Evaluation Question 3

What have you learned from your audience feedback?

We conducted a group audience feedback session. We asked our audience about:
- Technical aspects
- Camera work
- Sound
- Editing
- Content
- Strengths
- Weaknesses
- Compare to professional products

The majority of our audience felt that our use of camera work and music fitted well o our production. This was because of a variety of camera shots being used, which were also creative. Some of the audience also commented on the low angle shots used on the buildings and that the hip hop music fitted the shots of graffiti along with the pipe music fitting the history section.

People had different opinions on their favourite section of the documentary. The majority varied between, the interview with the graffiti artist, the cross cutting between the head teacher and police man and the vox pop. The audience found all of these entertaining and fun to watch.

The audience commented on some of the weaknesses in the programme. Such as there not being enough audio gain in certain parts of the documentary where the voice over was. Also some of the audience felt that the betoven music used in the background of the black and white section didn’t fit the genre. Another weakness which was commented on was that our documentary would be more suited to a younger audience mainly because we interviewed a young graffiti artist.

The majority of the audience said they would watch the full 30 minute documentary. They felt that the strengths in the content were the history, and the interview with the graffiti artist.

When comparing our documentary to real media products our audience felt that it was edited professionally, the graphics worked well and it was edited very professionally.

The majority of our audience felt that our radio trailer advertised our documentary well because it teased and made them want to watch it. The audience also felt that the print advert linked well to the documentary and was a good sum up of it.



Shanny, 30 "The best part of the documentary was the interview with the graffiti artist because it was interesting and the images in the background looked good."










































Angela, 42 "I didn't feel that there was enough audio gain used in certain parts of the voice over but overall the editing was professional and it compared well to real documentaries."

Olivia, 38 "I liked the first five minutes of the production because it was intruiging and I found the debate interesting"

Joan 59 "I like most of the production, however I didn't think that the music went well with the black and white part of the programme"

James, 32 " I would definately watch the full 30 minutes of the programme and I thought the camera work was good through out, especially on different shots of buildings"

Jamie, 40 "I would definately watch the full thirty minutes of the programme because I would like to gain more insight into the topic as I am unfamiliar with it"






















Al, 56 "I thought that a strength of the documentary was a use of creative camera work and a weakness was that may be it would be suited to a younger audience."






















Andrew, 34 "The radio trailer is good because it tells the audience when to watch it and makes the show sound itneresting"

John, 58 "I thought the radio trailer advertised the programme well, it sort of teased the audience on what it was about"

Chloe, 35 "I think that the print advert was very creative, although simple"

Tracey, "The print advert definately advertises the programme well, however some parts of it were a bit quiet"

In conclusion, to what we have found out from our audience feedback that I have gathered are, most of our target audience made a comment about the black and white feature of our documentary, which shows it was a success in trying to make an interesting part in the programme.
Some of our the target audience commented on the fact that the documentary might also be suited to a younger audience, this may suggest that we could make our target audience a little wider.
There was various different parts of the programme which were commented on as good content, showing that what we did was a success and there wasn't just one good part but many parts.