3D Rendering of American Sign Language Finger-Spelling: A Comparative Study of Two Animation Techniques

Authors: Nicoletta Adamo-Villani

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.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1077265

References:

[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