Evaluation Question 3

What have you learned from your audience feedback?

Documentary:

Question 1

From this graph i can conclude that on a whole, the people who answered my questionnaire found the our documentary "NON-SENSE" was very informative as 12 out of 19 people asked rated it 5 out 5 which is the highest rating available. This means that we included enough relevant information within the documentary and the interviews to satisfy the audience. However, seeing as one person answered 3 out of 5 and 6 more answer 4 out of 5, i can see that there is still room to include more content in the interview to interest the audience. To add to this, the following question details what the audience believe that could have been included.

Question 2

Is there anything else you would have found beneficial to include?

Some of the answers are as follows:

• More cut aways on the first interview
  
• A voice over in between the two interviews
  
• More about different blind people/partially sighted people
  
• Biology behind sight/how eyes work
  
• More interviews
• The affects on Margret Ross' husband

This shows that even though the majority of people found that the documentary was informative, we could still include more information of a variety of topics.

Question 3

This graph shows that most people found the interview with the guide dog trainer to be the most interesting part of the documentary and the Margret Ross interview being the second most interesting part. This tells me that the audience found the interviews to be the most interesting part of the documentary and therefore the rest of the documentary such as the vox pops, could be improved.

Question 4

This graph shows that the results of our questionnaire varies from 1 out of 5 to 5 out of 5. Naturally, the documentary will not appeal to everyone, especially if they are not in the target audience, and because only one person gave the interview with Margret Ross a low rating i can see that the majority of people who answered the questionnaire found the interview with Margret Ross to be of some interest.

Question 5

I can conclude from these results that the interview with Penny Williams was more interesting to the audience than the interview with Margret Ross as 9 out of 19 people rated it at a 5 where as only 5 out of 19 people rated the Margret Ross interview as a 5.

Question 6

With 26% of our audience rating the sound quality of our documentary a 5, 21% rating it at a 4 and 16% rating it at a 3 we can see that the results are quite close and from this we can assume that the can be improvements made to the sound quality of the documentary. The following question asks the audience what they liked and disliked about the sound quality of our documentary.

Question 7

• The music didn't interfere with the voice over
  
• The music was loud on the radio trailer
  
• The levels were good but the music cut out too soon
  
• Some of the music on the radio trailer was too loud
  
• The music sometimes overwhelmed the audio

From this we can see what the audience believe would be beneficial changes we could make and more over what they believe we did well with the sound quality of the documentary.

Question 8

With 11 out of 19 people rating the editing quality at 4 out of 5 i can see that the audience found the editing to a high quality however, there is room for improvement. Knowing this enables us to look back at our editing of the documentary and see what more we could have done/will do to make the editing as good as it can be.

Question 9

By asking the audience how they found the continuity of the documentary we can see that the majority of them found that the documentary flowed fairly well together.

Question 10

Because most people (1 out of 19) rated the camera work our documentary at a 3 out of 5 we can see that the camera work could be improved. By using more camera angles and shots our camera work would be more interesting and creative, meaning that it would attract the audience more.

Question 11

All of people who answered our questionnaire said that our documentary followed the codes and conventions of a real documentary. This tells us that we were successful in producing a professional looking media piece compared to other real documentaries.

News Print:

Question 12

I can conclude from this graph that the people who answered our questionnaire, on the whole, found our news print to be very eye catching. With 3 out of 5 being the lowest score, we can see that no one found that our news print was of an unsatisfactory standard.

Question 13

Because the majority of people rated the link between our documentary and our news print as a 4 out of 5, i can see that there is room for improvement which could make the link between the to media's a lot stronger. By making this link stronger the audience will be able to relate the news paper advert to the documentary.

Question 14

The results of our questionnaire reflect how the majority of people who answered the questionnaire liked the design of the news print. We can see that our design was therefore successful in comparison to a professional news print and also successful in advertising our documentary and persuading the audience to watch it.

Question 15

By looking at the results of our audience questionnaire, i can see that 5 out of 5 was the most frequent rating which shows how the audience found our news print to be intriguing meaning that it should influence them to watch the whole documentary.

Radio Trailer:

Question 16

Because 9 out of 19 people said that how well the radio trailer flows was a 4 out of 5 i can see that it has worked quite well. However, because 5 out of 19 people rated it only as a 3 out of 5, this means that some people thought it less successful than others which means that we could review the radio trailer and compare it to the codes and conventions of a real radio trailer and then make changes accordingly.

Question 17

A fair amount of people rated the music bed of our radio trailer as 3 out of 5 which let's me see that the music bed was not entirely successful. From previous questions in the questionnaire i already learned that parts of the music bed were too loud and sometimes blocked out the voice over.

Question 18

Most people agreed that our radio trailer linked well to our documentary by giving it 5 out of 5. However, the fact that the results show a slight variation means that some people believed that our radio trailer could be improved. On the whole, the since the lowest rating was 3 out of 5 then i can see that the radio trailer could be related more strongly to the documentary.

Question 19

From the results of our questionnaire i can see that the majority of people gave the sound quality of our radio trailer a 3 out of 5. From previous questions we have highlighted faults in the volume of the music bed and the beginning being unclear.

Question 20

I can conclude from these results that most people found that the radio trailer would make them want to watch the whole documentary. Out of 5, 7 people rated the radio trailer as 3, 10 rated the radio trailer as 10 and 2 people rated the radio trailer as 5. This tells me that we were successful in creating a persuasive radio trailer which makes the audience want to watch the documentary.

Another method which i used to obtain audience feedback was by posting the media products on facebook and youtube. People looked at my media pieces and commented their opinion.

Here is a video of the screen grabs i took from facebook and youtube:

I learned from the comments off facebook that:

- People found the documentary interesting

- The beginning sequence was creative, attention grabbing and interesting

- People found the interview about the guide dogs interesting as they found out things which they'd not known before.

- People enjoyed having a true story/insight

- The cut aways were good and supported the answer.

- The title 'Non-sense' was clever and witty

- The background of the interview was relative

- The sound levels of the voxpops were sometimes a little low or unclear

I learned from the comments off youtube that:

- Everything flowed nicely

- It was interesting to hear the perspectives of a blind person

- It was interesting to learn about how guide dogs are trained

- The beginning of the documentary was a little hard to hear/understand