Conclusion

Please find each section within these dates:

30/06/2010 - 11/11/2010 : Research
15/11/2010 - 16/12/2010 : Planning
15/12/2010 - 11/02/2011 : Production
26/02/2011 -01/03/2011 : Evaluation

This blog is now complete and ready for assessment.

Evaluation Question 4 - How Did You Use Media Technologies in the Construction and Research, Planning and Evaluation Stages?

The use of technology in media studies is vital, as processing the digipak and music video both require technology. Presenting my media coursework is done on Blogger, which is an easy and modern way of allowing people to view my work. If I had an iPhone, or a phone capable of viewing blogger effectively, I would have been able to update my blog from any location easily.
I used Myspace to ask the artist directly for permission to use one of their songs. Without media 2.0, asking for permission would have been extremely difficult and long winded.

By using Facebook during our planning stage, I could easily and quickly get in contact with my partner, as well as find potential actors/models for my music video and digipak. Using facebook also allowed us to share images of any locations we thought would be a good place to

shoot.

To help with the planning of the music video, I used Youtube to view many other music videos within my genre. Music channels such as "Kerrang!" and "Scuzz" were also useful, as they showed music videos within my genre too. However, a site such as Youtube has a vast wealth of videos, all free and ready to access.

For the actual production of the digipak, I used a FujiFilm A345 camera to take still images to use. This is an easy to use camera that still has good quality images. Although obvious, having a camera for the course is vital. I used Adobe Photoshop to then edit and assemble these photos. By using Google, I found a template with the right measurements and spacing ready made. Youtube also helped me here, as the site is full of step by step tutorials for many programs, including Photoshop.

For the production of the music video, I used two Panasonic DV cameras. By using two at the same time, it allowed us to capture the same footage from a different angle, which reduced the number of takes needed. To transfer our footage to a computer, we used Adobe OnLocation. The program has its pros and cons, as although capturing worked for the most part, some clips would corrupt, rendering them useless. This sometimes led to us having to repeat the capturing process to obtain certain clips. For the actual editing, we used Adobe Premiere Pro, which made putting together our video much easier. While it allowed us to edit it how we imagined it, using a new program leads to technological determinism. Which is that whatever

technology is available determines the final outcome, rather than the creativity of the user. I feel this applied somewhat to me video, as the video contained elements we didn't originally plan to

have, such as the black and white footage.
Media 2.0 has been useful throughout the whole course, as it allows anyone to gain some sort of feedback from an audience. By using Youtube, given that I have a fair amount of subscribers, I can use it to tap into a potential audience and ask for criticism. Although most comments are

generally very pedestrian.

In conclusion, the use of media technology, specially Media 2.0 such as sites like Facebook and Youtube which allow users to broadcast to an audience easily. Technology such as digital cameras, even though they used tape which may seem dated by todays standards, have been vital to the whole media course.

Evaluation Question 3 - What Have You Learned from your Audience Feedback?

I have collected audience feedback, as it is vital to see whether I have targeted my project at the right audience in the right way. Firstly, we asked media students for their feedback, as although they may not fit into my chosen target audience, they can give critical responses more detailed than non media students. They were all asked two questions, one about the lip sync, and one about the whether the video suited the genre of the song.

Overall, the general consensus is that the lip syncing was feasible, but that the acting was unenthusiastic. Another comment said the lip syncing looked unrealistic, as the acting looked flat. I think this is a fair point to make, as the acting was poor. However, many people thought the video suited the genre, as they felt the more comedic elements such as using Guitar Hero controllers matched well with the song, as it’s a cover. Metal cover versions of songs are usually seen as not being serious, as they are usually performed by the band just for fun. Finding this funny requires a a basic knowledge of Guitar Hero. This is an example of the audience having the right cultural capital, which is a theory developed by Pierre Bourdieu, which is whether or not certain knowledge is known within social groups. This collective of information within a social can come from a wide variety of sources, though Pierre Bourdieu claims much of it comes from institutionalised. For example, learning good manners or proper etiquette are learnt within our culture at an early age. Cultural capital can also be at a much more local level, such as knowledge of a more niche pastime, such as video games or comics. In this example, the audience is expected to understand the social contexts of Guitar Hero and similar games, such as the backlash by musicians claiming people should learn to play a real instrument instead of a simulation.

I also asked people who are not media students, as their opinions are more important, as they view it from an outside perspective. Among the various replies, this paragraph was one of the most critical. "While you do have some good camera angles and movements (such as the shots down the guitars and the tracking shot of bob), most seem very stationary and bland. You do have some camera in hand stuff, but it’s still lacking movement. And I don't think that random bit of black and white worked too well."Specifically, the comment about how the video seemed "stationary" is important. This refers to the use of a tripod throughout the video, instead of using a handheld camera, which is more comment for videos using heavier songs such as the one I used. The reason we shot using a tripod was mainly for practical reasons, as it allowed us to set up multiple cameras at one time. However, if I were to redo this video, I would use handheld cameras throughout, or apply a shake effect in post-production. Other comments later agreed on the lack of motion within the video. This is not a good example of an audience member misinterpreting the preferred reading of the video, as it is more of a technical criticism.

The same reply also went on to comment further: "And I don't think that random bit of black and white worked too well." Noting this, I would have toned down the black and white clips, limiting only to select parts of the song, such as the breakdowns. However, the black and white footage was used to help give areas like the breakdown a stronger sense of contrast and give the constantly changing footage more impact. I would say this response was an aberrant reading of the text, as the misunderstanding led to them finding less pleasure in the music video.

It is worth noting no responses expressed confusion in the use of the Guitar Hero game, which shows the understanding of at least the general idea of the game is known within the target audience's cultural capital.