Thread Subject: Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Hoffman, Allen
Date: Sat, Aug 04 2007 9:50 AM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions"
- Previous message in thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
I've been thinking through my logical analysis of the text-equivalent
for audio-description, and my feelings on it simultaneously, and trying
to recognize my own personal biases, and also understand the logical
separation of my feelings and the logic that text "screen play" should
I don't feel text-equivalent is equivalent for someone who is totally
blind but can hear. If screen-plays were so great nobody would attend
the theater. Next, reading a screen play takes significantly more time
normally, and just isn't the same kind of experience, while it may
relate the information.
I will say that the screen play, as a real necessary precursor for any
well done a/v product with audio-description, should be available over
and above any audio-description provided since someone who is both deaf
and blind can use this as "the only" means of access.
I think allowing text-equivalents in lieu of synchronized, or
integrated, audio-description is taking a step backwards for something
that is technically feasible, but rarely implemented. I think we should
consider adding the supplement of text "screen play" in addition as for
anyone who is doing a solid production job will have it anyway, and we
would be increasing accessibility rather than only broadening it while
simultaneously decreasing it for some.
Let me walk through the process for developing an a/v product that
includes the captioning and descriptions to illustrate my suggestion:
1. Develop script and associated actions, assess if audio-description
can be included to improve script.
2. Develop initial captioning identifying verbal and other sounds to
3. Develop audio-description if needed.
4. Integrate audio-description in to timing of sequences, or develop
5. Bring all together, adjust captions and audio-descriptions
(including to script), to match final product.
Now, audio-description is done, "screen play" is done including
captioning and audio-description, and all is well.
Most often people put the audio description and captioning in at the
end, which is a lot more difficult. For publication of pre-recorded
live events this is unavoidable, but for planned products its just poor
Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim Tobias
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 10:36 AM
To: 'TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-video] text transcripts for video-descriptions
Allen Hoffman wrote:
> As someone who is totally blind, reading a text-transcript and then
> accessing the "video" makes me review it twice.
> Audio description allows single use for me. I, for one, have real
> difficulty reading Braille, or listening to the text-to-speech of a
> transcript wile also listening to the audio of a a/v product
Allen -- you raise an interesting point. If a transcript -- actually a
complete and true script of the video, with all speakers identified --
also included the kind of information used in audio description, would
that be an optimal solution? It would allow better hunting and
skipping. I'm just asking.
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
+1 732.441.0831 voice/tty
+1 908.907.2387 mobile
- Next message in Thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions"
- Previous message in Thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: text transcripts for video-descriptions"