Peer Review for my Contents Page 2

With certain elements and conditions haven been included into the layout of my contents page, I felt his was the appropriate moment to gain the views from my potential audience members in another peer review in class, this would help me determine whether I was progressing well and to see if any ideas can be developed upon further. Since the previous feedback session I have covered up the empty white space in the bottom right hand corner with a photograph of my male model, so I am hopeful this is an area my peers will be able to identify when the give their personal critique to me.

My first indication was to show one of my friendly classmates the contents page and question them for their advice over what I had produced so far in the construction of this task, I needed to ensure my contents was appearing up to industry standard and that some of the flaws seen last time had hopefully been corrected. I asked the same peer who submitted their views previously to offer their insight once more, I felt this would be the most beneficial technique for me as out of everyone on my course they would be able to most distinguish if these faults have been corrected as they were the one who had brought them to my immediate attention in the first place. As per the normal standard he began by explaining the positive elements to my production. He was most enthusiastic I had gotton around to covering up the vast, empty space in the right hand corner of the piece besides the 'Subscibe' section as he had felt this would make my page look boring and unappealing to him as an audience member - he regarded it as such as he felt there was not enough essential information scattered about to provoke his instant line of sight. With that space now occupied he felt sated, he additionally commented on the humour employed here as he thought it was amusing to use one of the artists mockingly reading the 'Q' magazine, this perceived across to him my product was better so more worth the purchase. However to him this was the only major change he could currently identify and he implied more changes need to ultimately be set in stone for this page to develop further. Once recommendation he could make regarded the 'Features' section, he queried whether it would be possible for me to include another additional article, not only would this make it more attractive but it would help to lose the small gap between the two stories. This space he described as being off putting as if there were no major features at all hence my production would be lacking in them. Finally he added I should maybe consider placing the name of the female artist besides the page number as he didn't understand the concept of her being there without an appropriate sell line - yes he could reference she was on that page number, however there was no brief over what the content would contain about her as there was essentially no preview to this.

The last person who's verdict was critical to gain was that of my college lecturer, she was effectively the indiviual opinion that I desperately needed, with her marking my work she would be able to identify more accurately even the slightest of errors that my other peers may overlook or not pick up on. This would benefit me highly as the review of my product would be the most accurate it could be therefore it will be perceived to be of a more professional standard. Her first comment was quite blunt and forward as she explained that in her insight there was no drastic differences over the contents page to what she had seen when I previously presented it to her, the only alteration she could distinguish was the use of the image in the bottom right hand corner to re-illustrate the connection between it and the 'Subcribe' heading, other then that she could not identify anything else. She was very insistent in referring back to the main image of the female model as that was the concern she wanted me to deal with as a primary motivation, she was persuaded that the top of the page would look less empty in her eyes if the photo was enlarged slightly more so it was in a closer vicinity to the contents title. If she was browsing through this magazine she said explained she would be less concerned to purchase it if there was a large void between the conventions, to her it made it look less informative as a music informative production, in the notion that there doesn't seem many stories to sell and so forth. This co-insides perfectly with her last criticisms of adding in an extra feature cover story in between the two that were already on display in the top left hand column, she referenced back to what she had said previously to me about not approving of the small space between articles as this could essentially be filled to make the document more thrilling and exciting to the eye. Without this she describes my product as lacking a necessary visual impact that is vital to sell a publication of this category.

In conclusion to the feedback I have just gained I feel compared to the last review I really need to take into consideration what has been recommended to me as the most appropriate course of action, previously I had disregarded enlarging the female models image or including a smaller more concise article in the features box as I was content with how my page was developing. Now that it has been drilled into me on two separate occasions these alterations must be made for my contents to succeed, I need to reinstate what was suggested and employ it into my final production stages, as ultimately it will be people like my peers purchasing the magazine so their perceptions are the most critical after all.