Poll: Subtitle positioning in wider ratio (2.20+) movies on Sony Blu-ray Discs

[syncguy]

Originally Posted by Brain Sturgeon

Okay, I think the benefits of option 1 have been clearly stated:

• To allow CIH system users to properly view all the subtitles
• To best recreate the original theatrical presentation of the subtitles
• To maximize eye contact with the visuals while being able to read the subtitles
• To reduce eye strain from having to read one line of subtitles in the image (which could be bright) and one line of subtitles in the underlying dark bar

What exactly are the benefits of option 2 (one line in the picture and one line in the dark bar)? Honestly, I can't think of any.

If one of two options (with the third being abstain) in the poll is clearly better than the other, how can they be "promoted" equally?

I wish to emphasise a very important point that is not considered in above which is far more important than the first point related to CIH. I believe CIH issue is a minor point in larger subtitle blackbar problem.

The PROBLEM:
Placing subs on the blackbar tailors the content to 16x9 displays and prohibits the content to be used with evolving display technology.

It is bad for the consumers, retailers and manufacturers. It is BAD for the whole society. It negatively impacts on technology development as a whole.

In five years, blackbar-sub blu-rays will be obsolete if used on a super-wide TV set. Subtitles in the picture make current content universally compatible with all current and future display technologies and will support technology development which is good for the whole society.

This issue is not new: Many years ago subs were placed on non-anamorphic-DVD blackbars and limited those DVDs only to 4x3 displays. Those DVDs cannot be used in current 16x9 displays. The same is now repeated by placing subs on 16x9 blackbar and limiting those blu-rays to 16x9 displays.

Content shall not be limited to a display technology. Content should have universal compatibility with all current and future display types.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by syncguy

The PROBLEM:
Placing subs on the blackbar tailors the content to 16x9 displays and prohibits the content to be used with evolving display technology.

It is bad for the consumers, retailers and manufacturers. It is BAD for the whole society. It negatively impacts on technology development as a whole.

In five years, blackbar-sub blu-rays will be obsolete if used on a super-wide TV set. Subtitles in the picture make current content universally compatible with all current and future display technologies and will support technology development which is good for the whole society.

This issue is not new: Many years ago subs were placed on non-anamorphic-DVD blackbars and limited those DVDs only to 4x3 displays. Those DVDs cannot be used in current 16x9 displays. The same is now repeated by placing subs on 16x9 blackbar and limiting those blu-rays to 16x9 displays.

Content shall not be limited to a display technology. Content should have universal compatibility with all current and future display types.

Hyperbole is rather strong here.

16x9 is the HDTV and BD standard. There is no other standard.
5 years from now 21:9 will be normal? When there's no programming or format to support it?

I'd say there's overwhelmingly more folks with 4x3 HDTV displays (CRTs and smaller LCDs, as well as computer monitors) than those with 21:9. What about them?

Letterboxed 4:3 DVDs will play on 16x9 displays, with the "zoom" button provided on nearly every 16x9 display and several DVD players themselves. Sure it's ugly and lower resolution, but it will display.

"Bad for society"? There's disease, dictatorship, starvation, overpopulation, global warming and now subtitles in the black bar.

[syncguy]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Hyperbole is rather strong here.

Not really. I am talking about "proven" reality. This has happened in the past. It will happen in the future if people are not careful.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

16x9 is the HDTV and BD standard. There is no other standard.
5 years from now 21:9 will be normal? When there's no programming or format to support it?

Two content standards will be in the future:
16x9 HDTV and 21:9 (or 2.35:1) which is protected and supported by many billions of dollars worth of investment around the world. These are the formats that people will be watching on a regular basis in few years time.

A technology standard such as "16x9 display" should not limit current content to that display type. Since blu-ray specs does not support shifting raster-subs (may be due to content protection), it can not be expected that future blu-ray players will support that non-standard feature. One solution is for BDA to rewrite blu-ray specs (which may involve a structural change to the technology architecture) and force all manufacturers to comply - that will not happen.

So, as you say, of course there would be new formats to support 21:9 display, however, that will involve a new-standard player and possibly new-standard content (because blu-ray standard does not support raster-sub shifting) - This is called double-dipping. No one would be happy to see that.

It is shortsighted to limit blu-ray content to a particular display and expect some technology to solve the issue (which also might reduce the life-span of the current blu-ray technology). The robust, future-proof and safe method is to produce blu-ray content to be compatible with current and future content standards (i.e. 16x9 and 21x9).

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I'd say there's overwhelmingly more folks with 4x3 HDTV displays (CRTs and smaller LCDs, as well as computer monitors). What about them?

Letterboxed 4:3 DVDs will play on 16x9 displays, with the "zoom" button provided on nearly every 16x9 display and several DVD players themselves. Sure it's ugly and lower resolution, but it will display.

I haven't heard of 4x3 HDTV displays. Anyhow, the whole thrust of HD is to give a detailed and clear image to the viewer regardless of the display size. So, it does not matter the size of the display as long as the display-size to seating-distance ratio is the same. If the ratio is roughly the same the viewer can appreciate the clarity and details of a HD picture and therefore slim-line and well integrated "HD" subs in a "HD" image can be read seamlessly and effortlessly even without realising that they are reading subs. Of course this is not the case for fat and ugly DVD subs that people can remember very well. We are not talking about those.

Also note that display prices are coming down and the typical display size in a lounge room is increasing.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

"Bad for society"? There's disease, dictatorship, starvation, overpopulation, global warming and now subtitles in the black bar.

Of course hampering technology evolution is bad for the society - it can be considered as a bad disease.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by syncguy

Two content standards will be in the future:
16x9 HDTV and 21:9 (or 2.35:1) which is protected and supported by many billions of dollars worth of investment around the world. These are the formats that people will be watching on a regular basis in few years time.

But only for those films formatted in that format. There is no series programming that I am aware of that is in 'scope ratio.

All the talk of "the future" has been about some kind of 3-D display technology and the possible format battles over it. 21:9 is a niche of a niche. You think there's problems with getting people to buy catalog titles now, what about the thousands of titles that are 4x3? 21x9 displays will have severe pillarboxing on those titles.

So, as you say, of course there would be new formats to support 21:9 display, however, that will involve a new-standard player and possibly new-standard content (because blu-ray standard does not support raster-sub shifting) - This is called double-dipping. No one would be happy to see that.

I will still argue 21:9 will never be mainstream in my lifetime, even the 4K demos made are still in a 16x9 ratio.

I haven't heard of 4x3 HDTV displays.

There were quite a few CRTs and rear-projection sets sold in 4x3 format. Even now there are still some smaller LCDs that are 4x3 still in stores. Letterboxing on those displays with the subtitles in the picture will make them even more difficult to see.

[Eternal_Sunshine]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

So you think it's entirely fair to only have articles telling people why, according to them, option 1 is the best (...) all linked to from main pages of major sites?

First of all, there were not articles but one (1) such article, and Penton has already said that 'Zyber factor' has been taken into consideration.

Originally Posted by 4K2K

If there was an election would it be fair if one party was given nearly all the promotion, publicity and news coverage

Well, no-one stopped anyone from publishing pro option 2 articles, did they? So your analogy is deeply flawed. If no-one is bothered enough to write such articles, it's hardly the fault of option 1 proponents.

The truth is that option 1 would only be a slight annoyance to some people while option 2 makes films for other people unwatchable. So obviously there is more motivation to lobby for option 1. As I said before, before this poll was initiated, I have never ever read on any HT forum a single post lamenting the policy of Disney, Universal, Paramount, Fox etc. putting the subs inside the active picture area. So it obviously is not a big deal.

Also, you really need to give HT enthusiasts more credit. They are not sheep. They know what they want and it's not like this poll has a lot of confusing optiions. It's a very clear choice, and just because you don't like the choice the clear majority is making shouldn't lead you to characterize those voters as mindless sheep who will vote for whatever they're told to. As I already said on this thread, I linked to this poll on various HT forums, and if you read the threads there you will see that there were quite a few people who registered here and voted for option 2, despite my "bias" Goes to show that people make up their own mind.

Now to your list of "benefits" of option 2...

Originally Posted by 4K2K

Subtitles further down are easier to read, especially when they are in the black bars, where they are not affected by picture content.

I completely disagree. The eye has to travel a longer way to and back from subs in the black bar, leading concentration away from the movie. One line in the picture and one line in the black bar (and this is your only option) are harder to read because the contrast of both lines is different and it's harder for the eye to adapt to that.

Originally Posted by 4K2K

For foreign language movies, made mainly for their own country, they weren't really intended to have English subtitles in the picture - at least not when shown in their original country.

I don't understand how this is a "benefit for option 2"? Besides, in every other country except that of the origin, the theatrical subs are present and inside the picture area. And in this globalized world, movies are hardly "mainly made" for one country.

Originally Posted by 4K2K

Subtitles over-write things in the scene. Things that would have been completely visible for foreign language films in their original country.

For the few (if any) cases where you feel you have missed vital picture information because of a sub – and please be honest: did that ever happen to you? – you could skip back and disable the subs for that scene/moment.

Originally Posted by 4K2K

The Blu-ray format is natively 1.78:1. Usually 1920x1080. The same aspect ratio as the vast majority of HDTVs that Blu-ray titles are watched on.

This is a point for option 2 because...?

Originally Posted by 4K2K

A consumer HDTV isn't a cinema. Things that work on a cinema sized screen might not work as well on the vast majority of consumer 1.78:1 HDTVs, eg. most people probably watch HDTV from a further distance relative to screen size than they would at a cinema

Picture sizes get bigger all the time, thus the relative distance to the screen changes as well. Especially as you can only really see the advantages of Blu-ray over SD if you sit close enough...

Originally Posted by 4K2K

If they're completely in the black bar they will be easier to read even though they're smaller.

Irrelevant because not an option in this thread.

Originally Posted by 4K2K

On the vast majority of consumer displays, there's a lot of spare space, above and below the picture for 2.35:1 and higher ratio movies. Why not make use of it?

Because it makes movies unwatchable for CIH owner and zoomers, because it's actually harder to read, because it's uglier, because it's unfaithful to the theatrical presentation in all countries around the world except that of the origin of the movie, because 2.35:1 setups may be much more common in the future than you think.

Originally Posted by 4K2K

A book is written in black on white.

The same tired legibility issue that is not as clear-cut as you make it out to be (see above). And another very flawed analogy because black on white is something entirely different that white on black. Everyone hates websites with white text on a black background because of the eye strain. Go read thedigitalbits for longer that 10 minutes and you'll agree... (sorry Bill and Jeff )

[Eternal_Sunshine]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

There were quite a few CRTs and rear-projection sets sold in 4x3 format. Even now there are still some smaller LCDs that are 4x3 still in stores. Letterboxing on those displays with the subtitles in the picture will make them even more difficult to see.

Talking about niches... I'll bet that people with 4:3 displays that own Blu-ray players are the smallest niche there is. So it would make zero sense to base a decision about BD subs on that demographic.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Eternal_Sunshine

Talking about niches... I'll bet that people with 4:3 displays that own Blu-ray players are the smallest niche there is. So it would make zero sense to base a decision about BD subs on that demographic.

I wouldn't be surprised if more people owned 4x3 HD displays than had CIH setups.

[Eternal_Sunshine]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I wouldn't be surprised if more people owned 4x3 HD displays than had CIH setups.

I would be surprised. And the people who own 4x3 HD displays and Blu-ray players is certainly even smaller.

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

Well as I've said before, I think moveable, resizeable, vector based fonts are the best answer. But that's simply not an option . But this is my ideal option and would look the best on higher resolution displays, probably including the Philips one.

Sorry, there are only three options in the poll. The request for moveable, resizable, vectors based fonts has been asked and denied.

I also think Sony's current option 2 style subtitles are too big. If they were smaller they'd most likely fit in the black bar. Also, they put two lines of subtitle where they could use one longer line, all in the black bars.

* Subtitles further down, and as much into the black bars as possible make best use of the available space on the vast majority of consumer's displays, which are 1.78:1.

* Subtitles further down are easier to read, especially when they are in the black bars, where they are not affected by picture content (eg. white subtitles over a snow scene are going to be harder to read) - as I said, they can be made smaller and/or use one longer line instead of two shorter lines.

* For foreign language movies, made mainly for their own country, they weren't really intended to have English subtitles in the picture - at least not when shown in their original country.

* Subtitles over-write things in the scene. Things that would have been completely visible for foreign language films in their original country.

I understand your points here, but putting the entirety of the subtitles into the black bar is not an available option; and all of these points are contingent upon putting everything below the video image. It's either putting all the subs into the bottom of the video, or half in the video and half in the black bar. The half-in, half-out technique may use more of your 1.78:1 imaging panel, but other than that, I think that they are harder to read.

I would agree that turning the subtitles off should be an option as well.

* The Blu-ray format is natively 1.78:1. Usually 1920x1080. The same aspect ratio as the vast majority of HDTVs that Blu-ray titles are watched on.

I don't understand how the native format of BD or most HDTV's has anything to do with subtitle positioning. Let's say you are watching a 1.78:1 movie. Where are the subtitles going to be? Why should watching a movie that is 2.35-2.40:1 be any different?

* A consumer HDTV isn't a cinema. Things that work on a cinema sized screen might not work as well on the vast majority of consumer 1.78:1 HDTVs, eg. most people probably watch HDTV from a further distance relative to screen size than they would at a cinema, and for 2.35-2.39:1 movies the picture's screen height will be even shorter relative to their TV.

If the subtitles are arranged just like the original cinematic presentation, it takes up no more screen real estate on a 40" screen than it does on a 40' screen. More people are paying attention to the THX or SMPTE recommended seating distances in their setups, and this is identical whether it is in a cinema or in a home environment. If your viewing distance is properly set, your experience at home should be very similar to the one in the commercial theater, and I would guess that most home theater owners would actually say their home experience is better.

Penton has said that if the subtitles are to go into the active picture he will try to get them to make them to be smaller, and more like a cinema presentation in proportion to screen size.

Though most HDTV watchers will probably watch 2.35-2.39:1 movies from the same distance they watch 1.78:1 & 1.33:1 content - which isn't the case for CIH owners, who, as well as having bigger screens will have 2.35:1 content zoomed bigger relative to 1.78:1 content so the text would be even bigger relatively.

Though there is no guarantee that the subtitles will be made smaller, and if they're not they will cover even more of the movie picture. If they could be made smaller, that means that for option 2 they could be made smaller too, and cover even less space, and be further/completely in the black bar. If they're completely in the black bar they will be easier to read even though they're smaller.

If the subtitles are arranged exactly like the final released print, then there shouldn't be an issue.

* On the vast majority of consumer displays, there's a lot of spare space, above and below the picture for 2.35:1 and higher ratio movies. Why not make use of it? Especially when for foreign movies those subtitles wouldn't have been on the screen at all in the first place in their original country?

Hence, I agree with the option that the end user should be able to turn off the subtitles.

I understand that more of the imaging panel would be used for reproducing subs, but the half-in/half-out technique is more distracting than anything. Even for the vast majority of consumer displays, putting subtitles into the black bar simply pulls more attention to the black bar, which most critical viewers want to "disappear" when they watch scope images. Some viewers have gone so far to mask off those portions of their screens (both direct view sets and 16:9 projection screen) to maximize contrast and improve the viewing experience. I think that there is a underestimation of the percentage of consumers that find the black bars distracting/annoying and want to address them in some way.

* A book is written in black on white. An easy to read website is written in black on white or similar opposing colours. To be easy to read, it wouldn't have white text on top of a moving white background eg. a snow scene or other video content that could affect legibility.

Again, the poll that Penton requested does not include an option to include all subtitles in the black bar. It's either all in the video, or half-in/half-out, or abstain. I hear your arguments on the "all in the black bar" or "adjustable subtitles" option, but these are simply not options.

When's the last time you watched a foreign language film in a commercial theater and wished that they had projected the subtitles into the dark area below the screen and not in the video? I would guess never. This is the experience that I think BD should try to bring home: the ultimate consumer presentation of both the original audio and visual theatrical presentation.

Again, what is/are the benefit(s) of half-in, half-out versus all subs in the video frame?

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Hyperbole is rather strong here.

16x9 is the HDTV and BD standard. There is no other standard.
5 years from now 21:9 will be normal? When there's no programming or format to support it?

Who knows what will be standard 5 years from now. Not too long ago, 720p and 1080i were thought to be SOTA. Five years ago, I thought component video would be standard. Five years before that, I was one of the first to buy a Pioneer Elite 16:9 RPTV and people asked me "what for"?

If a wider ratio screen or higher resolution imaging panels/broadcast is standard 5 years from now, I would not be surprised.

I'd say there's overwhelmingly more folks with 4x3 HDTV displays (CRTs and smaller LCDs, as well as computer monitors) than those with 21:9. What about them?

There is no such thing as a 4x3 HDTV. All the ATSC HDTV resolutions are 16:9.

There are certainly plenty of 4x3 SDTV/EDTV sets out there, but I don't think you're going to find too many of these paired with a BD player.

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

There were quite a few CRTs and rear-projection sets sold in 4x3 format. Even now there are still some smaller LCDs that are 4x3 still in stores. Letterboxing on those displays with the subtitles in the picture will make them even more difficult to see.

If the subtitles are arranged just like they are in the theatrical presentation, how does that make them more difficult to see? They take up the same screen real estate no matter what screen you view them on. This is a function of the size of the screen and associated viewing distance, not the location of the subtitles themselves.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I wouldn't be surprised if more people owned 4x3 HD displays than had CIH setups.

I think you seriously underestimate the number of projector owners out there that either do CIH or want to minimize the appearance of the black bars by masking; much less the consumers that have standard 16:9 HDTV panels that want their black bars to disappear during scope viewing (a frequently mentioned benefit to the excellent blacks of the Kuro) or who mask off their black bars with a DIY system.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Brain Sturgeon

There is no such thing as a 4x3 HDTV. All the ATSC HDTV resolutions are 16:9.

There are certainly plenty of 4x3 SDTV/EDTV sets out there, but I don't think you're going to find too many of these paired with a BD player.

Up until about 2005-06 you could still find plenty of 4x3 HD CRTs: Panasonic's 27, 32 & 36, Sony's KD series (the monster 36 & 40-inchers), before those there were Mitsuibishis...and 1080i is not EDTV.

[Spymaster]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I wouldn't be surprised if more people owned 4x3 HD displays than had CIH setups.

Blu-ray should not be catering to the lowest common denominator. It should at least be striving to present the film as intended by the film-makers, and that means keeping the subtitles as part of the picture!

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Brain Sturgeon

If the subtitles are arranged just like they are in the theatrical presentation, how does that make them more difficult to see? They take up the same screen real estate no matter what screen you view them on. This is a function of the size of the screen and associated viewing distance, not the location of the subtitles themselves.

So you're comparing a 32" screen to a 32 foot screen?

I think you seriously underestimate the number of projector owners out there that either do CIH or want to minimize the appearance of the black bars by masking; much less the consumers that have standard 16:9 HDTV panels that want their black bars to disappear during scope viewing (a frequently mentioned benefit to the excellent blacks of the Kuro) or who mask off their black bars with a DIY system.

Let's put it this way, how many people do you know on a personal basis (go over to their house & visit on a regular basis) that have a CIH setup? I know *two*. The rest are 16x9.

[Deciazulado]

Well 12.77% of BD people on another poll have CIH, 0% have 4:3

[Spymaster]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

* Subtitles further down, and as much into the black bars as possible make best use of the available space on the vast majority of consumer's displays, which are 1.78:1.

But would not reflect the intention of the film-makers who will have designed the movie for a cinema screen (without black bars!)

Originally Posted by 4K2K

* For foreign language movies, made mainly for their own country, they weren't really intended to have English subtitles in the picture - at least not when shown in their original country.

True. And thus the placement of subtitles is entirely up to the distributor of that film in whatever country it's being shown in. However, if the film has specifically designed subtitles for foreign markets - e.g. Night Watch - then those captions should be transferred across to home video.

http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=61318

Originally Posted by 4K2K

* On the vast majority of consumer displays, there's a lot of spare space, above and below the picture for 2.35:1 and higher ratio movies. Why not make use of it?

Because it's not supposed to be filled. It's merely framing for the film. And like a picture frame it shouldn't be cluttered with "information".

Originally Posted by 4K2K

* A book is written in black on white. An easy to read website is written in black on white or similar opposing colours. To be easy to read, it wouldn't have white text on top of a moving white background eg. a snow scene or other video content that could affect legibility.

Again, in the case of theatrical subtitles this will already have been taken into account and avoided. In the case of foreign language films, careful placement of the subtitles would also avoid this. The problems start when the player is allowed to sloppily hurl the captions at the screen.

[Spymaster]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

So you're comparing a 32" screen to a 32 foot screen?

The thing is, in the days of VHS and laserdisc - and even today on TV broadcasts - movies are shown with their original theatrical captions, often making them a more accurate reflection of the movie than the BD or DVD!

People have coped perfectly well with film-sized captions on their movies at home since the invention of television! And TV sets were a heck of a lot smaller in those days!

[Spymaster]

Wow, guess what, this debate has been raging since 2005:

http://www.cultmovieforums.com/forum...ead.php?t=7808

[Spymaster]

Oh and here's another example where the tone of a movie can be COMPLETELY destroyed by replacing the theatrical captions with "easier to read" player-generated ones.

The Silence Of The Lambs (DVD edition):

http://www.zetaminor.com/dvd/dvdreviews/silence_x_3.htm









Bloody awful.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Spymaster

The thing is, in the days of VHS and laserdisc - and even today on TV broadcasts - movies are shown with their original theatrical captions, often making them a more accurate reflection of the movie than the BD or DVD!

?

I remember titles like Star Trek VI, the Star Wars original trilogy, Patton, Tora! Tora! Tora!, and many other LaserDiscs had all subtitles in the band. Star Trek VI even had off-centered letterboxing to allow a greater black area at the bottom for them!