The Survey for my Animation: https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/8SC3YT3
To review my animation project I will produce a written report as it allows me to go into more detail when evaluating my work, it also gives me the opportunity and time to question the responses I received. In comparison to a oral presentation where I would have to condense the information, therefore risk missing out vital information about my project and then not delivering the full picture of what my project is about and how the development of it came about, additionally evaluating the audience responses effectively.
To exhibit my project I have firstly placed it onto YouTube, this site enables it to be seen publicly by anyone who would like to watch it and/or who is interested in animation to view the project. I have also included the link to my animation, attached to my survey which I have sent out in an email to various students and teachers at my college to reach a variety of audiences. To exhibit my work to a broader audience another way could be to post it on social media, social media is an efficient way of promoting your own work and it being seen by people all over the world. Therefore I have broadcasted the link to my animation and my survey onto my Twitter and Facebook accounts. An additional method in which I can exhibit my work to reach a larger audience it through the possibility of screening, in the local cinema city where young and independent film makers screen their creations to get public feedback and views, this would be effective if I could also include a questionnaire at the end so people can take it after they have seen my animation.
These were the first questions in which I asked the audience their age and gender, I did this because it could influence the results I may receive from the other questions, and I also wanted to see which age groups and genders were most interested in taking part in this survey to do with animation. It was a predominately male audience who answered however there is still a good amount of female feedback which balances the responses out. The age groups were mostly 18-24, which could be because I sent it to students within my college and also on my social media sites that is the age group that follow me, therefore they were more exposed to the work. Although there was some respondents above these ages which I suggest are most likely to come from YouTube viewers as it was exposed to a wider age ranged audience.
Question 3 included what genre the audience felt this E-sting was, the genre that I was going for was comedy which is a good result to see that the majority of the audience received that. The reason I chose comedy is because people are more likely to be engaged with a media text if it entertains them or makes them laugh and in this case I believe it worked very well, also to fit in with the channel E4 which is home to many comical shows like the Inbetweeners(2008) , Googlebox(2013) and First Dates(2013)
The comments section which was why the audience found it funny was a vital response to have because the audience may have found different parts funny. It also explains why 2 people suggested it was action and 1 person suggested it had more of an adventure genre. the last response on the images shows the reason for why someone suggested it was adventure because of how the story line came across which is good to acknowledge what we could do differently if we were to redo it.
|Question 4 Comments|
|Question 4 comments cont.|
Following onto my next question which is about what the story line of this e-sting was about, it was about a Lego man who had to paint on a billboard at work, however the ladder fell down and he got frustrated, he kicks the billboard and then the E4 logo reveals itself through the paint. As the responses show this was also interpreted well to the audience because they understood the story line. This was effective because in a short space of time we were able to create a narrative which was understood by the majority of the audience, therefore shows they were engaged with the e-sting.
Question 5 was more advanced for those who know what types of animation there can be, however the majority of the audience understood that it was a Lego animation as we used a Lego character. Although there was one response that suggested it came across as a Claymation,this could be the paint at the end which could be mistake for clay instead of paint being removed, resulting in the E4 logo being revealed.
|Question 6 - Occupation|
This question has 3 parts to it, Occupation, Age and Gender, these are the responses to occupation as we can see the audience saw the characters occupation as a painter or decorator and artist which in our planning was exactly what we portrayed the character as, our e-sting is also called 'The Artist' which could have gave the audience a clue to of what the occupation of the character was.
This is a print screen to show the character and what he does, to reinforce what the audience assumed of his character, due to the bucket and the paint brush the audience were correct in suggesting he was a painter/artist. This is effective because it shows we represented and got the message across of what our characters occupation is.
The second part to question 6 was what age the audience thought the character was, I asked this because I wanted to make the audience think about the e-sting and see if they would be able to understand the story line and understand the characters. The responses to this question were of a range of ages from 20 - 40+, mainly at the older scale. This could be because of the sterotypical idea of a painter to be an older male, however this was a successful question because it made the audience think more about my e-sting and also that the responses were similar the age which I would say the character is, would also be around the 30-40 category.
|Question 6, Age.|
|Question 6, Gender|
The final part to question 6 included the gender of the character, used again to reinforce how much the audience was engaged with the animation. As the responses show male was what all the audience members who took part in the questionnaire thought. This could be due to the lego character himself looking like a male, however the sound effect used for the frustrated noise suggest a deep grunt which most people recognize from coming from a male.
|Question 8. Liked and Why?|
Question 8 I asked the question if the audience liked the e-sting or disliked the e-sting and why so that I could evaluate what worked well and what could be improved on. This image is the responses to Liked and why, the response which had the most impact was where the end part of the animation was mentioned how we edited it to look as if the painting was being ripped off piece by piece by itself. This part took the longest when filming and also where there was a lot of effort made, these comments are therefore successful to the project feedback. Also comments made about how creative the idea was, this was effective because when we began working on the animation project. As we had to research for existing e-sting and there wasn't any that we found that were like this idea, however we noticed there was a theme and that was that the E4 logo was being revealed near the end and that's how we came up with the idea of the paint because it was revealing the E4 logo.
|Question 8, Disliked and Why?|
For question 9 we asked if the audience though the idea was unique, we asked this because the e-sting animation competition is a broad UK based competition, therefore a majority of the ideas are unique and we wanted to have feedback on this to see if the audience agreed and thought it was a unique idea. Analyzing the responses the majority of the viewers thought that it was a unique idea, this was effective because during our research of this project we spent time looking at other e-sting that had been made to get a sense of what the common theme was and that was the revaluation of the E4 logo. Therefore we wanted to show this through a unique way, instead of our character just being releaved as painting the E4 logo, we had him falling off a ladder and being frustrated and then kicking the board and then the logo appears, to show that mistakes can sometimes make something that is a positive, and that is how we wanted to show the E4 logo.
|Question 9 the Comments|
|Question 9, the Comments continued|
Question 10 was a straight forward question referring to whether the audience identified this e-sting as an E4 channel ident or not. As the response shows 100% of the audience recognized that this was an E4 channel ident which means we had represented the company well and also followed the guidelines of using their logo and using their soundtrack music clips. It also shows how the majority of the audience who responded were between the 18-24 age gap which is E4's primary target audience.
Evaluating the stages of the project
When creating our e-sting there were several constraints that we had to overcome, one of the main constraints finance, this limited the materials we were using, they were fragile and broke easily. The ladder at first began being made from cotton bud sticks sellotaped together, although it was very unstable and did not look professional when we began filming, this took a majority of our time, the pre-production work was the most difficult to reach the deadline. After that ladder didn't work we resulted in still using cotton buds, however cutting the tips off to make it look more realistic and instead of using tape, we used blue tack as then we could stick it in position and make on the floor where exactly the ladder was so that the continuity of our project could be upheld.
This leads me onto the constraint of props and equipment, which was sellotaping the position of the camera and also the canvas that we used as a board, as we wanted to keep the same position so each shot would be taken from the exact same fixed point. However because we share a classroom and they may not have been aware of what the tape was doing on the floor, when we went in the next day our tape was not there, therefore we had to take time to position the camera looking at the images we took the day before to try and line it up as best as we could. Furthermore as we were filming on a low down surface we were unable to use a tripod that would descend to that height, therefore we had to use a box and mark where the box was and where the camera was on that box. These constraints took up a lot of our filming time, however we did manage to stick to the deadline for filming.
The constraints we came across through editing included that some of the pictures we had taken had a slight camera shadow on them from were we were down at a low level and the light was sometimes behind us when we were filming. If we had access to a larger budget (as the budget was £5) we could have brought a lighting prop that could have concentrated the lighting in one position in front of us filming and this would have prevented the shadowing, therefore finance was considered a constraint for this project. To remove the shadows we had to place colour correction and fix the RGB setting to make these less noticeable. Keeping to the 10 second time limit for our e-sting was challenging, when we had finished placing the frames together and editing the times we saw that our e-sting actually came to 15 seconds which was quite a way over what the limit was, therefore we knew we had to take out some frames. In the original set up of the e-sting the character kicks the board and it falls over and then the paint falls off to reveal the E4 logo, however because we ran over time we had to think about which part we could condense to have the same effect. We decided to cut the frames of the board falling over, these frames were also quite jumpy so we thought it was best to remove these and just get the character to kick the board and then the paint fall off from that action and reveal the E4 logo, this took our e-sting down to 13 seconds. Therefore we had to cut a few other frames out that could be removed, we took out and made shorter the part where the character was frustrated and threw his hands in the air, this eventually took it down to 10.1 seconds.
A challenge also came when we wanted to the board to stand up on its own, we had to use masking tape to stick it parallel to the floor so that it would stand upright. If we had a larger budget we could have purchased a canvas stand, one that could not be seen while filming, we researched the prices and they were out of the budget we had been given. Additionally we could have had a different set, possibly a larger canvas to give us more room for mobility of the animation, althought due to the finacial constraint we were unable to afford this.
A further constraint would be the sound track, we were limited on the creative freedom we had, E4's guidelines noted that we had to use their sound bites for the animation, therefore our animation would not have been eligible for the E-sting if we did not use these soundbites. Without the soundbites being given we would have had to find our own sound track and therefore the legal side of the production would have been at greater constraint. (Music constraint mentioned later in more detail) The reason for the E-sting to follow these guidelines on the soundtrack is because once submitted the E-sting is therefore part of the E4 copyright protection, no-one can legally copy the work you have produced and re-enter it. Also represents E4 as a brand, therefore what you produce must be in compliance with the guidelines, below is the 'House Rules' for which an E-sting must follow.
For our animation we had to be aware of the copyright law and also research on YouTube and the E4 E-sting website itself, to watch various E-stings that had already been made to get inspiration, but to also be aware of ideas that had already been made. This included using the same title, same story line, the music was not as much of an issue because all E-stings were specified to use music provided. The idea of our E-sting came from seeing a recurring theme of the revealing of the E4 logo, and to think about how we could do it, with a clear story line told within 10 seconds. The legal considerations restricted us from re-creating someones idea and even producing it with different materials, if it was one that already exists and you submitted that, it would be an ultimate disqualification.
Following the E4 guidelines we also had to consider The Ofcom Broadcasting Code, this is a code that all TV and Radio shows, adverts and any material on these platforms must follow. It guides the companies on what the limits and what freedoms they have when placing material on TV and Radio that the national public will view. Below is an example of one of the codes:
The timing for filming was from the 18th of November to the 25th of November. Through the setbacks of the constraints we still managed to keep the the deadline for pre-production, filming and editing. However the pre-production did take the most time because of the materials we used and collecting the paint as well to paint the canvas and paint over the masking tape, there was pre-production happening throughout some of the filming because of the different parts of the story that were being filmed. for example the canvas had to be plain to begin with, therefore we couldn't paint the canvas until we were up to that point of filming, we then had to check over the images to check that they were completed before we painted the canvas, as once painted we could not go back and redo any shots in front of the plain canvas.
With regards to the requirement to the brief these were the guidelines that I had previously looked at in another post I created the link is below;
|This is a print screen of where I had previously evaluated the terms and conditions.|
One of the main rules was that any actors used in the E-sting had to be over the age of 16, this did not apply to our e-sting because we did not use actual people, we used a Lego character. The reason we didn't use people is because we had the idea of what we wanted to do with our animation and it would work more efficiently on a smaller scale with a Lego character. When it came to the rule of not obtaining anyone else's material this was difficult to avoid due to the fact we were using Lego, however Adam found a Lego character at home that he had been given from when he was little. Although this could have still be interpreted as a Lego character, therefore we decided to paint it so that you couldn't recognize any Lego logo's or labels.
|Print Screen taken from our animation to show the Lego character has been painted and made into an original character.|
When it came to music we had to use the e-sting sound track that E4 provided us with, this did limit our freedom in the sense we could have chosen our own music, however the E4 music also made it recognizable to the audience. When editing we thought to make it sound and look more realistic we would add sound effects, this included the effect of the ladder falling, the characters frustration and also the foot steps. This we had to make sure was no-one else materials and we did so by downloading them off of a the website; http://www.freesfx.co.uk/. As for the format we exported it in the form of an accessible YouTube video at the definition of 1080p, this was the highest definition which would highlight our work in it's best format, it is also playable on multiple devices. Lastly channel 4 own the rights to the E4 logo, therefore you are only permitted to use their logo in the case of making an e-sting, if it is used in any other context or for any other media text, they have the right to enforce copy right laws.
The overall tone of the feedback was positive in the sense that the responses gave us feedback on what we had done well, for example, a common feedback comment was that they liked the story line and the idea of it, it was unique in the sense of how we revealed the E4 logo. The idea took us sometime to think of and research about to make sure there was no other ideas like ours, when the painter falls off the ladder and becomes frustrated, he kicks the board thinking he has made a mistake, however when he kicks it some of the paint falls off and creates the E4 logo. This was to send the message that mistakes can be constructive and actually create something better than you thought it could, this was sending out a positive message which is why I believe the feedback reinforces this. We received feedback from YouTube where we placed the animation, these were the comments below;
The feedback from the comments were mainly positive, the idea was the most mentioned because this is what the audience liked the most. There was constructive criticisms given that the camera was shaky at points in the animation, if we were to do this again we would increase the intensity of the warp stabilizer, or if were to film again we would make better used of where to place the camera so that each shot would be parallel. Another positive comment was about the movement of the character, that it was smooth and looked realistic, this was helpful feedback because there was a point in the project we thought we hadn't took enough photos for it to move swiftly, however this reassured us. The lighting again was mentioned as it was in the questionnaire, with the shadows appearing at the beginning, which was an issue when we were editing, the best way we found to get rid of them was changing the filter of the video, next time we would position our set somewhere more light appropriate.
From this project I have learnt that working with a brief can be limiting when it comes to how long you have to create the project and what you can create with the materials that you are specified to use. This project has also taught me that abiding by the terms and conditions is vital when it comes to responding to a brief because you have to deliver what the client wants. However this also allowed us to have some creative freedom when it came to the idea of how to show the E4 logo, we were able to come up with our own ideas and own materials to use, which meant the project could represent our ideas not only the content and reputation of E4. If I was to work in the industry and have to regularly respond to brief's I believe that I would be a suitable candidate for it, even though during the pre-production period there were many set backs I worked outside of the lesson time to gather materials which shows I am committed to keeping to a deadline that has been given from a client. In this project there was an opportunity of creative freedom which meant we could add our own touch to it, however in many other briefs there is not this opportunity, I found it restricting with the constraints on the music however understood why that was a requirement, to represent the company effectively. However I was still able to abide by these constraints and this is why I think working to a brief is something I would be capable of doing. Furthermore I do not see myself in a career when it comes to animation as it is not something I would like to pursue as a full time job or part time, I did find it difficult at times and even though I overcome the setbacks it would not be something I would choose to do in the future.