captioning vs signing

T

toddsouth

New Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I am a video producer that is working with others on a product that would allow a sign language interpreters to be seen at the bottom of the screen for video.

We are curious if this is an application that we should continue to develop or is it superfluous technology. My question is simple... Would the deaf community rather read captions or watch a sign language interpreter for their video needs? (i.e. news, video classes, television programming)

Any feedback is greatly appreciated.
 
Personally I prefer captions because frequently the "interpreter in a bubble" is too small. I can't read fingerspelling when they are so small. If they were bigger on the screen that would be okay.
 
There are non signing deaf. Lots of late deafened people. Captioning is more equitable.
 
Captioning and interpreting serve 2 different purposes. Captioning is a transcript of the language being spoken. Signing is interpreting the spoken language into another language. They really aren't interchangeable.
 
jillio said:
Captioning and interpreting serve 2 different purposes. Captioning is a transcript of the language being spoken. Signing is interpreting the spoken language into another language. They really aren't interchangeable.
Click to expand...

I understand that they are not interchangeable, however what we are evaluating is if there is a need for sign language interpreters. We have spoken to people that have a preference for one over another. Though this is hardly what you would call a representative example.

Our target audience is the sign language using population. Captioning is certainly one way to present language, however it is not the only way. We are simply curious if sign language is something that users would welcome.

The size of the interpreter is certainly a concern. We would present an interpreter that can be understood.

Are there any applications or genres signers would prefer an interpreter to captioning?
 
I prefer captioning, toddsouth, providing the captioner can spell correctly and not do it phonetically.
 
Hey toddsouth....it depends who you ask. High Visual Deaf would most times prefer the interpreter bc their English is at the level of K-2 grade. There are plenty of Deaf with good English, but there are also many with such bad English skills that they don't really understand captioning....therefore the interpreter box would serve them better.
 
Jeff_Andum said:
Hey toddsouth....it depends who you ask. High Visual Deaf would most times prefer the interpreter bc their English is at the level of K-2 grade. There are plenty of Deaf with good English, but there are also many with such bad English skills that they don't really understand captioning....therefore the interpreter box would serve them better.
Click to expand...

Very true. :lol:
 
I love captioning. I won't miss it at all unlike signing. I went to
post-grad school, sometimes I missed what they are saying by my deaf friends; also sometimes an interpreter forget to tell me that who are saying. however,
an interpreter with face head like left and right that next person speaker.
In real-time captioning does have ">>" is better than ASL interpreter.
I have sensitive attention on deaf culture that how quality looks on those captioning/interpreting.
 
I rather watch captioning. The vocabulary for signing is very limited while the vocabulary for captioning is the same as what's being spoken. :)

You see everything that's being said too. :)
 
I can only speak for me. I have lost most of my hearing in less than two years and do not sign. Although I have thought about learning, in reality, my workplace and family/friends do not sign. So, I would be talking to myself.:lol:
For me, I love CC (if done correctly). I will even settle for close to correct as long as I can understand what is going on.
 
Captioning is a godsend!! Captioning in Tvs and captioned phones like Captel/WebCaptel really makes the day!!

Yes, there are times live captioning has mistakes involved, usually because of similarities in the sounds of words (hear/here), but I can forgive it as long as most is correct. I can usually piece the rest together or ask for clarification (captioned phones)
 
I actually have captioning to thank for my increase in speed-reading skills. ;)
 
VamPyroX said:
I actually have captioning to thank for my increase in speed-reading skills. ;)
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I have used captioning consistently since my son was 5 years old. It has helped tremendously with his reading skills from the 1st grade on. Even just the recognition of one or two words at that age helps reading proficiency.
 
toddsouth said:
I am a video producer that is working with others on a product that would allow a sign language interpreters to be seen at the bottom of the screen for video.

We are curious if this is an application that we should continue to develop or is it superfluous technology. My question is simple... Would the deaf community rather read captions or watch a sign language interpreter for their video needs? (i.e. news, video classes, television programming)

Any feedback is greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

I prefer Captioning myself. If its more like you got on a dvd it will be excellent. The interpreter in the bottom is annoying and hard to see. Maybe you can have an option for both and just let the users choose?
 
jillio said:
Captioning and interpreting serve 2 different purposes. Captioning is a transcript of the language being spoken. Signing is interpreting the spoken language into another language. They really aren't interchangeable.
Click to expand...

PERFECT ANSWER!

As usual, Jillo knows her stuff. ;)
 
I do wish to see more interpreters in the 'bubbles'. I remember as a child I used to watch live court (local) because they had an intepreter (who I later would meet as she would be my high school teacher). Imagine that. A child watching live local court rather than cartoons.
 
Back
Top