In what ways does your media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real media products?

My media is in a documentary genre. Within my Short Film I used may aspects which are typical do a documentary. For instance I had the aim/introduction of what my documentary was about before showing the title of my film. Another thing I did which was typical of a documentary genre is to see the presenter and interviewee's driving in cars, documentaries often have this as interviews move on from one to the next. Furthermore, I also interviewed two experts within the field that I was talking about, experts too are often included within documentaries, what they're experts in simply depends on the topic of the documentary. In my case, this was body image therefore I chose a plastic surgeon and a lady that performs lazar treatment. Something else which is also true of documentary format is using unsteady/shaky shots. Not all the shots that I used were perfectly steady, something which is varied in documentaries. With all these things in mind, it shows that a lot of what I have included conforms to a typical documentary style. This can be seen as a good thing, as it means people pick up on and recognise documentary conventions that i've used, however a negative thing because perhaps I should've pushed the boundaries of what documentaries usually include and gone for something a bit different. Having said this, as so many documentaries include the elements I have above, it suggests that in order for a documentary to be good, they include similar aspects.
Something I did which challenged the forms of a traditional documentary was instead of summarising the interviewees points by showing a presenter talking about what they'd said afterwards, I used images on the screen to convey this message whilst using a voiceover. I said the same thing as I would've done if i'd have been on the filmed myself but through the form of images. In some respects I think this worked well, as I wasn't featured as a presenter throughout due to practical reasons, I felt showing me summarising their points could've been slightly confusing. Usually documentaries show the presenter talking about the interview afterwards. Cherry Healy usually does this for instance by giving her opinion outside where the interview has commensed or when going home on the train for example.
Another thing I did which is slightly different to the traditional documentary style was what whilst interviewing the plastic surgeon and Victoria who performs the lazar treatment I kept changing between their interviews. One moment you'd see Victoria answering a question and the next you'd see Dr Clibbon answering the same question. It is usual to see a question being answered one person after another straight away, however because they were in the same location and because Dr Clibbons interview was in quite a boring set up, with him simply sitting down directly in front of a camera, I felt it worked well to swap back and forth between the two of them.
What usually happens in documentaries is that one interview takes place and then it moves forward and another person is introduced, they don't swap between interviews just like that. In some respects I also conformed to to this traditional concept, as this is what I did when moving from The Sk;n Clinic on to Beth's interview. I feel the balance between using this traditional element, combined with something a different like I did when swapping between Victoria and Dr Clibbon's interviews worked well.
Another element usually seen in documentaries is the interviews taking place in a location that is relevant to the person involved. This I conformed to as a filmed Victoria/Dr Clibbon where they work and Beth at her Sixth Form. Having said this, usually in documentaries you see someone being interviewed in their home or at a local cafe, something which isn't done in my Short Film. I didn't chose a cafe due to the fact they're often very noise environments and I did film my Nan at home, however her interview I didn't feel worked that well so wasn't included, this then put me off doing interviews within the interviewees home environments. I do feel however, if I had more time in my short, I would've interviewed some more people and one of these more likely would've been that their house. For instance, I probably would've filmed Alice who has suffered from anorexia at her home, in order to see pictures of her when she lost weight and how far she has come.
One obvious thing I conformed to was how long my Short was. It was a Short Film lasting just over 5 minutes which is approximately how long most short films are. One way I challenged traditional Short Films however is my genre its self. My genre is a documentary and it is usual to have a short film that is in this genre. This was proven by the fact I found it difficult to research Documentary Short Films, not a huge amount came up in comparison to a genre like horror for example. If I was to stay true to the convention of a typical documentary, my Short Film would've probably ended up being made into a television programme, like those screened often on Channel 4.

How did you use media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation stages?

In the construction of my media coursework I used iMovie to edit my Short Film. Many people used Adobe however because I have iMovie software at home, it was easier for me and more practical to stick with this software instead. Not only this, but as I used iMovie for AS I already knew how to use the software making editing quick and affective. iMovie allowed me to gather and place together all my footage so that it all linked together, record my voiceover over the top of my footage, add in the title of my film as well as the credits, mute background noise from the lazar treatment clip with Victoria, speed up the pace of the clip consisting of me doing my make up, crop the footage where beauty products are shown on a self at the 'Sk;n' Clinic so that the tripod was not visible in the mirrored reflection, shorten or lengthen the time of clips, and remove the audio of some footage so that the voiceover was able to be recorded without any noise behind it.

When actually filming my coursework I used a sony digital HD camera which gave me good quality footage and is a simple camera to use with a substantial battery life which came in handy when filming. Aside from filming, microsoft word and photoshop were essential when constructing my magazine review and poster as these were the two programmes I used to create them.

In terms of research, the internet was a very important tool. I was able to use Youtube in order to search Short Films to see what they consisted of. This was very useful as previously I had not watched any short films therefore was eager to see how a plot was fitted into such a short time frame. Not only youtube, but I used the main search engine 'Google' in order to search specifically 'Documentary Short Films' this was because there wasn't many on Youtube. Watching some that linked to the exact genre I was doing really helped in my choosing a topic to base my documentary on and see similar elements that they had included. 

Sites such as iPlayer, 40d and Five On Demand also helped with this because although they do not feature Documentary Films, these sites have a wide range of Documentary Programmes to view, and by watching some of these, it also helped me to gain knowledge on what topic to chose and how a Documentary is executed. Specifically, I watched some my Cherry Healey.

Not only did I use the internet to research ideas for my Short Film, it was was very essential in enabling me to research information on what to include in my ancillary tasks. Google was used in order to look at a vast range of Short Film posters, some particularly for my Documentary Genre. I also used the internet to look at the main site for 'Empire Magazine' which was really influential when creating my film review, as they're one of the leading magazine film reviewers. I also went to watch some Short Films at 'Cinema City' in Norwich which like watching the clips on YouTube, helped me to gain a better understanding of what a Short Film consisted of. Watching television channels, like channel 4 also helped as they show many documentary style programmes.

In terms of planning, I used microsoft word in order to create a mind map to explore different ideas and concepts. I also used microsoft word in order to write a script for my production and to create release forms for my characters to sign saying that I had permission to film them. A video camera was often used in order for me to record myself discussing my ideas and my progression, this helped me as I was able to look back at this videos and remind myself what I had come up with so far. I also used a video camera when conducting audience research videos as recording peoples videos was a fun and interactive way of getting to know their views. I used a digital camera in order to take photos of my locations and characters, which helped me decide on final locations and narrow down the characters that I was using because originally I had too many.

Finally, for my evaluation I have not been able to record myself unfortunately due to the fact my iMovie is currently not working correctly, therefore I have used my blog to write essay style answers. I have also used the internet to include some pictures however in oder to make my answers more appealing. As well as original images of my poster and magazine review in order for people to see visually what I am talking about. Lastly, I used my laptop in order to take print screens of the footage from my media coursework in order to illistrate my points when discussing my audience feedback.

How effective is the combination of your main product and your ancillary tasks?

The aim and overall theme of my documentary was 'whether the media influence how someone feels about the way they look.' It was this sentenced that I wanted to bare in mind when creating my poster/magazine review. This was because I felt this sentence summaries my documentary, therefore if I created a poster and magazine review conveying this message, it was sure to support and advertise well the Short Film that I had produced.

I conveyed this message with my poster by putting newspaper text in the background. Like the magazines that were shown in my film, this text represents the media. As seen on the front cover of the magazines in my Documentary, I chose to feature a very beautiful and airbrushed model on my poster. One which looked perfected and too good to be true, in other words, false. Having her face featured represented the media using unrealistic images for young girls to conform to. I also felt by creating my poster in the style of  the front cover of a magazine almost, helped to link it to the magazines and beautiful faces that were shown in my Documentary. The image of the girl I put on my poster also had lines across her face, these lines symbolised her having plastic surgery in order to look how she does. This again links to my Documentary, as a plastic surgeon is interviewed, as well as the idea that the images on magazines are not real, they do not represent what a 'real' person looks like. Aside from that, I was keen not to have too much on my poster, I wanted to keep it simplistic and to ensure it did not become over complicated. I felt with the background newspaper text, the perfected image and the lines on her face all worked in drawing the conclusion that my documentary was about how the media use false images on their front cover that don't represent what the average person looks like and that plastic surgery can play a part in this. I felt I had conveyed this message well through the means of images, rather than writing too much text. The only text I did include on my poster was the title and the date. The title also helps to convey what my documentary is about ''The False Reality.'' This is the idea that the images we see are false but that is the harsh reality of how it is nowadays. The date was included as it is essential it is included on a film poster so that the audience know when it is realised. Overall I felt my poster worked nicely with my film that i'd created. I feel I was able to give off the main point of my documentary through images, which I feel is what a poster aims to do. I chose the text to be black and white as text often is in the media industry and the picture was made to look extra false by making the girls skin look perfected and adjusting her eye colour so that it was obvious that they didn't reflect the natural colour of her eyes. Not only did I enable people to workout the aim of my documentary but I also gave them some information of the kind of things that would be featured in my documentary, i.e. the plastic surgeon due to the surgery lines on her face and the magazines due to the media text situated behind her. I think my poster reflects my film well and I don't think there is anything I would change in order to improve it. The colour of the text for my film date and colour of the girls lips even goes with my documentary as a similar tone of pink was used in the title/credits of my film, making them combine affectively. One thing I would change however, is that I should've included the production logo (seen here on the bottom right hand corner) in my film. This wasn't something I had thought of until I had completed my film and started my poster, and I think they would've combined slightly better if my production logo was shown in my film, something which it doesn't currently feature.

Moving on from my poster, I then created my Magazine Review. Unlike my poster, which I feel combines with my Documentary really well, I do not feel my review compliments my short film quite as well.

I feel the colour of the text works well with both my poster and my Documentary film. The pink tone is consistent throughout all three of my pieces and works not just because it is featured in all of them but because pink is a colour which represents my target audience for my film - young females. The dark purple in the background, I feel also works because this colour also would be liked by my target audience as it is a colour majority of young females like. This colour however it not featured in my poster, therefore you could argue the colours used don't combine affectively. Having said this, I was unable to have the same background as on my poster because that would've meant putting text on top of text which would have been almost impossible to read. The purple colour is however featured within my documentary when I am putting on my make up and you can see the wallpaper with purple tones included behind me, so in some aspects the colour works well. I also didn't feel it was appropriate to leave the background completely white, therefore I feel I chose the right colour as a background. In terms of the title the colours match with the poster as the same grey is used. In hindsight however, I feel placing the word 'false' in a different colour/text like I have in my review worked really well and was effective and I probably should've done this with the title of my poster and the title in my Documentary too. Another thing I feel which would've helped combine my poster, review and film together was if i'd have chosen the same font for the tile of my Documentary. They have all been placed in different ones and they wouldn't looked neater and more professional and consistent if i'd have placed them all in the same font. Having said this, the title of my poster and magazine review are in similar fonts, just my review font is thinner and smaller because there is less room on a review than a poster, plus the fonts available on iMovie are very limiting so there's not garentee I would've been able to use the same font for my film tile in my documentary anyway. I feel the information box of the top left of my review doesn't necessarily combine well with my documentary. This is because I made up the information due to the fact I thought it would look more affective, for instance saying a films running time is only 5 minutes doesn't look that impressive. If I was to do this again, I would ensure that all the information in the box was truly relevant to my actual production, regardless of how professional it appeared as it doesn't accurately reflect what my film is actually like. An example of this would be the fact there are only three interviewees in the film, not the five that are suggested. I do feel however that it was necessary to include this information box and it was an important factor to include within my review, this is demonstrated by the fact most professional reviews, such as Empire Magazine include a basic box of the films information. In terms of the images used in my review, I feel that it doesn't really combine very well with my film and poster. I think I should've included the image of the director however also included some images of the characters in my documentary and perhaps the image of the girl shown on the poster. From the review, visually people do not know who is featured, something that I definitely was wrong not to have included. Having this image would've allowed my 3 pieces to interlink more appropriately and including the images wouldn't have taken very long to do. In terms of the text however, I feel the plot outline combines my magazine review, poster and film affectively. This is because the plot outline is obviously what my documentary is about but just summarised into a couple of sentences in my review and the poster represents this same plot outline, but instead demonstrates this via images instead of text. I feel the review text itself in some ways combines well with my short film however it other ways does not. This because I did not get feed back on my Shot Film before writing my review, therefore the positive and negative comments I made were strictly my own views and what I suspected the audience would think of my work. This meant that the overall review is not 100% accurate to what the audience stated. Another thing that changes this is due to the fact I had very limited space to right my review on therefore couldn't include as many aspects as I wanted to due to shortage of space. This means that due to lack of detail people may not get a true reflection of what my film is actually like, meaning it doesn't combine hugely affectively. Having said this, I got as much detail as I could in within the space I had and some aspects I what I included myself, for instance the idea I should've focused more on the media industry rang true when I got back my audience research. The same is true for the overall verdict, this should've been made once my audience feedback was gathered, however I do feel it does reflect what my audience said about my film regardless, however it could've been slightly more precise. Lastly, the fact the title of the film in my review has a white background behind it combines well with my film as the title there too had a white background. Although the background of the title in the poster is not white, it is still a nude colour which is similar. 

In conclusion, overall I feel the combination of my film and poster worked really well. I feel the message of my documentary is conveyed accurately via images in my poster. I also feel that the colour scheme is similar as shown in my documentary and I like how certain elements of the poster foreshadow what is seen in the documentary, i.e. the plastic surgeon. The only thing I think that could change about my poster in order for it to combine with my film would be for me to have included my production logo within my film. I don't feel that my magazine is as affective with combining it to my main product. I feel the colours combine well however the information in the information box is misleading and the review text isn't completely accurate due to having not gotten feedback before I wrote it and lack of space. The plot outline combines affectively with my Documentary and poster however. In hindsight I should've include two more images on my review, one of character interviewed in my coursework and another of the lady situated on the poster, this would've enabled all three elements to combine better. Another thing that would have meant they combined better would've been if the exact same font was used in all three elements. 

What have you learned from your Audience Feedback?

I have learned many things from my audience feedback, both positive and negative aspects of my work. Whether the comments were positive of negative, they have helped me to learn a great deal about what worked well within my Short Film and what improvements I could've made.

My Documentaries opens with the audience seeing magazines on a shelf. People in the feedback said they liked the fact the magazines were shown as they represented the media really well visually, whilst I was talking about the media via the means of a voiceover. They did say however in my feedback, that this was one of the few times the media were mentioned/included in my short. Considering the main aim of my documentary was to discover whether or not the media influenced the way someone feels about their appearance the media played a key roll and some people in the feedback felt as though I should've brought the media into it more, and the magazines being shown were one of the few times this happened.

After this shot, the audience still see some magazines but the camera focuses specifically on the beautiful women that are on the front covers. The audience felt this was good as it still meant the media was involved in the film and that by showing the 'perfect' airbrushed images helped to demonstrate my point that the media put pressure on people to conform to a certain image. They did say however in some of the feedback sheets that one of the magazines (the first one show) was considerably creased which didn't look professional. In hind sight, I probably shouldn't have included this specific magazine and chose another front cover to feature in my documentary. None the less, I feel it was important to show the images of these unrealistic models.

The shot that comes after this was arguably the most popular mentioned in my feedback, it is of me putting on my make up. A few said they liked the fact this scene was sped up and faster than any of the other shots, as this made it look different and stand out from the others. They also tended to say that they liked how I was shown in my documentary, as it introduced me, which they felt was important because it was me who was doing the voiceover and the overall aim of the short film is to answer a question I want to find out - it is personal to me. Furthermore, they liked that it was me putting on my make up, as the theme of the documentary is how someone feels about the way they look, therefore putting my make up on allows this theme to be consistent throughout. The downside about this shot however was that some people suggested it was a shame I wasn't quite sitting central within the frame. I am sitting slightly more to one side, whereas it would've been better for me to be placed in the centre of the shot. I did attempt to fix this as I had realised the issue myself, however using the cropping tool in imovie meant that it also cropped some of my shoulder too, which made it look worse therefore I decided to leave it how it was. A final negative also was that people said it was a shame this was the only time I was seen in the documentary. They felt it would've been good if I was a consistent presenter throughout. It originally was my idea to do this, however I realised due to practicality it was best if I wasn't shown all the time in my documentary. This was because then I would have to have someone filming me all the time too, which isn't always appropriate.

The 4th shot shown was of me driving in a car. There are two shots of people driving in cars in my documentary, one of me towards the start and one of my friend Beth featured later in the short. Something mentioned in the feedback was that they liked how I had filmed people in cars as these are iconic documentary shots as many documentaries include showing someone in a vehicle or some form of transport, i.e. a train. They also mentioned they liked how i'd used varied shots. From outside of the cars, to inside showing Beth's face, her turning the wheel as well as through her car windscreen, I didn't use just one long shot in the car like documentaries can do occasionally.

Next, after a mini introduction of what my film entails the title of my documentary is shown. A positive about this that was mentioned was that the title didn't come in straight away. Like with the cars being shown, people felt this element was something that was iconic to documentaries, as demonstrated (one person said) in many done by Cherry Healey on BBC 3. People also tended to say by having an introduction about the documentary before bringing in the title it was able to give them an overview about the aim of the piece which mean't they were engaged. The downside about the title that was mentioned, as well as with the credits at the end was that even though the colour of the font was good (pink) as it went well with my target audience (young females) the font and background colour of the text (white) was very bland and not very exciting. People felt I could've chosen a fancier font and had a background image which related to my documentary. Having said this, some complimented the chosen font indicating that it was easy to read, plus one person said they liked the credits at the end because they were quick so didn't become tedious.

One positive mentioned was that when arriving at places where the interviews were being conducted I did establishing shots outside of the venues. This is demonstrated outside of the 'Sk;n' clinic and outside Beth's Sixth Form, 'Wymondham High Sixth Form.' People mentioned that it was good to have establishing shots so that the audience could see where the interview was taking place and some even said it helped to move the documentary forward from one interview to the next. It made it clear that the documentary had moved from one location to another.

A shot which wasn't very popular was inside of the Sk;n clinic. The audience felt this wasn't really necessary and an establishing shot of outside of the clinic was all that was needed before seeing the interview. They said the reception area looked dark so could've done with brightening up in iMovie. They did however, like the shot of the beauty product on the shelf. Some people commented that this demonstrated just how focused the clinic was on a person's appearance. 1 person also said that it was good to see the beauty products close up, a camera angle which wasn't often used.

Inside the Sk'n clinic I interviewed Dr Clibbon and Victoria and later at 'Wymondham High Sixth Form' I interviewed Beth. One of the most positive comments mentioned in feedback was that people liked that I had interviewed experts within the cosmetic industry, they said it showed that I went out of my way to contact people that knew what they were talking about, plus the fact interviewing experts is something commonly shown in Documentaries. Having said this, and as mentioned earlier, people felt an expert from the Media industry would've been good to include too, in order to create a more balanced argument. They also liked Beth's interview as she has a disfigurement therefore they felt it was really valuable talking to someone who could tell the audience how the media affected the way they felt about their self esteem.

One thing they liked more about Beth's interview was that varied shots were used. Interviews can sometimes be quite bland but by interviewing Beth using varied camera angles help to make the interview more interesting to watch. In contrast, a negative mentioned about Dr clibbons interview was that in his there were no varied camera angles. It is simply him talking stationary into a camera. Some people found this quite boring and I probably could've done with having another camera in the room to get him from two different angles. Having said this, I felt this was easier to do when interviewing Beth as I had two hours to complete her interview whereas with Dr Clibbon he had other patients to see so time was limiting. I did attempt to make this interview more interesting however by swapping between his interview and Victoria's in order to break up shots slightly which people felt worked well. They specifically liked how Victoria was interviewed whilst performing treatment, instead of doing a simple sit down interview. A negative mentioned about Victoria's interview however was the volume levels, people said at times it was difficult to hear her. This was something I tried to rectify by downloading iMovie 11' in order to take out some of the background noise. In doing so, this meant that Victoria's voice was also muted slightly. Regardless of this, I felt it was still important to include her interview as she is an expert in the industry and knows whether the media influences the way someone feels about their appearance.

After each interview, I summarised each persons comments by using images on the screen and through the means of the voiceover. Many people mentioned they liked how i'd summarised their points, making them clear and concise and using the images made this more interesting. Some pointed out that it would've been better if i'd have summarised the points by me being shown on camera, as many presenters featured in documentaries do. However, as I said earlier, i'd decided not to be in my documentary due to practical issues. Some also said that although the images I used were good, I could've taken my own images and made the more personal to my short film. This I don't think would've worked because of the fact I am useless at drawing and getting a primary image of one of the people I used (Katy Piper) would not have been possible.

Although I was rarely featured in my Documentary, my voice was a prominent fixture throughout and a voiceover was used regularly in my film. Comments were made that my voice was clear to hear and engaging, 2 people also mentioned that some of the facts I mentioned were good. These included: ''in he UK we spend approximately two billion on magazines per year, with over 3,300 to chose from'' and ''My names Jenna and like a massive 84% of people my age, I have insecurities about the way I look.'' People said this enabled my Documentary to appear more professional and facts help an audience to feel as though a person knows and has researched what they are talking about. A further comment made about the voiceover was that it matched the images that were shown on screen.

Finally, the last aspect of my film which was mentioned in feedback was how steady shots were. Some shots were very steady, such as the interview with Dr Clibbon and me putting on my make up, this was because each time a camera was situated on a tripod and did not move. In contrast, other shots such as when Victoria was being interviewed and when in the car with Beth are not so steady (this can be demonstrated above as the picture is blurred.) Opinions on uneven shots were very mixed. Some felt this did not work and made my documentary appear unprofessional whereas others felt as though it added to the feel of a true documentary style because often shots are not completely 100% steady.

In conclusion, there were positive and negatives about my documentary but overall I was happy with the feedback, whether it be positive comments or constructive criticism. From the feedback I have learnt several things. One of these is that people like traditional documentary elements to be included, for instance shots of people in cars. Secondly, people liked how i'd included experts within the industry however I should have included a expert from the media industry to be interviewed, in order to make the argument more balanced. Some people like steady shots, others liked some that were shakier, so including a balanced mixture of both works well. I need to ensure that shots a central when focusing on something and when conducting interviews vary shot angles to make them appear more interesting. Check that interviewees can be heard effectively whilst shooting, not discover they can't be heard very well when uploading footage. Establishing shots of buildings are good to move the documentary forward and introduce a new location, interior shots of a place are not necessary, I could've gone straight into the interview. Summarising an interviewees points is a good idea, but people prefer a presenter present in a Documentary instead of a voiceover all the time. People like the title not coming in straight away in a documentary, they prefer the aim of the documentary to be explained firstly. I should've made the title/credits of my piece better by having a different background image and slightly fancier font, although still making it clear to read like my original one that I chose. Lastly, people like documentaries to include facts, allowing the documentary to appear more professional.