What many don’t realize is that all students benefit from captioned material. Literacy rates improve with captioning.

Essential for Learning is a very good informational video that was produced and captioned by Media Access Australia.  Check it out.  No matter where you live, captioning improves comprehension, provides access and increases literacy of students.

Here are a few articles and studies on improving literacy with captioning:

http://jdsde.oxfordjournals.org/content/6/1/43.short
http://www.captionsforliteracy.org/research_on_captions.htm
http://aperfectplayroom.com/?p=791

To learn more about pricing and captioning for educational videos or other content, contact me at tenglish@realtimetranscription.com or contact another reputable captioning company.

You be the judge.

Since getting YouTube’s captions to show up on the video can be a bit tricky, we decided to make it easy for you.  We took a video that was recorded with the automatic machine-generated captions by Google being displayed on the screen.  (They appear in the black box inside the video.)  Then we captioned the video using Transendia.  (The Transendia captions appear beneath the video.)  This allows you to compare the two captioning methods head to head.

iPad Intro video – Google vs Transendia

So, what do you think?  We are interested in hearing your thoughts.

Go ahead and search around in the video using the transcript window on the left.  The help file will show you all the features of the player.  If you’d like to know more about Transendia and how you can use our searchable captions, let us know either here or by reaching us through the Contact Us page.

http://www.digitalmediabuzz.com/2010/02/hulu-caption-search/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DigitalMediaBuzz+%28Digital+Media+Buzz%29

If video content is recorded in advance, there are many ways to accurately caption that video for the internet and/or for broadcast.  A realtime solution is not required, unless there simply is not enough time to have the video captioned or transcribed and synchronized.  It’s when the event is being broadcast live and is unscripted that you truly need a streaming realtime solution.

I want to show you an example of streaming realtime captioning that was done using “traditional” captioning, like you see on television.  I will also discuss some of the other ways you can stream live text to the internet using realtime transcription, realtime captioning and the technology that exists today.

The examples of realtime captioning you will see here are generated by trained professional realtime captioners – actual people – who write on a stenography machine like you see court reporters use in the courtroom or in a deposition.  There are also very good realtime captioners that use their voice and voice-recognition software coupled with the same type of Computer-Assisted Translation (CAT) software that the steno captioners use.   It should be noted that the realtime voicewriters are every bit as skilled and highly trained as the steno captioners.  Please don’t confuse “voicewriters” with “automatic voice recognition” like YouTube and others are using.

Live Webcasting with Realtime Captions

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is holding hearings on broadband accessibility and recently held one of the meetings at Gallaudet University in Washington, DC.  The FCC webcast the hearing live, with high quality realtime captioning.  Here’s a clip of the compelling testimony by Marlee Matlin, who presented at that hearing.  Not only is this clip an example of wonderful realtime captioning; the message is something that everyone that produces internet video should hear.  (So watch it all if you have the time.)

Marlee Matlin testifies at FCC hearing

Realtime captioning involves mixing the text file with the video, which is done through special captioning software and a piece of hardware called a captioning encoder.  The encoder is placed in the video stream before the video is broadcast to the internet.  The realtime captioner in the example was listening to the speaker (in this case the voice of Ms. Matlin’s interpreter) and producing the nearly flawless captions, including punctuation, as the words were spoken.  The captioning you saw was not edited or corrected at all.  The text was sent from the captioner’s computer to the encoder, where it was mixed with the video.

Because the captioning is visible on the video at all times and cannot be turned off, the captions in this example are open captions.  If the captions had been hidden in the video until the viewer turned them on (like most of the television programming that is captioned), the captions would be classified as closed captions.

Streaming Text Alongside Streaming Video

Another way of streaming realtime text to the internet with video (without any special captioning software or hardware) is to stream the text in a window alongside the video in a webcast.  The streaming text window may be resized and positioned anywhere the viewer (or the webcaster) chooses, and the font and background colors may be adjusted as well.  While some may choose colors and fonts that are aesthetically pleasing and complementary to their website, others may make their choices for entirely different reasons.  Large and bold fonts may be combined with high-contrast colors (like yellow letters on a black background) for persons with low vision; very small fonts may be chosen by someone who wants to just monitor what is being said and scan large amounts of text without having to scroll up and down.

It should be noted that the particular streaming realtime text in the next example was accessible by screen readers, which are used by persons who are blind.  (This actual demo is not accessible to screen reader software because it is simply a video made to illustrate what the streaming text looks like when shown alongside a video.)

Here is a link to an example of live streaming text alongside a video:

Streaming Realtime Text with Video

Choosing a Method

There are other ways to stream realtime text of live events to the internet, but if you need it accurate and streamed in real time, all methods involve using skilled realtime writers.  Whether you choose realtime captioning or streaming text, you should hire a professional if you want good results.

Your choice of methods may depend on what equipment and software is available; it may depend on your audience.  If your audience consists of a large number of individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, they may find the traditional captioning most accessible, since the text is actually in the video picture, and they can watch the video and the captions without looking back and forth or up and down as much.  If the event is also being broadcast on television, the captioning option may make more sense.  (It is possible to simultaneously send closed captions to the television broadcast and open captions to the internet, by the way.)

If your audience uses screen readers or has vision problems, the streaming text window may be a better choice.  If you want to give your viewers the option of seeing the streaming realtime text alone or alongside the video, in a separate window, choose the streaming text.

If you have questions or need more information, please comment below or contact me through the www.transendia.com website.

While this is a step forward in video search, is it really making video content accessible for people who are deaf and hard-of-hearing?  YouTube is utilizing Google’s Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) technology to perform the automatic transcription, and then in some instances they are using automatic translation to translate that English text into other languages.  The next logical question:  How accurate are the foreign language translations?

Automatic Speech Recognition

The premise behind the Google official blog announcing the automatic captions is that this was done to make video accessible for the folks with hearing loss.  YouTube lists some of the entities that are using this ASR technology currently, so I decided to check it out.  I clicked on the first link listed, which is UC Berkeley, and I clicked on the first video I encountered, which was a short video of Professor Williamson’s Nobel Prize day highlights.

Interestingly enough, when automatic speech recognition translation is used, the transcripts are rarely made available in their entirety.  Could this be because showing an entire transcript makes it painfully obvious how error-laden the transcription is?  Google’s Gaudi project has been in beta testing for quite some time now, and the same thing occurs there.  The automatic transcription is only available in snippets, without much context.

Here are the results of my short experiment.  I hit PLAY on the video.  The automatic captioning must be invoked by the viewer, and the captions do not “stay with” the video or become a permanent part of the video;  they simply appear on the screen and disappear.   After a few seconds, the captions began to appear.   To capture the actual text, I created a screen shot.  In fairness, I admit that the audio quality was poor as the video began, showing people mingling and chatting before the speech.  The “auto-cap,” as they call it, picked up a few false captions and nonsense words.  Confusing to someone who can’t hear, but nothing major.

Once the audio improved and the speaker took the podium, this was the result:  He said, “This is a little daunting.”  The automatic captions read, “so the vote don’t you,” with no punctuation.  (see figure 1, below).

These results were typical and continued throughout the remainder of the video.  I was not surprised by this type of result, as I’ve followed automatic speech recognition technology for years.

“Something is Better Than Nothing”

In YouTube’s video announcing  the new service on its official blog, they admitted that the system had its flaws; that they were aware of the issues; that it is going to get better as time goes on; and, that for someone who is Deaf, “something is better than nothing.”

As a long-time advocate for persons with hearing loss (and a realtime captioner and CART provider), I initially bristled at that statement.  Upon further reflection, and in reading what some Deaf and hard-of-hearing people had to say about it, I suppose I agree with that statement, to a degree.

Here is the distinction.   In the case of the millions of videos being posted on the internet by individuals and small businesses who can’t afford to subtitle or caption their content, perhaps something is better than nothing.  (Although, I question that at times.  In the example above, perhaps those captioning errors are more confusing for the viewer than no captioning.)  But for universities and colleges, big businesses, media outlets and governmental entities, they could and should do better.  In the case of broadcast television networks and others that fall under the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulation and must provide closed captioning on their broadcast programming, to post the same video content on the internet without the captions is irresponsible and offensive to those who depend on captioning.  Yet, sadly, that is a very common practice.

Foreign Language Translation

Now let’s discuss the automatic foreign language translation feature.  As anyone who is fluent in more than one language can tell you, automatic translation software doesn’t work well enough to properly convey meaning.  Talk to any foreign language translator, and they will explain how this works and the problems it poses.  Add to that the fact that the base text file being used for the YouTube translation is what the auto-cap produced.  Even if the foreign language translation were flawless, it would still have the speaker in our example saying (in the language of your choice), “so the vote don’t you” instead of “This is a little daunting.”

Synchronization of Accurate Transcripts

The second part of the service that YouTube unveiled is automatic synchronization of text and video for people who upload video content and a transcript.  The system aligns the transcript with the video and posts it as captions.  The video owner has the option of submitting their own transcript or having one prepared by a human transcriptionist.  Ideally, the transcripts provided by the captioning or transcription companies will be accurate and in a format that is more like the captioning that appears on television broadcasts.  Accurate transcripts … now that is a good idea!

Of course, one must pay for the transcription, and when we speak of individuals uploading massive amounts of video content, that was the problem to begin with.

Searchable Video & Audio

Once accurate transcripts are prepared – whether the product of a captioning company, a professional transcriptionist, a script, or the content owners themselves – the possibilities are endless.  Accurate transcripts are the foundation for accurate video search, for accurate language translations, and accurate captioning.  Now you’re talkin’!

Tanya Ward English

“Making video and audio fully searchable and accessible worldwide.”

What makes Transendia special?

• One-Stop Shop – You upload your video, provide us with spellings, and we do the rest
  • Transcription
  • Synchronization
  • Hosting
• Accurate Transcripts
• Robust Player with Multiple Search Features
• Captioning Outside of Video Field
• Patent-Pending “Pinpoint” Search Technology from Search Engines
• Search Keywords & Glossary Terms, in Addition to Verbatim Transcripts
• Customization of Player and Website Integration
  • Branding and Custom Skins
  • Integrate with Search Portals and Video Libraries/Collections
  • Custom Accessibility Options (Traditional Offline Captioning and Video Description available, for example)
  • Translation into Other Languages
• Video & Audio Files Processed
• Optional Download of Transcripts
• Integration with Realtime Transcription for Live, Streaming Events