And in any language, the machine-generated captions don't have punctuation. You also miss out on non-speech cues that a manual captioner will often add, like a note that there's music playing in the background, or that a loud crash happened off-screen, or simply that a person laughed.
> Machine captions can be scaled to caption the entirety of YouTube, something crowdsourcing could never accomplish.
They certainly don't scale the same way, but one of the entire purposes of crowdsourcing is that it scales better than trying to employ what will inevitably be a smaller number of people. I still think there's value there, at least until machine-generated captions are actually on par with a human. We're not there yet.
completely devoid of punctuation
and proper capitalization so that all the words
run together in an endless nonsense sentence also they're
useless because each word pops up on the
screen one a time very slowly in time with the audio
with arbitrary line breaks sounds useful but
it makes it impossible to read the captions and actually
watch the video because you're forced to keep
your eyes on the weirdly scrolling captions you
can't just read one line at a time like proper
captions and it never gets the hard to
hear words right you know the ones that
would benefit most from proper captions
---
Also, the machine-generated captions are completely devoid of punctuation and proper capitalization, so that all the words run together in an endless, nonsense sentence.
Also, they're useless because each word pops up on the screen one a time, very slowly (in time with the audio), with arbitrary line breaks. Sounds useful, but it makes it impossible to read the captions and actually watch the video because you're forced to keep your eyes on the weirdly scrolling captions--you can't just read one line at a time like proper captions.
And it never gets the hard-to-hear words right. You know, the ones that would benefit most from proper captions.
Creating real subtitles is as much a combination of art and skill and judgement and balance as editing the video itself.
A good subtitle allows you to quickly read ahead, and then move your eyes back to the video, back to the people speaking, so that you can watch them act out the line.
A good subtitle doesn't transcribe everything said word for word, but reduces spoken language to written language, and focuses on the gist of what's said.
A good subtitle for hearing-impaired viewers describe important sounds that happen off-screen, such as doors opening or closing, but skips non-important sounds, and sounds of things happening on-screen.
Good subtitles and CCs both have to be structured carefully so that they do not negatively impact the delivery of lines in the content. The biggest offender of this is comedy series as an improperly structured and timed CC or subtitle will ruin many jokes.
Another aspect of this is how they handle making it easy to digest multiple lines of dialogue. Good CCs and subtitles will either structure the dialogue such that a certain voice is always on top or bottom or alternatively will match colours to voices.
Similarly, in content that is visually busy or rapidly changing, good subtitles and CCs will stay out of the "busy" section of the screen and avoid using a colour or outline that would interfere with the readability based on the background of the scene.
They are different but with regards to what makes them good, they are basically the same.
And to add on to this, on just about everything but live feeds, they are produced and added to video more or less the same way.
Yes. The rules for how long to show a subtitle, and when to pop them in and out are the same, regardless of the actual text shown. Everyone can decide what characters-per-second limit works for them, but whatever you choose, it fundamentally alters everything else and restricts what text can actually go in the subtitle. Translated or not translated, sound cues or no sound cues.