My peer assessor gave my front cover a level 3.

He thought that I exceeded in

showing an understanding of the conventions of layout and page design.
However, he believed I was weak on using ICT appropriately for the task and
manipulating photographs as appropriate to the context of presentation. I agree,
with this, in self-assessment, I would say that I used appropriate text sizes, such
as having a large splash and masthead; whilst having smaller cover-lines. I also
felt that I performed well in understanding the conventions of the layout of a
school magazine in research and then I felt able to implement this into my front
cover. Although, I can recognise that I was weak in manipulating photography to
be appropriate for the tasks. This is because I took the picture from too far away,
therefore, to try to fix this, I cropped and enlarged the picture in order to get a
clearer view of the persons face in the picture. This resulted in greatly reducing
the quality of the image and therefore making the magazine appear unprofessional. Also, I agree with the fact that I did not use ICT appropriately for the
task as I did not overlap any of my layers, which is a convention of a magazine,
this also made it look un-professional and disjointed.
My second peer assessor also gave my front cover a level 3.
Like the first peer assessor, he believed my strengths were that I understood the
conventions of the layout of a magazine and that I used appropriate and effective
text sized. He also emphasised my weakness in using ICT appropriately for the
task, but also integrating illustration and text. I think the latter is another downfall
of my front cover as the lack of overlapping between images and illustrated
opposed a key convention of magazines and
made it appear disjointed and consequently un-professional.