I want a clean Subtitle Track on every Blu-ray!!!

the sdh subs are very annoying. always hated them if they're the only option. why can't studios simply add standard subs? is it that hard? i'm tired of reading [door opens] or [gunshot], etc.

i'm not saying they should drop them as people who have hearing problems should enjoy the movies too. but i just want to read what the actors are saying.

this goes to all studios, major and independent: add a standard subtile track to all your releases!!!

Re: I want a clean Subtitle Track on every Blu-ray!!!

Its not a make-or-break for me, but I do also wish they would include both a normal and SDH subtitle track on each disc. There's nothing like watching a movie late in the night, so you have to turn the volume down and put on the subs, only to have the TV tell you [Laughs Offscreen] or [Sirens in the distance].

But they definitely need to include both. BD should be accessible to the hearing impaired as well.

Re: I want a clean Subtitle Track on every Blu-ray!!!

my only wish is that subs be exactly what is being said on scree.n

too many times the sibs are truncated and a condensed version of the dialog.

this is not limted to blu, it has been happening on dvds since the beginning.

damn right tony. i just watched 'in the line of fire' on blu-ray and most the of the dialog was omitted in the subs

the reason i dig this thread up is that there is no change of the sdh vs standard subs situation on blu-ray

universal: sdh only
warner: mostly sdh, rarely clean subs
fox: sdh only
disney: mostly sdh, rarely clean subs
paramount/dreamworks: always have both
sony: always have both
criterion: sometimes sdh only, sometimes they give you an option (on non english language films that is)
lionsgate: can't really say much about them, cause i only have two films from them on blu and both had the option for either.

Most studios see little invested interest in non-SDH English subs for English films because the number of people that will use them is rather small.

The posts without capitals are very annoying. Always hated them if they cannot be avoided in the thread. Why can't posters simply add standard capitalizing? Is it that hard? I'm tired of reading "the sdh subs are ..."    or "always hated them" , etc. when those are the first words of a sentence and "SDH" should be in all caps.


But then again, I can't always get what I want. 


Cees

As someone who used to work in closed captioning and did a little subtitling, I can tell you that it's not uncommon for the studios to simply re-use old closed caption files done years ago for VHS and have them converted into subtitles for DVD.  It's cheaper.  And that's where the sound effects in the files come from... a new subtitle file has no sound effects, because they're really intended for a hearing audience, not the hearing impaired.

Many years ago, it was believed by most in the captioning industry that people weren't capable of reading fast enough to get every single word of speech in a film or television show.  After conducting tests with the hearing impaired, it was determined that, yes, deaf people can read really fast, so it's okay to caption every word spoken onscreen.

So these older caption files (generally pre-2000, depending on the company), are heavily edited.  There may still be some captioning houses out there that do edited files; I don't know. 

So when a home video company decides they don't want to spend the money for a whole new subtitle job, which for a two-hour movie would involve about 24 hours of labor, they can have the old closed caption file converted to subtitles for less than half the price.  Many of these are now apparently being ported over from DVD to blu-ray.

Some editing is still occasionally necessary, though.  Sometimes, when someone is talking REALLY fast, or several speakers overlap, it's just not possible to put every word in.

Regarding errors in captioning/subtitling: Very often the production company does NOT provide a script to the captioning house.  Even when they do, sometimes even the cutting continuity script is wrong in spots... those are transcribed by outside vendors, too. 

For television shows, very often what is captioned is not the final cut... audio overdubs have yet to be added.  This is why you have lines in the captioning for TV shows that are very different from what is being said or are not even in the show at all.  Worst thing is, the production company usually has a hissy fit and blames the captioning company for this, until they are informed that they never sent out a final cut for captioning.  Everything is on such fast turnaround for TV... frequently a change is made to a show literally the day before it airs.



 

Before studios put effort into creating "clean" subtitle tracks, I'd like to see them do a better job of keeping them out of the picture area in 2.35:1 movies.

out of the picture area? are you serious? why would that be any good?

exactly, a very bad idea.

I'd much rather have the subtitles in that unused matte area than interfering with the actual picture unnecessarily. For 1.85:1 content, they don't have a choice... for 2.35:1 content, they do.

When you read the subs in the unused matte area you have to look away from the picture to read them.
There are other reasons that don't affect me but there are people wth constant height setups that are affected.

I'm not so sure that I do. But while I understand the argument, if that's a problem for you doesn't that mean that you're basically ignoring a big chunk of the picture when you're watching a 1.85:1 movie?
Blu-ray is not a constant height format, though; it's (ignoring content with a smaller AR than 16:9) constant width. If they choose to project it as constant height, losing content is a risk they take.

Hi

I think that different subtitles would be a perfect fit as a BD Live feature. Then the studios could correct any errors that have slipped through.

I too am very annoyed with [music playin] etc. However, I do use the subtitle features a lot for late night viewings.

cheers