1. What sections of the documentary were the most effective?
2. What sections of the documentary were the least effective?
3. Has the the documentary made you want to learn more about the topic?
4. What have you learned from this documentary?
5. What improvements would make the documentary better?
6. Pea soup, with or without wieners?
Jan
1. The interview with the graffiti artists but mostly the one with the teacher.
2. The one with the guy talking about how graffiti is a fantasy for poor people.
3. Not really, but it made graffiti a bit more interesting.
4. That Graffiti artists don’t want to show off with graffiti but to express themselves and their desire to make art.
5. Maybe show what normal people think about graffiti and what they think the reason for Graffiti artists to do this is.
Mats
1.the quotes
2.the opening
3.yes
9.that graffiti is not pollution, It is art
10.more comedy relief
11.without
I believe that my documentary don't go too bad. I believe that because of the comments of my viewers. A problem in my documentary that was mentioned by one of the viewers that it needed
"more comedy relief". I initially thought of adding a bit of humor but then it was too hard. I do think that my idea (to show that even graffiti is art and an expression) came through.
Through out this project i think i worked well, mainly in the design section. The main issue with the design section was that it had to be changed a couple of times, which is fine as that is just part of the process. when it came to the create part I think I did well, yet i also think I could have had more sources in my documentary. All in all I believe I did a good job with a few areas of improvements.