Evaluation Question 7
·
Comparing my preliminary task to my main
production, I think it is evident I have learned a lot about the design,
construct and content about what a magazine has to offer. I have learned this
through the tasks that coursework has provided.
Lighting & Colour: Through coursework research, I have come
to recognise how lighting effects the interpretation of how a magazine is
taken. In my Preliminary Task I had no concern of what lighting meant in the
production, I was more concerned about the quality of the camera and how clear
objects were. While not necessarily a bad thing, I have actually come to pay a
lot more attention to lighting and how it effects design.
Mise-en-scene: French for placing on stage. In my preliminary
task, I did not emphasize this aspect of Media as much as I do now. Property
and every single detail on stage in order to give your production full
professionalism. My Prelim had this as there were just shots of school-like
features, which was what my magazine was all about. In my later production, I
had focused more on the quantity of Mise-en-scene to give rather than the
quality, with not much in the image.
Analysis of Cinematography: Knowing what different kind of shots
to take, as they all imply different meanings. In my prelim, I know what shots
to take for a certain effect- but I didn’t know that in my prelim production. I
had used a close-up in the prelim to catch detail of a small object and blur
out the rest of the background to give further detail in the design, and in my
magazine production I had used a medium shot of the model, and a fair shot to
show off outfit, and to show what is exactly the main focus of the production.
Magazine Deconstruction: This had helped learn to construct a
proper magazine. In my preliminary task, I had a lack of sky lines, sell lines,
etc. Just a main image and a main title. My actual production contained a lot
more detail and attention towards these features. I had even decorated the sky
lines, mastheads and sell lines in order to give it more of an attractive look.
This is much more of an improvement.
Overall content: My genuine production compared to my ‘practice’
production was more fruitful in terms of quantity. Within it there was a
backstory, content titles that would be sure to capture the reader’s attention.
Genre Research: My prelim production had no built-upon knowledge
prior of music industry. It was not a heavily studied area before. But in my production,
I was able to apply genre research to properly formulate my magazine. Compared
to my prelim, I only just threw a picture in, added text, and used generic
text. Now although both productions had different audiences, it would be hardly
appealing to anybody to see a magazine of just a basic level. Unintuitive
design, uncoordinated features, not only would it have been boring, or driven
people away from reading it, but it would have come off as an eyesore as a
result of carelessness, or just rookie media skills. By gathering knowledge of
what my audience would want, I was able to, and with better editing skills
as well, able to deliver a production that would give viewers of that specific
interest in that genre a good time.
Better Editing Skills: Before I could hardly use any tools on Photoshop. Which made the quality capability of my production very limited. But through tasks of media, I was able to increase my potential and give a better magazine. .
