Advertisement

The Effect of Rendering Style on Perception of Sign Language Animations

  • Tiffany Jen
  • Nicoletta Adamo-VillaniEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9176)

Abstract

The goal of the study reported in the paper was to determine whether rendering style (non-photorealistic versus realistic) has an effect on perception of American Sign Language (ASL) finger spelling animations. Sixty-nine (69) subjects participated in the experiment; all subjects were ASL users. The participants were asked to watch forty (40) sign language animation clips representing twenty (20) finger spelled words. Twenty (20) clips were rendered using photorealistic rendering style, whereas the other twenty (20) were rendered in a non-photorealistic rendering style (e.g. cel shading). After viewing each animation, subjects were asked to type the word being finger-spelled and rate its legibility. Findings show that rendering style has an effect on perception of the signed words. Subjects were able to recognize the animated words rendered with cel shading with higher level of accuracy, and the legibility ratings of the cel shaded animations were consistently higher across subjects.

Keywords

Sign language Animation Non photorealistic rendering Cel shading Deaf education 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This research is supported in part by a grant from the Dr. Scholl Foundation

References

  1. 1.
    Rusinkiewiz, S., Burns, M., De Carlo, D.: Exaggerated shading for depicting shape and detail. ACM Trans. Graph. 25(3), 1199–1205 (2006). (Proc. SIGGRAPH)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Elliott, R., Glauert, J.R.W., Kennaway, J.R., Marshall, I.: The development of language processing support for the ViSiCAST project. In: Proceedings of ASSETS 2000, pp. 101–108 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Vcom3D (2007). http://www.vcom3d.com
  5. 5.
    Sims, E.: SigningAvatars. In: Final Report for SBIR Phase II Project, U.S. Department of Education (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    TERC (2006). http://www.terc.edu/
  7. 7.
    Vesel, J.: Signing science. Learn. Lead. Technol. 32(8), 30–31 (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Signing Science (2007). http://signsci.terc.edu/
  9. 9.
    Adamo-Villani, N., Wilbur, R.: Two novel technologies for accessible math and science education. IEEE Multimedia 15(4), 38–46 (2008). Special Issue on AccessibilityCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Adamo-Villani, N., Wilbur, R.: Software for math and science education for the deaf. Disabil. Rehabil. Assistive Technol. 5(2), 115–124 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhao, L., Kipper, K., Schuler, W., Vogler, C., Badler, N.I., Palmer, M.: A machine translation system from English to American sign language. In: White, J.S. (ed.) AMTA 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1934, pp. 54–67. Springer, Heidelberg (2000) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grieve-Smith, A.: SignSynth: a sign language synthesis application using web3D and perl. In: Wachsmuth, I., Sowa, T. (eds.) Gesture and Sign Language in Human-Computer Interaction. LNCS, vol. 2298, pp. 134–145. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huenerfauth, M.: A multi-path architecture for machine translation of English text into American sign language animation. In: Student Workshop at the Human Language Technology Conference/North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (HLTNAACL) (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huenerfauth, M.: Cyclic data-driven research on American sign language animation. In: Proceedings of SLTAT 2011, University of Dundee, UK (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Delorme, M. Braffort, A., Filhol, M.: Automatic generation of French sign language. In: Proceedings of SLTAT 2011, University of Dundee, UK (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gibet, S., Courty, N., Duarte, K.: Signing avatars: linguistic and computer animation challenges. In: Proceedings of SLTAT 2011, University of Dundee, UK (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kipp, M., Heloir, A., Nguyen, Q.: A feasibility study on signing avatars. In: Proceedings of SLTAT 2011, University of Dundee, UK (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lesmo, L., Mazzei, A., Radicioni, D.: Linguistic processing in the ATLAS project. In: Proceedings of SLTAT 2011, University of Dundee, UK (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lombardo, V., Nunnari, F., Damiano, R.: The ATLAS interpreter of the Italian sign language. In: Proceedings of SLTAT 2011, University of Dundee, UK (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Decaudin, P.: Cartoon-looking rendering of 3D-scenes. In: Syntim Project INRIA, p. 6 (1996)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Flodin, M.: Signing Illustrated: The Complete Learning Guide. Berkley Publishing Group, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Battison, R.: Lexical Borrowing in American Sign Language. Linstok Press, Silver Spring (1978)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Adamo-Villani, N.: 3D rendering of American sign language finger-spelling: a comparative study of two animation techniques. In: Proceedings of ICCIT 2008 - 5th International Conference on Computer and Instructional Technologies, vol. 34, pp. 808–812 (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Adamo-Villani, N., Wilbur, R., Eccarius, P., Abe-Harris, L.: Effects of character geometric model on the perception of sign language animation. In: IEEE Proceedings of IV 2009 - 13th International Conference on Information Visualization, Barcelona, pp. 72–75 (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Adamo-Villani, N., Kasenga, J., Jen, T., Colbourn, B.: The effect of ambient occlusion shading on perception of sign language animations. In: Proceedings of ICCEIT 2011, Venice, Italy, pp. 1840–1844 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Purdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations