Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: DCP Re-Mastering - Just to add additional Subtitle Language

This is topic DCP Re-Mastering - Just to add additional Subtitle Language in forum Digital Cinema Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=002445

Posted by Anurag Chourasia (Member # 9025) on 10-19-2015, 11:07 PM:

G'day All. So the studio says that they will have to re-master the DCP in order to add any additional language subtitles. [Confused]

And that means extra cost to me. Is Re-Mastering the only way to allow additional language subtitles? Can a subtitles file not be ingested and played after ingesting the original CPL? We are talking about a encrypted DCP. Appreciate if someone could spend some time in explaining this a bit. Thanks in advance. [Smile]

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 10-20-2015, 12:41 AM:

Yes, it's called VF (version file). It still takes some time to create and, most importantly, a proper mastering facility will have to QC the final CPL to confirm all works fine.
This is for 2D.
3D is another story.

Sure, if you don't care about QC it's a 10 minutes job.

Posted by Ian Freer (Member # 1940) on 10-20-2015, 04:25 AM:

I would say it's a little dramatic for the distributor to say re-mastering is required, but on the other hand surely it's a little simplistic to say it's a 10 minute job to create a VF?...

Anurag, the "sub-titles file" you want is actually another DCP, as Marco says, it's called a Version File, or sometimes a 'supplementary package'. Re-mastering is certainly the wrong term but that may be how it was 'explained' to the distributor, especially if they are not DCP-tech-savvy.
If it's not authored as a DCP then it will not ingest (i.e. you cannot just download an .srt file and 'attach' it to the DCP...)

I suppose IF the subtitle assets existed for the foreign language VF then yes the final authoring of the VF is pretty simple, and it could be emailed to you as it would be a very small file (unless the png image method is used, then in my one and only experience using this method, the VF was about a 10-15GB download from the lab's ftp site). But if the assets already existed then you would kinda expect the VF would exist already too...

If the Sub's need to be created it could be that timed text doesn't exist, or maybe only in the original language, so there could be translation costs etc?
If it's to be done locally then the DCDM needs to be sent from the master lab to the local lab, along with DKDM etc, all these will probably incur some 'handling/admin fees' along the way...

So before you even get to QC, there could be a fair bit of costs involved.

Then once it's done it will of course need it's own KDM. This isn't really an added cost as each cinema only needs the one KDM for the version they are screening, but it's more added complexity.

The how many cinema's are there to benefit (i.e. essentially share the costs) from the distributor investing in a VF? If your cinema is the only one, then yes I can imagine the distributor will pass on the costs, but if 100 cinemas will use the VF, then it is certainly unfair for the distributor to pass these directly on.

All this is just guessing, I have no idea if this is a major studio title or if it's a small indie film, but it's fair to say if all the text/timing data is available in an appropriate format then it's certainly possible, but not necessarily that cheap at commercial lab rates if that's where the DCDM is being held.

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 10-20-2015, 01:43 PM:

Hi Ian,

Yes, I assumed that, because the distributor says that 'mastering' is involved, the facility already has the subtitle files, ready to be mastered into a VF and also all the previous assets, DCDM and DKDM.

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 10-20-2015, 03:52 PM:

Well, there is no strict definition of the term 'mastering'. Creating a subtitled VF is certainly nothing that can be done for free. Also, depending on local habits, service companies may vote for burnt-in subtitles, that would mean another encoding run as well.

- Carsten

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 10-21-2015, 05:44 PM:

why on earth would you ever use burnt in subtitles with D-Cinema?

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 10-21-2015, 05:56 PM:

Attack on Titan, Part One.

Posted by Ian Freer (Member # 1940) on 10-21-2015, 10:58 PM:

quote: Marco Giustini
why on earth would you ever use burnt in subtitles with D-Cinema?

Do you ever have to work a film festival and some of your sites have Dolby/Barco? If so, you'll appreciate burned in Sub's!
It might be unfair of me to single out two manufacturers, but for me this is the combination that see's the most subtitle issues.
Admittedly CineCanvas is better than it used to be, but subtitles are still one of the biggest complications and stresses I face each year at various festivals.

And it's not just Dolby servers, I have had occasional issues with both Doremi and GDC handling sub's.
I experience less issues with these than Dolby's and there's usually a work-around due to their server-side rendering options.
I generally prefer server-side as these systems have historically been more reliable than CineCanvas, but that goes both ways; mostly server-side is more reliable but now and again I'll come across a DCP that doesn't work with Subtitle Engine or Subtitle Overlay but does work with CineCanvas.

I accept it's a hassle for the lab, and it SHOULDN'T be necessary, but when I see a hard-subbed DCP come in, it's one less title I have to worry about phone calls coming in and trouble-shooting with numerous cinemas around the country...

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-21-2015, 11:47 PM:

If you've got a series 1 projector being fed by a server, with the software in those machines having last been updated circa 2011, the risk of a DCP with subtitles encoded for on-the-fly rendering not working is somewhere between significant and guaranteed.

Making a DCP with burnt-in subtitles increases the cost to the distributor, because a separate rendering cycle is needed for every language version, plus the added admin cost of ensuring that the right version goes to the right venue. But doing that guarantees that you won't face an Attack on Titan type situation.

With the latest software versions in the server and projector, my experience is that subtitle rendering problems go away. When I started working here, both our DSS200 and NC2500 had software images in them that were three years old. Since updating to the latest versions available of everything, all the problems with subtitles in SMPTE DCPs have gone away. But not everyone is going to be able to do this very easily: some manufacturers don't even allow end users to install updates themselves (you have to get an authorized service company to do it, and that costs), and even if you have access to them, the projectionists in some smaller and more remote independent theaters might just not feel confident doing it. For those reasons and others, I suspect it's quite likely that there are a lot of series 1 projectors and servers out there running software versions that are several years old, and they are going to have problems playing SMPTE DCPs with subtitles encoded per the latest specs. Therefore, from a distributor's point of view, burnt-in subtitles make a lot of sense.

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 10-22-2015, 04:02 AM:

I see what you say but from my point of view if the subtitles are made properly, they work.

The other day I received a support call where the subs were not working on a Dolby. Dolby logs keep the subtitle files as well so I could inspect the actual sub file. A quick check on the DCI specs confirmed me that the mastering facility put an UUID where the font file name was supposed to be and also left a sort of "put_your_font_if_here" where the font ID was supposed to go.

Ok, Cinecanvas is fussy and it could be made a little more flexible - as the Doremi engine is. But I see their point: if we stick by the rules, the subs work.

Also, if the CPL is QC'd - as any proper mastering facility would do - these issues would be picked up before releasing.

But no, we want to save money. We now hire monkeys and we ask cheaper facilities to do the job. Why screening the whole movie on a variety of servers, it's time wasted.
Then, when this happens, we spend more money to have a full DCP re-mastered with burnt in subtitles to avoid issues.

Muppets. [/rant mode off]

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 10-22-2015, 04:24 AM:

Some regions use strange fonts or formatting for text, also some need multiple subtitles simultaneously. Also, they rarely show those features without subtitles, because dubbed versions or OV showings are not a common habit, so, theres no need for a CPL without subtitles.

Often it is easier to create burnt-in subtitles from common video editing applications than to export and convert XML.

And yes, some locations may have notorious issues to keep their projector and server software up-to-date.

So, there are a couple of reasons outside the mainstream/commercial DCP world to use burnt-in titles.

- Carsten

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 10-22-2015, 12:08 PM:

Carten,

Strange fonts are dealt by PNG subtitles. I don't know the video editing suites but I still feel that making proper subs would be the best choice.
I still see this as "we can't be bothered in doing things properly, let's burn the subs and happy days".

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-22-2015, 07:37 PM:

That's the problem - the whole system is not particularly muppet-resistant, at the mastering end or at the exhibition end. If you let Kermit the Frog or Miss Piggy loose at either stage in the process, the risk of subtitles not making it onto the screen is inherently high. That is why Funimation and possibly other distributors are moving to burnt-in subtitles, which are to all intents and purposes muppetproof.

Another complication is that in English-speaking countries at least, most of the subtitled DCPs in circulation are of foreign movies, and they tend to get shown in arthouse, university and indie type venues - precisely the sort of house that is likely to have a lower budget and thus be using older projectors and servers with older software in them.

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 10-23-2015, 03:58 AM:

Don't get me wrong, I understand what you are saying Leo. It makes sense.
But my experience says that this eventually will lead to less skills in the industry as "we don't need someone who actually knows what they're doing, we just push this button and everything works".

I understand why burnt in subs are idiots-proof but I know where all this is going and I cannot agree on it in principle.

I've just heard of an encrypted CPL where all the KDM's were made using a demo version of a software which - obviously - didn't produce valid KDM's. If we follow the subtitle approach, all next features will be unencrypted as encryption may lead to issues [Wink]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-23-2015, 11:49 AM:

Wouldn't it be great if the creation of a KDM was so difficult and expensive that it required a supercomputer and an army of people with PhDs in applied maths to do it? No more encrypted DCPs ever again, no more panic calls to Technicolor or Deluxe half an hour before showtime.... Weird, isn't it, that the security aspects of the DCP standards are about the one aspect that they moved heaven and earth to make robust and reliable?

While I agree that equipment and software designed to be operated and maintained by trained professionals as distinct from consumers should not have to be designed with muppetproofing first and foremost, I do feel that the subtitle aspect of the DCI/SMPTE DCP standards has turned out to be unacceptably fragile and unreliable. It's under such constant revision (there are currently a blizzard of posts popping up on the ISDCF list about latest tweaks), depends so heavily on servers and projectors having the latest software and firmware versions in them and causes such a big problem if they don't (i.e. subtitles simply fail to display), that you have to question if the whole system is fit for purpose.

After the Attack on Titan debacle, we know that at least one distributor has come up with an answer to that question, which is to stop using it altogether and use an alternative method of doing subtitles that costs a little more up front, but delivers 100% reliability.

I suspect the people who designed the software infrastructure for handling and rendering DCP subtitles simply assumed that all the servers and projectors in the field would be permanently connected to the net and automatically updated as soon as new software is issued, like consumer smart devices in the home, and are now finding out by trial and error that this simply isn't the case.

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 10-23-2015, 01:40 PM:

Quite frankly, Texas Instruments Cinema DLP division is exactly the only one to blame for the subtitle desaster. Period. They gave a shit. Period. Probably because all major mainstream movies are US centric and there is no need for reliable subtitling in that US market. So there were not enough complaints to force them into timely bugfixes.

- Carsten

Posted by Marco Giustini (Member # 4544) on 10-24-2015, 06:25 AM:

after all TI is the same entity that designed the Enigma software! [Smile]

I do agree that Cinecanvas could be way better than it is. Doremi showed them that a subtitle engine could work as expected, it's not rocket science, it's just subtitles!!

That said, DCI packages are as strict in terms of formatting and rules but the industry had to come to terms with that because Hollywood would not agree on relaxing the rules.

Posted by Anurag Chourasia (Member # 9025) on 01-24-2016, 07:44 PM:

In case of a DCP with burnt-in subtitles, is it possible to increase the rendered font size on the screen or is it not possible? Also in case the subtitles are not burnt-in but in their own time coded XML file then is it posssible to conigure on the projector so as to show the subtitles a little bit bigger on the screen?

Posted by Ian Freer (Member # 1940) on 01-25-2016, 05:03 AM:

Burned-in titles; no they cannot be increased by the projection system, there are simply part of the image
XML titles; the font size is specified in the xml file, so Cinecanvas will not be able to change it...
but maybe GDC "subtitle overlay" and/or Doremi "subtitle engine" may have adjustments in most recent software, I am not 100% sure.
I think in Build 359 GDC included the ability to reposition the titles, so maybe there is a font size too, I will look next time I get a chance...

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 01-25-2016, 08:38 AM:

Depends on the type of DCP. Some DCPs actually allow changes to the XML files, if you can compute new hashes, etc. But it's not just a number box you dial on your projector or server. Doremis allow to adjust position only when their server-side subtitle engine is used.

- Carsten