3D Rendering of American Sign Language Finger-Spelling: A Comparative Study of Two Animation Techniques
In this paper we report a study aimed at determining
the most effective animation technique for representing ASL
(American Sign Language) finger-spelling. Specifically, in the study
we compare two commonly used 3D computer animation methods
(keyframe animation and motion capture) in order to ascertain which
technique produces the most 'accurate', 'readable', and 'close to
actual signing' (i.e. realistic) rendering of ASL finger-spelling. To
accomplish this goal we have developed 20 animated clips of fingerspelled
words and we have designed an experiment consisting of a
web survey with rating questions. 71 subjects ages 19-45 participated
in the study. Results showed that recognition of the words was
correlated with the method used to animate the signs. In particular,
keyframe technique produced the most accurate representation of the
signs (i.e., participants were more likely to identify the words
correctly in keyframed sequences rather than in motion captured
ones). Further, findings showed that the animation method had an
effect on the reported scores for readability and closeness to actual
signing; the estimated marginal mean readability and closeness was
greater for keyframed signs than for motion captured signs. To our
knowledge, this is the first study aimed at measuring and comparing
accuracy, readability and realism of ASL animations produced with
different techniques.
[1] SignWriting. Available at: http://www.signwriting.org/
[2] N. Adamo-Villani, J. Doublestein, & Z. Martin, Sign Language for K-8
mathematics by 3D interactive animation. Journal of Educational
Technology Systems, vol. 33, issue 3, 2005, pp. 241-257.
[3] S. Whitney, Adventure Games as Teaching Tools for Deaf and Hard of
Hearing students. Journal of Border Education Research (In print)
[4] J. Vesel, Signing Science. Learning & Leading with Technology, vol. 32,
issue 8, 2005, pp. 30-31.
[5] Vcom3D. Available at: http://www.vcom3d.com/
[6] eSIGN. Available at:
http://www.visicast.cmp.uea.ac.uk/eSIGN/index.html
[7] M. Flodin, Signing Illustrated. Perigee Reference - The Berkley
Publishing Group: New York, 1994.
[8] S. Burgstahler, Increasing the representation of people with disabilities
in science. Journal of Information Technology and Disability, Vol. 24,
No. 4, 1994.
[9] E. Sims, SigningAvatars. Final Report for SBIR Phase II Project, U.S.
Department of Education, 2000.
[10] I. Rapin, Helping Deaf Children Acquire Language: Lessons from the
Past. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, vol. 11,
1986, pp. 213-223.
[11] S. Whitney, Mocap ASL for the Sciences. National Science Foundation
RDE-DEI: award #HRD-0435679B, 2004.
[12] N. Adamo-Villani, & R. Wilbur, Novel approaches to deaf education.
Proc. of NSF First International Conference on Technology-Based
Learning with Disability (LWD-07), OH, pp. 13-21, 2007.
[13] Mathsigner™. Available at: http://www2.tech.purdue.edu/cgt/i3/
[14] SMILE™. Available at: http://www2.tech.purdue.edu/cgt/i3/smile/
[15] N. Adamo-Villani, G. Beni & R. Wilbur, US patent application:
"Interactive Animation System for Sign Language" 64145-00-US
12264-84 (filed on September 1st 2005).
[16] R. Wilbur, & N. Adamo-Villani, Software for Math Education for the
Deaf. National Science Foundation RDE-FRI: award #0622900, 2006.
[17] M. O-Rourke, Principles of Three Dimensional Computer Animation.
W. W. Norton & Company: New York, 2003.
[18] S. Dyer, J. Martin & J. Zulauf, Motion Capture White Paper. 12 Dec
1995. Available at: http://web.mit.edu/commforum/
papers/furniss.html#5
[1] SignWriting. Available at: http://www.signwriting.org/
[2] N. Adamo-Villani, J. Doublestein, & Z. Martin, Sign Language for K-8
mathematics by 3D interactive animation. Journal of Educational
Technology Systems, vol. 33, issue 3, 2005, pp. 241-257.
[3] S. Whitney, Adventure Games as Teaching Tools for Deaf and Hard of
Hearing students. Journal of Border Education Research (In print)
[4] J. Vesel, Signing Science. Learning & Leading with Technology, vol. 32,
issue 8, 2005, pp. 30-31.
[5] Vcom3D. Available at: http://www.vcom3d.com/
[6] eSIGN. Available at:
http://www.visicast.cmp.uea.ac.uk/eSIGN/index.html
[7] M. Flodin, Signing Illustrated. Perigee Reference - The Berkley
Publishing Group: New York, 1994.
[8] S. Burgstahler, Increasing the representation of people with disabilities
in science. Journal of Information Technology and Disability, Vol. 24,
No. 4, 1994.
[9] E. Sims, SigningAvatars. Final Report for SBIR Phase II Project, U.S.
Department of Education, 2000.
[10] I. Rapin, Helping Deaf Children Acquire Language: Lessons from the
Past. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, vol. 11,
1986, pp. 213-223.
[11] S. Whitney, Mocap ASL for the Sciences. National Science Foundation
RDE-DEI: award #HRD-0435679B, 2004.
[12] N. Adamo-Villani, & R. Wilbur, Novel approaches to deaf education.
Proc. of NSF First International Conference on Technology-Based
Learning with Disability (LWD-07), OH, pp. 13-21, 2007.
[13] Mathsigner™. Available at: http://www2.tech.purdue.edu/cgt/i3/
[14] SMILE™. Available at: http://www2.tech.purdue.edu/cgt/i3/smile/
[15] N. Adamo-Villani, G. Beni & R. Wilbur, US patent application:
"Interactive Animation System for Sign Language" 64145-00-US
12264-84 (filed on September 1st 2005).
[16] R. Wilbur, & N. Adamo-Villani, Software for Math Education for the
Deaf. National Science Foundation RDE-FRI: award #0622900, 2006.
[17] M. O-Rourke, Principles of Three Dimensional Computer Animation.
W. W. Norton & Company: New York, 2003.
[18] S. Dyer, J. Martin & J. Zulauf, Motion Capture White Paper. 12 Dec
1995. Available at: http://web.mit.edu/commforum/
papers/furniss.html#5
@article{"International Journal of Information, Control and Computer Sciences:60466", author = "Nicoletta Adamo-Villani", title = "3D Rendering of American Sign Language Finger-Spelling: A Comparative Study of Two Animation Techniques", abstract = "In this paper we report a study aimed at determining
the most effective animation technique for representing ASL
(American Sign Language) finger-spelling. Specifically, in the study
we compare two commonly used 3D computer animation methods
(keyframe animation and motion capture) in order to ascertain which
technique produces the most 'accurate', 'readable', and 'close to
actual signing' (i.e. realistic) rendering of ASL finger-spelling. To
accomplish this goal we have developed 20 animated clips of fingerspelled
words and we have designed an experiment consisting of a
web survey with rating questions. 71 subjects ages 19-45 participated
in the study. Results showed that recognition of the words was
correlated with the method used to animate the signs. In particular,
keyframe technique produced the most accurate representation of the
signs (i.e., participants were more likely to identify the words
correctly in keyframed sequences rather than in motion captured
ones). Further, findings showed that the animation method had an
effect on the reported scores for readability and closeness to actual
signing; the estimated marginal mean readability and closeness was
greater for keyframed signs than for motion captured signs. To our
knowledge, this is the first study aimed at measuring and comparing
accuracy, readability and realism of ASL animations produced with
different techniques.", keywords = "3D Animation, American Sign Language, DeafEducation, Motion Capture.", volume = "2", number = "8", pages = "2802-6", }