skip to main content
10.1145/3170427.3188507acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

Feels Like Being There: Viewers Describe the Quality of Experience of Festival Video Using Their Own Words

Published:20 April 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Incorporating user-generated video (UGV) into professional coverage of public events has the potential to enhance experience through offering alternative perspectives. However, current tools for choosing video rely on objective technical quality metrics that might not identify these offerings. This work uses an Open Profiling of Quality methodology, in which participants freely describe and refine a vocabulary of positive and negative qualities of music festival video. By validation with a second viewer cohort, we show that this method can yield attributes with strong descriptive consensus. Our work should help enhance creative processes for selecting footage that transcend conventional criteria.

References

  1. Kerlin, L., Evans, M., and Jones, R.. (2017). Professional Use of User-Generated Video - Views of Producers and Contributors. ACM TVX2017 Adjunct Proceedings.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Haimson, O. and Tang, J.. (2017). What Makes Live Events Engaging on Facebook Live, Periscope, and Snapchat. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '17). ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Berg, J. (2006) How do we determine the attribute scales and questions that we should ask of subjects when evaluating spatial audio quality? Spatial Audio and Sensory Evaluation Techniques. Guildford, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Kelly, G. A (1955) The Psychology of Personal Constructs. Norton, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Jack, F. R. and Piggott, J. (1992) "Free choice profiling in consumer research," Food Quality and Preference, (3), 129--134Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Bech, S., Hamberg, R., and Nijenhuis, M (1996). "Rapid Perceptual Image Description (RaPID) method" in Proceedings of SPIE, Human Vision and Electronic Imaging Vol 2657, 317--328.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Zacharov, N., and Koivuniemi, K., (2001). Audio descriptive analysis and maooing of spatial sound displays" in Proceedings of the International Conference on Auditory Displays (ICAD2001).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Strohmeier, D. (2012). Open profile of quality: a mixed methods research approach for audiovisual quality evaluations. SIGMultimedia Rec., 4 (4), 5--6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Strohmeier, D., Jumisko-Pyyko, S., Kunze, K., and Bici, M. O (2011). The extended OPQ method for user centered quality of experience evaluation: a study for mobile 3D video broadcasting over DVBH. EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing, 1--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Walton, T., Evans, M., Kirk, D., and Melchior, F (2016). A subjective comparison of discrete surround sound and soundbar technology by using mixed methods. Audio Engineering Society Convention, 140.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Strauss, A., and Corbin, J (2015) Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th Edition), SAGE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Feels Like Being There: Viewers Describe the Quality of Experience of Festival Video Using Their Own Words

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI EA '18: Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2018
      3155 pages
      ISBN:9781450356213
      DOI:10.1145/3170427

      Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 20 April 2018

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • abstract

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI EA '18 Paper Acceptance Rate1,208of3,955submissions,31%Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader