Wortel review for first-person video and action annotation

Wortel describes collecting and labeling first-person demonstrations, with short action segments and descriptions for each hand. Its public examples make it particularly relevant for a lab comparing annotation methods on the same footage. Give it a small clip that includes simultaneous actions, an occlusion, and a clear end state. Check whether the delivered labels preserve timing and the evidence for the chosen action. Wortel examples and process

Evaluate the review passes on your own edge cases

The company describes reviewing segmentation and language separately, with an internal and an independent external review pass for each. Its published examples also show corrected descriptions alongside originals. Ask which review records are included in your export, who resolves disputed boundaries, and how instructions or corrections are versioned. The public throughput figures are provider statements. A pilot should establish quality on your task and delivery cadence. Wortel annotation and review workflow

Confirm the quote and permissions

Check whether the quote is for annotation of your footage, new collection, or both, and what counts as a billable or accepted hour. Ask who can access source video, whether raw uploads can be used for other purposes, how long files are retained, and who can authorize the capture if Wortel supplies it. The reviewed overview provides a pilot route. Get the fees, file ownership, and rights in writing before transferring footage. Wortel pilot and service overview

An original two-hand annotation check

In a fictional sorting demonstration, the left hand steadies a tray while the right hand moves a practice object. The camera then turns while the left hand remains still relative to the tray. Ask for descriptions that preserve the different hand roles and distinguish camera motion from object motion.

Include a short occlusion and a revised label in the sample review. Check whether the source interval, original description, correction and accepted boundary remain connected. A polished final sentence can hide a timing error if the underlying action interval is not inspectable. No test result on Wortel’s data is reported here.

Compare review evidence and the commercial unit

The company describes separate reviews of boundaries and language. Request the records included with the delivery, how disagreement is resolved and how a changed instruction affects already reviewed work. Use a held-out clip to check the same written rule instead of relying on a provider-wide throughput statement.

Identify whether the quote covers annotation of your footage, commissioned collection or both. Ask how source hours, segmented clips, simultaneous views and rejected work enter the accepted unit. Confirm access, retention, source authority and ownership of annotations before transferring footage. A specific pilot and agreement are needed to establish the scope and cost.