Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:45:43.816Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Making interaction with virtual reality accessible: rendering and guiding methods for subtitles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 November 2019

Belén Agulló*
Affiliation:
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
Mario Montagud
Affiliation:
University of Valencia, Spain i2Cat Foundation, Spain
Isaac Fraile
Affiliation:
i2Cat Foundation, Spain
*
Author for correspondence: Belén Agulló, E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Accessibility in immersive media is a relevant research topic, still in its infancy. This article explores the appropriateness of two rendering modes (fixed-positioned and always-visible) and two guiding methods (arrows and auto-positioning) for subtitles in 360° video. All considered conditions have been implemented and integrated in an end-to-end platform (from production to consumption) for their validation and evaluation. A pilot study with end users has been conducted with the goals of determining the preferred options by users, the options that result in a higher presence, and of gathering extra valuable feedback from the end users. The obtained results reflect that, for the considered 360° content types, always-visible subtitles were more preferred by end users and received better results in the presence questionnaire than the fixed-positioned subtitles. Regarding guiding methods, participants preferred arrows over auto-positioning because arrows were considered more intuitive and easier to follow and reported better results in the presence questionnaire.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agulló, B and Matamala, A (2019) The challenge of subtitling for the deaf and hard-of-hearing in immersive environments: results from a focus group. The Journal of Specialised Translation 32, 217235Google Scholar
Agulló, B, Matamala, A and Orero, P (2018) From disabilities to capabilities: testing subtitles in immersive environments with end users. HIKMA 17, 195220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, M, Brown, A, Crabb, M, Hughes, C and Sandford, J (2015) Understanding the diverse needs of subtitle users in a rapidly evolving media landscape. IBC 2015, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, September 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aylett, R and Louchart, S (2003) Towards a narrative theory of virtual reality. Virtual Reality 7, 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A, Turner, J, Patterson, J, Schmitz, A, Armstrong, M and Glancy, M (2017) Subtitles in 360° video. Adjunct Publication of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video. ACM: New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A, Turner, J, Patterson, J, Schmitz, A, Armstrong, M and Glancy, M (2018) Exploring subtitle behaviour for 360° video. White Paper WHP 330. BBC: Manchester.Google Scholar
Cummings, JJ and Bailenson, JN (2016) How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media Psychology 19, 272309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De la Peña, N, Weil, P, Llobera, J, Giannopoulos, E, Pomés, A, Spanlang, B, Friedman, D, Sanchez-Vives, MV and Slater, M (2010) Immersive journalism: immersive virtual reality for the first-person experience of news. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 19, 291301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dooley, K (2017) Storytelling with virtual reality in 360-degrees: a new screen grammar. Studies in Australasian Cinema 11, 161171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Broadcasting Union (EBU) (2017) Virtual reality: how are public broadcasters using it? Available at: https://www.ebu.ch/publications/virtual-reality-how-are-public-broadcasters-using-it (consulted on 28 November 2018).Google Scholar
Gödde, M, Gabler, F, Siegmund, D and Braun, A (2018) Cinematic narration in VR – Rethinking Film conventions for 360 degrees. In Chen, J and Fragomeni, G (eds), Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality: Applications in Health, Cultural Heritage, and Industry, VAMR 2018, Vol. 10910. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Greco, GM (2016) On accessibility as a human right, with an application to media accessibility. In Matamala, A and Orero, P (eds), Researching Audio Description. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Jones, S (2017) Disrupting the narrative: immersive journalism in virtual reality. Journal of Media Practice 18, 171185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lessiter, J, Freeman, J, Keogh, E and Davidoff, J (2001) A cross-media presence questionnaire: the ITC-sense of presence inventory. Presence: Teleoperators, and Virtual Environments 10, 282297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, Y, Chang, Y, Hu, H, Cheng, H, Huang, C and Sun, M (2017) Tell me where to look: investigating ways for assisting focus in 360° video. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘17). New York: ACM, pp. 2535–2545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mateer, J (2017) Directing for cinematic virtual reality: how the traditional film director's craft applies to immersive environments and notions of presence. Journal of Media Practice 18, 1425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Men, L, Bryan-Kinns, N, Hassard, AS and Ma, Z (2017) The impact of transitions on user experience in virtual reality. 2017 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), Los Angeles, pp. 285–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moghadam, KR and Ragan, ED (2017) Towards understanding scene transition techniques in immersive 360 movies and cinematic experiences. 2017 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), Los Angeles, pp. 375–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patel, S (2016) 85 percent of Facebook video is watched without sound. In DigidayUK. Retrieved from: https://digiday.com/media/silent-world-facebook-video/.Google Scholar
Perego, E, Del Missier, F and Bottiroli, S (2015) Dubbing versus subtitling in young and older adults: cognitive and evaluative aspects. Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice 23, 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Remael, A, Orero, P and Carroll, M (eds) (2014) Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility at the Crossroads. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Romero-Fresco, P (2013) Accessible filmmaking: joining the dots between audiovisual translation, accessibility and filmmaking. The Journal of the Specialised Translation 20, 201223.Google Scholar
Romero-Fresco, P (ed.) (2015) The Reception of Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing in Europe. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Rothe, S, Heinrich, H and Mathias, A (2017) Diegetic cues for guiding the viewer in cinematic virtual reality. Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. New York: ACM.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothe, S, Kim, T and Hussmann, H (2018) Dynamic subtitles in cinematic virtual reality. Proceedings of the 15th European Interactive TV Conference (ACM TVX 2018). New York: ACM.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheikh, A, Brown, A, Watson, Z and Evans, M (2017) Directing attention in 360-degree video. IBC 2016, Amsterdam, 9–13 September.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slater, M and Usoh, M (1993) Representations systems, perceptual position, and presence in immersive virtual environments. Presence 2, 221233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, G, Gu, W and Suh, A (2018) The effects of 360-degree VR videos on audience engagement: evidence from the New York Times. In Nah, FH and Xiao, B (eds), HCI in Business, Government, and Organizations, Vol. 10923. HCIBGO 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Witmer, BG and Singer, MJ (1998) Measuring presence in virtual environments: a presence questionnaire. Presence Teleoperators & Virtual Environments 7, 225240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar