Advertisement

Making New Narrative Structures with Actor’s Eye-Contact in Cinematic Virtual Reality (CVR)

  • Dong-uk Ko
  • Hokyoung RyuEmail author
  • Jieun KimEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11318)

Abstract

With an advent of the VR market, using 360-degree cameras to create Cinematic VR (CVR) experiences opened up a prominent question that can challenge the traditional film narratology. Additional fields of view are allowed so the viewers in CVR can move their heads to choose more attentive and informative scenes, but frequent scene changes are not welcomed due to VR nausea. These technical drawbacks (and/or advantages) demand a new narratology for CVR, in particular, how the director of CVR can convey certain narratives to the viewers in conjunction with how he/she can attract the viewers to look at the acting persons in the 360-degree scenes. In this study, we employed well-established underpinnings of both eye contact and gaze, by which the acting persons in CVR can effectively convey the narrative structure, and, at the same time, more attentiveness from the viewer in CVR can be ensured. We completed two versions of CVR, one with the traditional film narratology and the other for the new CVR narratology (i.e., eye contact and gaze) proposed in this article, and are now in the stage of evaluation. Our preliminary results showed that the viewers in the CVR film with more eye contact and gazes effectively presented the narratives of the film and also were more satisfied with the CVR environment.

Keywords

Cinematic Virtual Reality Narrative Eye contact 

References

  1. 1.
    MacQuarrie, A., Steed, A.: Cinematic virtual reality: evaluating the effect of display type on the viewing experience for panoramic video. In: 2017 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), pp. 45–54. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Mateer, J.: Directing for cinematic virtual reality: how the traditional film director’s craft applies to immersive environments and notions of presence. J. Media Pract. 18(1), 14–25 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chang, W.: Virtual reality filmmaking methodology (animation producing). TECHART: J. Arts Imaging Sci. 3(3), 23–26 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stevenson, J.: The fourth wall and the third space. Center for Playback Theater, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    LaFrance, M.: The disappearing fourth wall: law, ethics, and experimental theatre. Vanderbilt J. Entertain. Technol. Law 15, 507 (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    White, G.: On immersive theatre. Theatre Res. Int. 37(3), 221–235 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pope, V.C., Dawes, R., Schweiger, F., Sheikh, A.: The geometry of storytelling: theatrical use of space for 360-degree videos and virtual reality. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 4468–4478. ACM (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kleinke, C.L.: Gaze and eye contact: a research review. Psychol. Bull. 100(1), 78 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Britten, B.: From Stage to Screen: A Theatre Actor’s Guide to Working on Camera, pp. 103–107. Bloomsbury Publishing, London (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Biggin, R.: Immersive Theatre and Audience Experience. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke (2017). (Chapter 3)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hanyang UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations