Research and planning
• For our groups research we looked up on the internet the risks, advantages and disadvantages of social media. It was really helpful because the internet had many sources that helped us on making questions to ask to the students from our college.
Also the pre-production was really successful because we individually had different researches and we combine them together so we could produce a more accurate documentary.
• Our production was quite successful, because we worked as a team and we were helping each other which made the job easier. We used a variety of shots, our interviewer was very good with words and made the documentary more appealing to the audience. Also we took pictures of the locations we were going to film in.
Our documentary was very well edited, but it had a few mistakes, for example: we had some audio issues and there were some unnecessary parts on the documentary that should be deleted. Overall our documentary was very enjoyable to watch, it had a lot of information included and we edited in a way that it would look real to the audience.
For the double page spread construction I used my poster to be the image, changed the colour of the background, wrote ‘’Addictive’’ (which is the tittle for our documentary as the title of the magazine page, wrote ‘social media network’ as the header and I also included my evaluation.
• The main strength in our interview was our interviewer because he was very confident, very appealing, he wasn’t playing around, etc.… Also the people we interviewed answered every question we asked properly and correctly, they didn’t play around and were very well behaved.
Our weaknesses were the audio and lighting. The audio because there were bits in our documentary that you couldn’t really hear anything so it was quite difficult to understand what the interviewer was saying. About the lighting, there were a few locations where the interviewer was that it was really dark, it was really difficult to see the surroundings.
Codes and conventions of a factual programmes I have seen
• ‘’Catfish’’ is one of the factual programmes I have seen. It’s a documentary because it’s non-fictional and it’s real. It’s a very appealing documentary because they have natural sound on it, they have natural lighting on it, they show their surroundings so the audience won’t think is fake, they basically show that what they are doing and what is happening is real.
• ‘’Inside Death Row’’ was also another factual programme I have seen. On this documentary they clearly show that what is happening is not fake. They used natural sound, natural lighting and Trevor McDonald is a well-known journalist that does documentaries about real facts. Also the scenario didn’t look fake at all, it was inside a jail and it was pretty clear that it was a real jail. Furthermore the people didn’t seem to be acting, they looked serious when they were saying stuff. Overall the documentary had facts which made it even more realistic.
• The target audience were students from Leyton Sixth Form College. The age range was around 16 to 18 and there was no specific gender. I know this because our filming location was at the college and because our target audience were teenagers I know that 16 to 18 is the correct age range. Also because we were interviewing people that were around the same age as us we didn’t really use formal language, but of course the interviewer spoke to them in a respectable way.
Strengths and weaknesses
• The strengths of our documentary film were the fact that we tried to make it look as real as possible for example: using natural sound, we had different lighting, we used different locations, etc.… We also added parts in our documentary showing people walking, showing the camera crew and in my opinion that was added to show the audience that everything we done was not fake, it was basically a prof.
• The improvements our group could have made was the use of audio and that is because there are parts in our documentary that you can’t really hear anything, so, you couldn’t really understand the information our interviewer was saying. Also during the filming we had some light issues which made some bits really hard to see because it was too dark.