direct question,
therefore intriguing them”
“Uses keywords”