[adp-list] Description Quality

margaret hardy katiemags at aol.com
Thu Jun 7 17:37:07 EDT 2012


tell me how it would work.

margaret hardy
katiemags at aol.com


-----Original Message-----
From: fred olver <goodfolks at charter.net>
To: ACB Audio Description Project Discussion List <adp-list at acb.org>
Sent: Thu, Jun 7, 2012 2:25 pm
Subject: Re: [adp-list] Description Quality


Why not, but also for Descriptive video in theaters, I expect it would 
be alot cheaper.Fred Olver----- Original Message ----- From: "margaret 
hardy" <katiemags at aol.com>To: <adp-list at acb.org>Sent: Thursday, June 
07, 2012 4:23 PMSubject: Re: [adp-list] Description Quality> for live 
theatre?>> margaret hardy> katiemags at aol.com>>> -----Original 
Message-----> From: fred olver <goodfolks at charter.net>> To: ACB Audio 
Description Project Discussion List <adp-list at acb.org>> Sent: Thu, Jun 
7, 2012 1:38 pm> Subject: Re: [adp-list] Description Quality>>> Someone 
ought to develop an app so Iphone users can receive audio > description 
with their phones or Ipods/ipads.>> Fred Olver>> ----- Original Message 
----->> From:   Diane DiSalvo>> To: adp-list at acb.org>> Sent: Thursday, 
June 07, 2012 2:32   PM>> Subject: Re: [adp-list] Description   
Quality>>>>> Brilliantly stated, as usual, Rick. What you have   
outlined here is and > has always been the goal of AudioVision, Inc. 
That   is to say the > providing of "quality description." As Margaret 
said,   we were able to > bring in blind patrons to review our process 
back in the "old   days" and > it was tremendously beneficial in 
creating the formula we   continue to > operate with today. I too 
believe that this is the most   important issue > concerning the 
continued improvement and ultimate success   of audio > description. If 
those of us working in this field cannot ensure   the > quality of what 
we produce, we are merely spinning our wheels and doing > more of a 
disservice to those we profess to serve.>> Thank you   so much for your 
"unique perspective."> Diane DiSalvo> Program Director> AudioVision, 
Inc.>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------> 
  From: rjboggs at socal.rr.com> Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 11:24:27 -0700> To:  
  adp-list at acb.org> Subject: [adp-list] Description Quality>> Hello   
all,> I'd like to share my somewhat unique perspective with you, in   
particular > with those blind consumers on the list here. I say unique, 
  because > perhaps sadly, I happen to be the only totally blind 
professional > producer of video description and the only producer of 
video description > to   hire blind professionals to review the 
description work we do at my > company.   So, I am certainly a 
consumer. I am also a professional audio > engineer and voice over 
artist with a resume of more than 25 years in > those   fields of 
work.>> There are so many issues concerning description, and   many 
more studies > need to be conducted. Description consumers are so   
unaware of > description in general, where to find it, how it is 
produced, what   is > and is not possible to achieve through 
description, how to access it when > it is offered, how to know when 
and where it is offered, and on and on. > People   can point to the 
limited studies that have been attempted thus > far. We   know that the 
AFB study from the late 1990s suggested great > disparity between   
blind consumers of description and their opinions > about what they 
liked and   what they wanted. In my own organization and > experience 
producing   description, we have continuously attempted to > collect as 
much data as   possible about consumer opinions related to > 
description style and content.   I have carefully analyzed all of the > 
published "standards" for   description as well. It seems there are 
some > generally agreed upon   principles. Everything else seems to be 
stylistic > choices.> I am concerned that the technology related to 
description   production and > delivery is already and will continue to 
be far ahead of the   effort to > learn answers to some critical 
questions that could best ensure that > blind consumers of description 
are served effectively. The "quality" of > description will forever be 
an arguable topic with various schools of > thought   advocating their 
own viewpoints. To imagine that there might > ever be an   agreed upon 
method by which we can measure the quality of > description might be   
a very lofty idea and may be well out of reach in > reality. However, 
the   concern about the rising quantity of description > becoming a 
priority that   completely blots out any effort to ensure the > quality 
of description offered   is a very valid concern. Consumers > generally 
have no idea about emerging  technology that will soon make the > 
production and delivery of description very   easy for anyone to do. 
While > this will surely increase exponentially the   quantity of 
description > available, it will also surely dramatically affect the   
style or quality > of description available as well.> The real   
question here is whether or not the current "leadership" or > leading 
producers   of description will make any attempt to address this > 
issue, or will they   simply be satisfied to get their share of the > 
growing pie of description work   in the marketplace? Anytime 
non-disabled > individuals provide a "service"   intended to benefit 
people with > disabilities, there is a potential for a gap   in 
integrity or > accountability. Because the service being sold or   
purchased feels like a > program to benefit the public, there is 
possibly a   built-in assumption > by consumers of the service and the 
onlooking public that   those > providing the service are serving the 
disabled population in the most > effective way possible and that doing 
so is in fact the goal of those > providing the service. That is a 
natural dynamic when non-disabled > people design, operate, and deliver 
services for disabled   populations.>> So, I assert that the best way 
to address the issue of the   "quality" of > description, whatever that 
might mean, is to ensure that blind > professionals are reviewing 
description, are involved in producing > description, and that, in 
general, those producing description in any form > ought to make every 
effort to be directly accountable to the consumers > they   serve. 
While this may not result in any particular consistency in > style   or 
content of description, it will be the only measurable means to > 
determine   that every effort has been made to serve the consumer; that 
 > is, let the   consumer determine how they are served.>> All sorts of 
arguments can be   made by producers of description as to why > this is 
not practical, but I run   perhaps the smallest of the very active > 
description companies who regularly   deliver description to government 
 > agencies, nonprofit organizations, and even   television, DVD, and 
movie > cinemas, and I have been able to ensure that every   program is 
reviewed > by professionals who are also blind consumers.> Since 
consumers know very little about the service, as I already   pointed > 
out, they are likely to accept any idea that sounds reasonable that > 
might explain why a description producer does not include any blind > 
professional review process. I would suggest that no other producer of 
 > description would likely understand how they might incorporate some 
form > of   review by blind professionals, since they have no 
experience doing > it.   As a business person, I definitely appreciate 
the perceived burden > that   such accountability might seem to be. 
Purely from a business > standpoint,   any added expense to the 
production process would be a cost > that must be   minimized in order 
to achieve maximum profitability. > Indeed, if blind   consumers allow 
cost and profit margin to be the > primary or sole   considerations for 
producers, then that will remain a > legitimate approach to   producing 
description. However, if the forces in > the marketplace were to   
shift, and an emphasis on some measure of > quality, such as review by 
a blind   professional, were to become a major > concern for buyers of 
description who   might hear lots of feedback from > consumers of 
description, that might be a   "game changer" forgive the > over-used 
pop phrase. If consumers were to   apply enough pressure through > 
public forums like social media, email   petitions, and phone calls and 
 > letters to government agencies that fund   description, networks that 
 > broadcast description, and theaters, museums, and   other venues that 
 > offer description, asking, demanding, to know if blind   
professionals > reviewed the description being offered, then, suddenly, 
it makes   more > sense for a producer to incorporate such 
accountability, even if it does > put a small bend in the bottom line. 
Consumers most often think like > consumers, but if blind consumers 
want to have any impact on the kind of > description they get in the 
near future, they really will have to think > more   like business 
people.>> Do we who produce description need to learn much   more about 
what our > description consumers want? Yes, we do. However, if   
finding those > answers takes longer than the roll out of new 
technology that   will flood > the market with description that may not 
even really serve   consumers, > then studies may become an irrelevant 
afterthought. Blind   consumers are > still in a position to have an 
impact before that horse leaves   the barn. > Waiting until they are 
completely unhappy with what passes for   most > description will be 
too late to do much about it.>> So, that is my   somewhat unique 
perspective on what I consider to be the > most important topic   or 
issue concerning description today.>> I certainly cannot be accused of  
  trying to be popular.>> Rick Boggs>> www.audioeyesllc.com> 
_______________________________________________   adp-list mailing list 
 > adp-list at acb.org   http://www.acb.org/mailman/listinfo/adp-list>>> 
------------------------------------------------------------>> 
_______________________________________________> adp-list mailing   
list> adp-list at acb.org> http://www.acb.org/mailman/listinfo/adp-list>>> 
_______________________________________________adp-list mailing > 
listadp-list at acb.orghttp://www.acb.org/mailman/listinfo/adp-list>  
_______________________________________________> adp-list mailing list> 
adp-list at acb.org> http://www.acb.org/mailman/listinfo/adp-list> 
_______________________________________________adp-list mailing 
listadp-list at acb.orghttp://www.acb.org/mailman/listinfo/adp-list
  


More information about the adp-list mailing list