|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: DOJ proposes requiring closed captions and audio description
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 01-03-2015 12:08 PM
Firstly, many thanks to Harold for compiling this page.
Another gotcha I didn't see mentioned in any of the submissions (though I was only skimming and may have missed it) is that theaters that show archive, rerelease, foreign and other "obscure" content are potentially screwed. Admittedly that is only a tiny fraction of the country's theaters, but this would be a big deal for us.
If you're playing an obscure Hollywood 'B' movie from 1935 one evening and an archive print of a BBC documentary from the 1970s the next, there is no subtitle or audio description content available for it - none has ever been created, it's as simple as that. So if this became law, either we'd have to hire a post house to do that, costing thousands of dollars per hour of content, or break the law, or stick to a small range of well-known classics and new releases.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 01-13-2015 03:01 AM
There are many arguments against it, like the availability of those meta-tracks for legacy and independently produced content, the extra costs involved, etc.
This whole government mandated regulation regarding accessibility for disabled is slightly getting out of hand, not just in the U.S., but it's a general western issue.
I guess the primary argument here is simple: You're most likely not running a Public Service institution. And while it may be graceful for you to provide adequate infrastructure for disabled guest, experiencing movies, unfortunately, requires some basic "bodily functions" to be present and in a somewhat working condition and while the requirements are not as intense as e.g. for skiing, they're still required for the experience. And while we would laugh at the notion of making all ski trails compatible for blind people, if somebody would suggest the same for theaters tomorrow, many people would call it a GREAT IDEA...
quote: Brad Miller
I couldn't watch it. I would walk out as a moviegoer. Open captions are only good when you CAN'T hear the sound, such as sitting in a restaurant or a doctor's office, because that's similar to watching a silent movie. When the sound is available to hear though, it's an immense distraction. (At least to me)
As I stated before, I'm totally against mandating this by law. Personally, I find those audio descriptions also rather annoying and also more often than not missing the point entirely. Even if you're hearing impaired and you see a big explosion, do you really need to be told: [Series of loud booms]* ?
But I grew up with subtitles... About 85% or more of the content hitting the theaters around here is foreign in some way and usually comes with subtitles. All foreign movies on TV com with subtitles and they were "burned in" on every VHS release. And although I prefer to watch movies of which I can comprehend the language being spoken without any subtitles, you will, eventually, get used to them and they will cease to distract you.
Subtitles are, by the way, also a great way to get to know a foreign language. I think, watching movies with subtitles in foreign languages works way better than many language courses around.
* If you're also required to play the Visually Impaired soundtrack, you will see a series of big explosions on screen, hear an ear-shattering series of explosions in surround all around you, will read it on screen to confirm it really happened and a gentle voice will also remind you: A series of big booms.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 01-13-2015 06:51 AM
quote: Marcel Birgelen
Even if you're hearing impaired and you see a big explosion, do you really need to be told: [Series of loud booms]* ?
You miss the point. There is a difference between subtitles (language translation) and captions (sound replacement). If you are deaf, you will likely miss audio cues that hearing people will take for granted. If the theatre does not have nor turns up their LFE track, you may not "feel" the boom that was evident to others. Think of a scene where you see someone press their remote control bomb detonator and the audience merely hears the explosion from "far off."
The idea with the current legislation is a group of friends where one is blind, one is deaf, one is in a wheel chair, one is merely hard of hearing and one is "not handicapped" any of those manners can all go out, sit together and "enjoy" a movie together like "regular people." The blind person gets the audio description channel to augment the normal sound track...they can hear the dialog but have no perspective as to where people are on screen, particularly those not speaking. The deaf person gets the captions so they get not only the spoken word but a sense of the music/effects. After all, if the music and effects are not important to the movie, why are they in there? The person in the wheelchair gets to sit in one of the designated areas that represent typical seating for the theatre with his/her friends sitting next to him/her. The one that is merely hard of hearing can use the Hearing Assistance to raise the volume for just him/her without bothering other patrons. It also accommodates those with multiple handicaps too.
I maintain, it shouldn't be the theatre's responsibility to provide ANY listening devices or even caption devices. The theatre shouldn't be handing out anything...that should be the handicapped person's responsibility...just like getting one's own glasses or wheelchair or whatever. The regulation should stop at the transmission of the signal.
As an able-bodied person, I prefer rear-window for captions because it is completely unobtrusive to those that don't need them. I'm curious if society could get used to having captions BELOW the screen. That is use LED boards to create a caption display below the screen such that the captions are not in the picture to distract. It would be a learning experience thing though since it would be a distraction at first until people who don't want them learn to just not look below the picture. Theatres would have to be designed to ensure that they would be visible from every seat too.
I also like "Open Caption Sunday" or some such concept where open captions are run on ALL movies in a particular time slot EVERY week such that those that desire them can count on them being there and those that just can't live with them will know when to avoid going to the theatre. This is probably the most workable and least costly solution. It may require some fine tuning as to the number of time slots that are dedicated to it based on actual need/demand.
What the DOJ should also consider is the harmful business impact of requiring something that the prime movie going patron finds distracting and a reason to NOT go to the theatre. It is wrong to discourage 90% of the people to accommodate less than 1% of the people that may buy a ticket that day. (Made up numbers but the idea is that time-after-time theatre owners have shown that actual use of the ADA devices are WAY-WAY below what legislation has required).
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 01-13-2015 12:29 PM
quote: Steve Guttag
You miss the point. There is a difference between subtitles (language translation) and captions (sound replacement). If you are deaf, you will likely miss audio cues that hearing people will take for granted. If the theatre does not have nor turns up their LFE track, you may not "feel" the boom that was evident to others. Think of a scene where you see someone press their remote control bomb detonator and the audience merely hears the explosion from "far off."
No, I didn't miss the point and you can safely assume I know the difference between subtitles and "captions" as in, the audio replacement captions (although those terms are often mixed/confused) for hearing impaired people. My point was, how stupid it would be if you would be required to play both the HI track as open captions and VI audio track per default.
Now for the usefulness of those HI and VI tracks altogether. I do get the (limited) usability of those tracks for private use, but for cinemas, the use really is extremely limited.
I happen to know some hearing impaired people, and both of whom I spoke about those captions do think those "descriptive audio captions" are mostly just stupid. Although the subtitles are important for them to correctly understand the dialog, their hearing aids are usually more than sufficient to get the idea of almost all sounds. And in regards to people who where deaf right from their birth, they usually don't have any sense what most of those sounds actually sound like, so those cues will probably just get lost on them.
I also happen to know a blind person who was born blind. He never even considered to go to the movies, because... what's the point actually? He even doesn't own a TV, because, you might guess it already, it's rather pointless for him to "watch" TV.
quote: Steve Guttag
a group of friends where one is blind, one is deaf, one is in a wheel chair, one is merely hard of hearing and one is "not handicapped" any of those manners can all go out
This almost sounds like the start of a great joke ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
quote: Steve Guttag
As an able-bodied person, I prefer rear-window for captions because it is completely unobtrusive to those that don't need them.
My experience with them is very limited, but I've witnessed them twice if I remember correctly. I do remember them casting an eery yellow, flickering glow on the screen... If I would go for a system with closed captions, I would certainly opt for a wireless system with individual receivers, not a big LED screen at the end of the room and a bunch of mirrors.
quote: Steve Guttag
I'm curious if society could get used to having captions BELOW the screen. That is use LED boards to create a caption display below the screen such that the captions are not in the picture to distract. It would be a learning experience thing though since it would be a distraction at first until people who don't want them learn to just not look below the picture. Theatres would have to be designed to ensure that they would be visible from every seat too.
Some multiplexes with floor to ceiling and wall-to-wall screens will have a hard time fitting those. Besides that, I think this will be a hell of a distraction. I think I would always rather want them IN the picture than below, above or even besides the picture. I remember something just slightly similar... About 15 years back, a cinema over here experimented with a LED sign in the right corner below the screen, showing the number of minutes until the start of the show, the number of minutes until the intermission, the remainder of the intermission and finally the time until the end of the show. The thing needed to be programmed per show. The idea was apparently to keep people in their seats until the intermission or end of the show and also getting them back on-time for the re-start of the show. The thing wasn't only a failure because nobody understood the actual meaning of those numbers, it was also a major and rather pointless distraction.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 07-09-2017 06:36 AM
I don't think Williams has a complete solution either. They can handle the two audio tracks but not the captions. One could augment a Williams system with a Captilink system and if QSC has kept the CCE-100, though expensive, it could also supplement a Williams system.
I have a love/hate relationship with the Sennheiser system. I REALLY like the idea that the end-user supplies their own receiving device. Forcing businesses to supply those is wrong on so many levels. The ADA is supposed to prevent business from putting up barriers to the disabled, not participate in whatever the disability is. The business provides the wheelchair ramps, not the wheelchair. Requiring businesses to provide listening/viewing devices is as dumb as requiring them to provide corrective glasses if you are nearsighted.
From an audio standpoint, Sennheiser using one's phone/pad/pod like device shouldn't be an issue (doesn't need to light up or be visible). From a caption standpoint, using the phone's display could be disturbing to others and encourages everyone to use their phone while a movie is playing (you can't enforce a rule for some but not others. Once phones are lit up, they are lit up). I believe they are working a "Google Glass" like viewing device.
Clint would know more on its status.
From what little research I've done on it, it seems pricey, for what it is, and I think one has to use THEIR WiFi access point, for some reason. That is a non-starter for me. Again, Clint would know more specifics.
I believe they BYOD approach is the correct one (in general). It solves so many failings of the present model of how many devices to have, sanitation, actually providing the proper audio correction for one's particular impairment...etc.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carsten Kurz
Film God
Posts: 4340
From: Cologne, NRW, Germany
Registered: Aug 2009
|
posted 07-09-2017 08:12 AM
We use a completely open and free HI/VI/CCAP system in germany, with apps available for iOS and Android (Greta & Starks). Basically it's an offline system, the user downloads the aux tracks at home, through WIFI, or 3G/4G, if necessary, right ahead of exhibition time. You are free to offer them free WiFi at your cinema to speed it up a bit, but it is doable over 3G/4G easily.
That means, you have to supply nothing, except pointing patrons towards that possibility.
Once people use this app, they get notifications of new titles with HI/VI/captions available. So they choose the title, but not the cinema or equipment. The system works by syncing the VI-N/captions to the audio track in the auditorium. So, if they buy the Bluray or DVD later, they can use the same app to have VI-N or captions at home.
I also like the idea that people bring their own device. Aside from hygienic issues/battery charging/setup/provisioning, it gives these people back their autonomy to choose and act. Also, they do not have to out themselves as being handicapped in order to receive a device. They just enter the auditorium as everyone else.
Yes, you have no way to promote your business against others based on your offering of assistive equipment, but as in the US, every cinema is forced to supply HI/VI devices, there will soon be no promotional incentive anyway, as everyone offers it.
The VI-N listening part using this app on iOS or Android is very unobtrusive - you select the movie before the show starts, hit 'run', then you can put your phone into your pocket and go on only with your headset (including volume control if your headset supports it. Bluetooth also supported.
You don't need a WiFi or 3G connection during the movie, so you can set it to flight mode or silent mode.
The captions part, yes, that COULD be obtrusive, but so far, it hasn't happened in our auditorium. You can also tell patrons using it that they should prefer the last row of seats. The company supporting this system we are using are also working on wireless connected glasses for the captions.
In germany, cinemas are not forced to supply assistive devices. Movie productions are forced to supply assistive content, and cinemas receive funding if they buy and supply assistive devices.
So far, no clear winner can be seen between the smartphone solution and established dedicated devices. In germany, it is still in the beginning with these solutions.
Leo - the way I understand it, even if smartphones are an option, you would probably have to supply smartphones to people if they demand it.
- Carsten
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 07-09-2017 10:01 AM
quote: Carsten Kurz
Once people use this app, they get notifications of new titles with HI/VI/captions available. So they choose the title, but not the cinema or equipment. The system works by syncing the VI-N/captions to the audio track in the auditorium. So, if they buy the Bluray or DVD later, they can use the same app to have VI-N or captions at home.
That's really clever. The phone's mic simply listens to the same audio that the customer does (or could, if his or her hearing allowed) and uses that to sync the captions or commentary. Furthermore, as you're not including the movie audio itself in the data pacakage that the app uses, only information as to what it should listen for as a cue to display each line, there is no copyright infringement issue.
I hadn't thought about Steve's BYOD angle - that people with disabilities in other contexts are required to provide their own assistive equipment (the theater only provides the ramp, not the wheelchair) - but it makes a lot of sense. Reminds me of a court case shortly before I left Britain: someone sued a council for charging to use disabled parking spots, claiming discrimination. The council's response was that they are only required to help level the playing field for disabled people, not skew it. So, because they can't walk as far and/or as easily, they do need a spot closer to their destination. But that does not in itself mean that they are unable to pay to park, so the charge still applies.
So, as applied to our business, we wouldn't be able to claim that because we forgot to put our glasses or contact lenses on, the picture looking fuzzy is the fault of the theater; so by the same token, asking customers to provide their own device (especially a common one, that almost every adult citizen of every developed country owns) to receive assistive audio and subtitles is not unreasonable or discriminatory.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic