I just bought “300” on DVD and it turned out that it doesn’t include closed caption, just plainly foreign-style subtitle (that stays in bottom middle of the screen).

What the hell? Why did they decided to use subtitle instead of closed caption (or “open caption,” like subtitle, but it appears on left/right/center/top – like Universal DVDs uses). I mean it’s very hard to follow the conversation between two people in one screen.

Is Warner Brothers going to use that format from now on? If so, I will stop rent/buy their products.

I find it really deplorable the inconsistent use of close captioning by varing home video studios to the hard of hearing/deaf community.

I'm confused. 300 has two different English subtitles. One is just dialogue and the other is for the hearing impaired (with sound effects, etc.). They look about the same as any other Warner DVD I've seen so I don't understand the problem.

Not any other WB DVDs. Previous WB DVD have closed caption (with black background/white fonts). "300" is the first DVD I have seen them using the foreign-style subtitle. I have even selected "Caption for Hard of Hearing/Hearing Imparied" in Language section, I get that subtitle.

I've watched so many foreign films I actually prefer that style to closed caption. But I certainly see the need for the closed caption style to be on all DVDs.

I %100 agree.

The deaf/hearing impaired have the right to enjoy movies as well. I think that it should be a law, that all DVDs have closed captioning included.

At least 300 has closed captioning. A lot of DVDs, especially TOD titles, don’t have f**k all. I personally think that the black background with the white font is the best way for easy readability. The foreign style (just words, no background) is harder for the deaf/hearing impaired or anyone to follow.

I was surprised when I watched 'The Number 23' the other night that it didn't have subtitles.

Seems like alot of dvd's nowadays dont have subtitles. I use them for when I am watching something late at night and I dont want to wake anyone. I personally can't stand the closed caption style with the black box with the white letters. Sometimes those take up half the screen. At least with the regular subtitles, it isn't a solid black box over half the screen.

I wonder if they're doing it to save money. Since they support blu-ray and HD. And those formats can only offer subtitles/sdh and not closed captions?

I think subtitles at least with the fonts they select do look pretty cheap. While captions are easier to read and have the text placed on various parts of the screen to show who is talking,or where a sound is coming from.

At first I thought maybe they were doing like Disney does now,and just stating SDH on the package. While offering that and standard closed captions. I don't know if Disney still does that though. But at least on the Sin City SE,it says SDH but contains both.

It's kind of sad to hear about the SDH only being used by Warner now. Since that means the Blade Runner set will only have them as well. Warner doesn't subtitle or caption extras either. And it is pretty unfair to charge for elaborate sets like BR and yet deaf/hh people are unable to enjoy the extras. Especially if you want one of the other versions of the film. That means you have to pay more money for the 4 or 5 disc sets. And won't be able to really view the extras at all.

Universal uses SDH on their extras. And I know Paramount offers both on their releases. They seem to be the only major studios I'm aware of that bother with captions or subs on the extras.

Criterion doesn't really have an excuse for asking the prices they charge,and yet only the film itself is sub/sdh. Since again,why pay so much money for a film,and not be able to enjoy the extras as well?

There is a difference between closed caption and subtitles.

I agreed WB should have included closed caption since I'm hard of hearing. At least they did use subtitles on the special features on disc 2 which I found surprising cause not too many studio put subtitles on special features so I give kudo to WB on using them.

There are at least 4 different kind of "caption" so far I have seen:

Closed Caption (black text highlight with white font) which pop up where the character talks or where noise comes from.

"Open Caption" (I actually called it open caption because it's similar with theatre's open caption) shows similar subtitle style, but pop up at who's talking or where noise comes from. It has no black text highlight. Sometimes it's hard to read if the scene has bright white, the text would blend in.

Subtitle - mostly foreign movie or when character speak in foreign language in English-spoken movie. The text stay only ONE place - bottom center of screen. It's much difficult to know who's talking.

Colorized Subtitle - I have only seen in Anime DVDs. Yellow subtitles are only person speaking, blue/green would pop up if someone else speak at same time as yellow subtitles shows.


Only Closed Caption and Open caption are much easiest to read and enjoy the movie.

In Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon DVD, it DID provided Closed Caption, BUT it acts like foreign subtitle with black highlight with white fonts. It did not move where characters talking or noises. It was so hard for me to understand the movie. Till they show it on cable, where the closed caption was acting like it supposed to be - I understood the movie.

I might have to agree with Julie Walker that studio might attempt to "cut" some cost by degrading the caption on their DVDs. DVD sales are climbing and I don't see any good reason for them to trim some expenses.

I don't see how this could be a very big expense. Probably the costliest aspect of subtitles/captions is paying someone to write/type them and proofread them. Once that's done, encoding them into the video stream can't amount to much.

I'm sure WB has a reason for why they're doing this, but I doubt cost is the culprit.

Okay, after reading through the whole thread I finally understand what you're talking about. You're saying that the subtitles (and I'll call any player-generated text "subtitles") are just in the middle of the screen and don't move around to correspond with who is talking? I was confused because most of us think of "closed captions" as the type that the TV generates from the code in any video (not just DVD).

I brought this point up to a friend who had worked in home theater, and he's heard more and more from people, that the studios just don't care anymore.

Closed Captioning for most, if not all TV programing is funded by non-profit groups and/or government agencies, but apparently that doesn't carry over for movie studio releases.

It's safe to say 99.9% of people buying DVDs don't need captioning to enjoy the film. I know Universal tried going one step further and added 'descriptive audio' tracks for those who were visually impaired, but both that and captioning dissapreared shortly thereafter. That to me, supports the theory that studios don't care.

If people really have a problem with the lack of captioning, they need to conact the studios personally and express their anger. I personally think its pathetic that they can't find the time to provide a reasonable service for the hearing impaired.

I don't know how to get "Closed Captions" to work, except on my PC.
How do you get them to work on a TV?

I prefer a normal subtitle stream. It's easier and clearer to read than an ugly black background with blocky font. Just do away with CC and let it be a sub stream. Easier.

(Anchor Bay.......)

Does close captioning even work with progressive scan or upconvert players? I don't think it does. At least, it doesn't on my setup. That is why I prefer subtitles. Of course, many studios have cut subtitles too... Warner for one. Cheap bastards.

All tvs should have the option in the tv menu. Select them to turn on. You are usually given options of many 'caption channels' ie C1 C2+. Just select the first option,and captions should show up onscreen.

Some dvd players also have it in the player menu and must be turned on to access them. Though I only saw this option once in a cheap low cost player. And the captions would show up in the smallest font size possible crushed into the bottom corner of the screen.

Anyway, back to the subject... Can anybody check with WB's most recent release (except "300") to see if they're using only subtitle or closed caption?

By the way, I double checked the "300" as Rizor said there's two separated English subtitles, and both are using same exactly same subtitles. Both of them appeared only on bottom/center of the screen.

That's true in the U.S., where Closed Captioning decoders are required to be built into all TVs. But manicsounds is in Japan where the requirments may be different.

I have Unaccompanied Minors, and the HD combo disc of TMNT (can only play the regular DVD side right now) and neither have regular closed-captions, though they do have subtitles done in the same style (with sound effect descriptions and stuff like that) but the text stays centered. They both have subtitle tracks for the commentaries now too. Seems strange that they would get rid of TV-decoded captions now; Paramount briefly did away with them in late 2000 but brought them back due to complaints, Dreamworks initially didn't use them but added them later, Universal is the only major studio that simply refuses to use them at all, though their subtitle tracks look more like regular captions now with the words displayed in different places depending on who's speaking.

Does anyone know for sure if the old-style TV-decoded closed captions ONLY work through composite and S-Video connections? My TV is on the old side and just has S-Video, but when playing with TVs that have component video inputs I can never get the captions to work. When I finally get a new TV, that means I would still have to have the DVD player hooked up with S-Video so I can still see the captions. I'm not hard-of-hearing, but I've always been interested in how captions work and I have a rather obsessive way of watching all my discs (the first time I play them with no captions or subtitles, but always re-watch them so that I eventually see all the available subtitles and captions on the disc.)
Do the HD formats not have TV-decoded captions at all? It looks like digital broadcast TV has captions but they work a little differently, judging by the setup screens I've looked at on some newer TVs though I haven't seen too many digital TV broadcasts.

http://www.textgrabber.com/

That Textgrabber device should be the one you're looking for. It has RCA connection and S-Video connection.

I can't use closed captioning because I have an LCD projection system and not a TV for main viewing. Most major studio releases have English subtitles which I can use since it is generated by the DVD players. A few movies (The Apartment, for one) have subtitles in Spanish and/or French but not English. I still haven't figured that one out as to why.

Older TV season sets are the worse. The dialog isn't that clear and they have no subtitles. I just forego buying those sets.

Here's a bit from Wikipedia:

Pretty much. I looked at some threads at AVS and they confirmed what I thought, CC is limited to 480i because it is carried on line 21 of the video signal. If that signal is altered, (up-converted or whatever) the caption stream is destroyed. I don't see why captioning wouldn't work over component, but HDMI... not a prayer.
This is why I prefer subtitles and studios that don't provide them are giving consumers who want or need them a big "fuck you".