Evaluation Question 3

What have you learned from your audience feedback?

From my audience profile it can be established that my intended audience for my music video and
print products are largely comprised of my peers. This proved very useful during the construction
process as I was able to confer with my target audience without having to go out of my way to find
them. My aim throughout much of the project was to provide a gratifying experience for my target
audience in an effort to influence them to consume other media texts that I produced, thereby
generating profit. I set out to achieve this by focusing on the cathartic use (mentioned in my
audience profile) of my music video via an audio-visual spectacle that my audience would find
appealing. This ties into Strinatis postmodern philosophy of form over function as well as Lyotards
rejection of grand narratives as video lacks deeper narratives or function beyond its spectacular
visual form. The only intended deeper meaning the video has is the way the fire from the poi
represents the passionate lyrics; there is no narrative or message.

The first piece of audience feedback I received was from a hotdesking

exercise in which I previewed an early rendition of my music video to
members of my target audience. This video used two different styles of
animation and I wanted to see which one audience members preferred.
The feedback I received not only indicated a favourite among the two
styles but prompted me to abandon the second style completely. This
can be observed by watching the music video preview and music
video final artefact videos in succession. Note in the former how at the
30 second mark the animations change drastically whereas in the latter
This style I polished and
the animations stay roughly the same throughout the entire video. This
included in my final video
feedback also prompted me to remove a tacky shatter effect I used.

The second piece of audience feedback I received was from showing a

full edit of my music video to a large group of my peers. This session let
me know that I was succeeding in my goal to create a product that my
target audience found gratifying, as well as that some of my video was
visually unclear and that the blue infrared effect was too invasive. In
response to this I changed the blending options to make the girl stand
out more from the animations, as well as removing the infrared effect
and replacing it with a dulled down version which is less invasive.

This style I did not use due

to negative feedback

Infrared effect people

Less invasive version
didnt like
The third piece of audience feedback that I received was another
hotdesking exercise in which I exhibited mock-ups of my print products.
Feedback indicated to me that my print advertisement did not resemble
a print advertisement and would require a complete reworking. Other
feedback on my print ad included a dislike of the 3D logo AN logo and a
stroke effect I was using on some of the text. This prompted me to
remove almost all instances of the red stroke effect and to replace the
3D logo (which ended up not being used due to the redesign). My
feedback also indicated to me that people liked the soft blue border I
was using so I used a similar border in my redesign. A mock-up of my
digipak was also exhibited in the same hotdesking exercise. Feedback
indicated that people liked the rendered fire effect I was using so I
continued to use the fire in my final digipak. Distain was however
expressed for a blue strip of fire present, which I then changed the
colour so it matched the rest of the fire. It was also alerted to me that
my digipak lacked copyright notices as well as a spine so both of these
were added to the design.

Overall, audience feedback has shaped all of my products so that they

appeal more to my target audience