Hacker News Reader

I wish there was a CC mode for “I’m not deaf, I just don’t catch the quiet mumbly dialog sometimes so give me captions only of the dialog.”

Bonus if it’s delayed by exactly 2 seconds, so that it doesn’t spoil jokes, and I can quickly reference it if I missed something someone said (helping me avoid fixating on the captions.)

Because it’s the CC descriptions of music swells and things like “[laughs] and “[crying]”, etc that are distracting for me, and not needed.

What’s worse, sometimes they ruin comedic timing by putting the punchline on the screen before the setup has finished (or logical equivalent of a punchline… comedy is often found in timing) and the captions ruin the timing.

There is on some shows. For those the choice is between "English" and "English [CC]" or similar; the former omits descriptions of noises. Most don't have this, probably because it's not provided by the producers.

Agreed on timing issues. This also seems to vary by show/producer.

VLC lets you adjust the timing of the closed captions. It's totally possible to set a delay of 2 sec.

H/J to decrease/increase subtitle delay.

There usually is (but not always). It is something like English vs English [for hearing impaired].

As a non-native English speaker I’m used to watching most television and movies with subtitles. The extra sound descriptions don’t bother me too much actually. Sometimes it is kind of funny actually, it is a running joke in my home to count the times a show has [ominous music].

Roku with captions on replay is my goto way of dealing with muddy dialog

That’s the difference between subtitles and closed captions: one is for people who don’t speak that language but can hear in general, the other is for people who can’t hear at all.

> Bonus if it’s delayed by exactly 2 seconds, so that it doesn’t spoil jokes, and I can quickly reference it if I missed something someone said (helping me avoid fixating on the captions.)

This is the exact reason why I vastly prefer playing media on my own media player. I have it set to always delay subtitles by exactly 2 seconds. I even have the font overridden to use a nice geometric sans (Josefin Sans, to be exact); subtitles with bitmap fonts (like they are on DVD and Blu-ray) are disabled outright.

Every time there's a new person watching something with me, they comment on the subtitle delay. It usually starts with a complaint that the subs are off-sync. Never had someone (yet) stick to that complaint though, after this explanation. But, nobody I've met has previously recognised a need for such a delay, either. Until they watch something with me, of course.

  mpv --sub-filter-sdh [--sub-filter-sdh-harder] --sub-delay=2

https://mpv.io/manual/master/#options-sub-filter-sdh

If only I could pipe Netflix or HBO through mpv. Stallman was right yet again.

[whooshing intensifies]

> Bonus if it’s delayed by exactly 2 seconds, so that it doesn’t spoil jokes, and I can quickly reference it if I missed something someone said (helping me avoid fixating on the captions.)

I think that'd ruin me more than not having subtitles at all, because I just get stuck at reading the subtitles all the time if they are on (which, I have on 99% of the time). I go so far to avoid content that doesn't have subtitles.

What I'd love to have, would be a "speed-reading" version of subtitles, that just show each word individually as it's spoken (or maybe two/three) instead of the full sentence. That way it can still be in sync, while not ruining punchlines. Would be a real hassle to actually write/make the subtitles though, but with all the AI/ML around today, there is probably a way to automate it.

3Play Media's format could do this. Their output is usually a transcript where you can click on any word and it will take you to that second of the video. The software they've developed for the people who create the captions does go second by second as well.

I don't know if they've ever considered having that as a display option. They're just one of the only companies I can think of for whom it wouldn't involve a whole rethinking of how they create the captions.

[pants] is my favourite. I'm waiting for [t-shirt] but it never arrives.

> Because it’s the CC descriptions of music swells and things like “[laughs] and “[crying]”, etc that are distracting for me, and not needed.

This drives me nuts too, especially when they're being subjective and I'm asking myself things like 'Was that music really "ominous"? Didn't seem that way...'

Another thing that bugs me is when captions reveal a character's name to indicate who is speaking when the name of that character hasn't actually been revealed in the story yet.

> [CC] complements the audio & visual nicely. I don't have any evidence for this but I'd wager that plot synthesis and comprehension of television shows is greatly improved by CC

As you say, you don't have any evidence for this, so I'll just add that my subjective impression is the absolute opposite. I find it impossible to concentrate on what is happening visually on screen in a film when closed captions are on.

I associate CC with the one place I ever see them - at the laundromat, where they are always on because you can't hear the TV clearly above the background noise. Hard to think of a setting where "background entertainment" is a better descriptor.

I grew up watching anime with subs and at a certain point it just became natural to have subtitles on even when the content is in English.

For the longest time I couldn't follow anime with subtitles, it kept me from watching the action.

I think practice helped, but so did reducing the size of the video frame. Turns out having the whole frame in my field of view was a big deal.

Depending on the title you're watching, the subs are easier to read. Like one of the episodes from DBZ.

Goku: AHHHHHH!

Vegeta: ARGHHHH!

Goku: OOOMPH!!!

Vegta: HMMMMM!

The visuals were just as simple. For like most of the episode

I think it depends on your reading speed and ability to skim. If you can read faster than people can talk, subtitles aren't really distracting because you can glance down and then go back to reading the visual expressions and background details of the dialogue.

As non english-native speaker I watched so much stuff with captions it's second nature for me.

But for any language that I understand well I only turn them on when the accent is so thick I can't get what the actors are saying.

Similarly I always turn on all subtitles in video games because it's easy to miss something if say ingame explosion or other sound effect covers the voice, or it is just too silent (say NPC talking that's a bit far)

But the article claim it helps multitasking seems weird - how having to look at screen would help when multitasking?

> But the article claim it helps multitasking seems weird - how having to look at screen would help when multitasking?

You have the audio on and are doing something else with your eyes. You don't quite hear something that's been said, glance at the screen, read the captions to fill in what was missed, return your eyes to your other task.

If it was audio only, you missed whatever it was, and have to live with it or replay a little bit of content. Going back a few seconds is often a UI challenge not worth the gained context, IMHO, but if it happens a lot, might as well not be watching anything.

There are a number of tasks that have varying noise levels, yet aren't so involved that you can't keep glancing at the screen. Washing dishes, for example.

>I associate CC with the one place I ever see them - at the laundromat

never watched anything in a foreign language? It's just familiarity, after a while you get used to reading and watching at the same time.

I watch a lot of things in foreign languages, but still feel that having to use subtitles is a worse experience.

It's really very fast to get used to if you try.

I'm from Europe so used to subtitles from early age. My wife is Canadian, and first little while of our dating was bewildered with subtitles.

Now though, literally all my Canadian in-laws use subtitles, intergenerationalLy - they're used to them, and addicted to knowing what the heck is going on :)

I mean, I do "try" in the sense that about half the movies I watch are foreign, and therefore require subtitles. Despite this, I really do feel that I miss out on a lot of what is happening in terms of cinematography and creative directorial choices because I'm spending about 1/3 to 1/2 of the time reading the subtitles.

I am exactly the same. Even with the audio on, I can’t focus on what’s happening on the screen when captions are on.

My 26 year-old son watches everything with captions, so there’s always a battle because I switch them off and he switches them back on again.

>I find it impossible to concentrate on what is happening visually on screen in a film when closed captions are on.

This is a skill. I would have agreed with you 20 years ago but at some point I started putting them on because I could only afford a shitty audio setup and dramas got really mumbly. Took a while, but I learned to not be distracted by the subtitles.

This aligns pretty well with McLuhan's concept of cool and hot media [0]. The younger generations prefer it cool - perhaps their hotness is found in newer forms like video games.

[0] https://mediawiki.middlebury.edu/MIDDMedia/Hot_versus_cool_m...

Underrated comment. These are such critical concepts and really the way we should all be discussing out media consumption.

This is an insightful observation but also feels incomplete and outdated. They use hot and cold to distinguish between "one sense" and "all senses", for some reason, which doesn't quite match modern media.

But I definitely agree that there is something to it, and video games occupy a different niche of entertainment than movies for me. Video games are a pastime and a hobby, movies and shows are not unlike books: I don't want to miss a single piece of the action.

When I have dinner I watch something off Youtube. Movie time is after dinner when I can give my full attention to it.

For context, I'm in my mid-30s and grew up playing video games. When doing chores I listen to podcasts or audio books.

I really like to think of media consumption in terms of attentional pressure. How long can you not pay attention without "missing something". For movies and TV shows it seems like 15 seconds, plus or minus depending on the content itself. Chatty podcasts give you 30 seconds or a minute.

I enjoy the fast video games I play (shoutout to Deep Rock Galactic, killer PVE FPS with a non-toxic player base!) because they modulate their attentional pressure and ratchet it up intensely at moments. It feels great to handle a situation where even a subsecond lapse in attention would result in failure.

From wikipedia: Cool media are those that require high participation from users, due to their low definition (the receiver/user must fill in missing information). Since many senses may be used, they foster involvement. Conversely, hot media are low in audience participation due to their high resolution or definition.

Seems like it's hard to place fast video games? You don't have to fill in much of anything (hot) but they require full participation (cool).

One of the things I love about podcasts is the ability to titrate the playback speed multiplier as a means of selecting a context appropriate window of permissible inattention. Sitting in an airline seat 3x… driving to an unfamiliar urban destination 1.25x.

I'm a native English speaker and grew up mostly overseas in non-English speaking countries. Subtitles helped me understand American slang and conversational English that I wasn't used to hearing at home. I've also always struggled with distinctly understanding dialogue in films. It never had anything to do with active vs passive viewing. Another reason I always had them on was because I grew up in apartments and was always mindful of my noise levels for my neighbors. Using subtitles let me actively consume the film without worrying about bothering people around me. Now as an adult subtitles are my default for all media when available and I prefer it.

They mix sound differently now as well. I can’t follow speech in many shows and movies because voice volume is low and the background crap is too high.

Ditto with excessive darkness.

I die on the inside when I go into houses with multiple TVs on in the background as noise.

This whole framing is bull. People who grew up without closed captions are just used to watching a show without it. For them, it’s distracting to constantly have words to look down and read when they are trying to pay attention to what is happening on the screen. Like trying to read the words on every single road sign when you drive somewhere.

You may notice that in movie theaters—the most focused and immersive watching experience there is—they don’t show captions except maybe when translating foreign language.

Or you may not, if you only watch movies at home on your TV.

I'm closer to 20 than 60. I did not grow up with CCs. I use them because they are an option and give me something I want.

If there is bullshit framing then it is the very notion of assumptions based on age, which is caked into the headline.

The bullshit framing is that there is any correlation between having CC on, and how closely the viewer is paying attention to the show or movie. There is not, as evidenced by a century of cinema and TV.

Movies originally had captions, because there was no dialogue track. As soon as they figured out synchronized sound, the captions went away. Even if people were paying very close attention.

> You may notice that in movie theaters—the most focused and immersive watching experience there is

Movie theaters have the same influence on a mind as any other experience of collective attention. It keeps your attention aligned with attention of a crowd. It may be a case of herd behavior, or it may be something special, I dont know, but it works.

I believe that this collective attention is the main reason why movie threaters are still profitable. But not just it: surroundings associated with attention on a screen and all these rituals, like eating pop corn, also do their part as stimuli leading to a learned response. You get highly focused attention without any conscious effort. You need conscious to fight it and to divert attention from a screen.

But it doesn't matter when you try to watch a movie or a lecture at home. Despite of all your experience of collective attention it would be much harder to keep your attention focused.

No, that's not it. I grew up with literally everything in English being subtitled. Always hated it, but all I can do is make an effort to not have my eyes there.

Even some DVDs did not have the option to turn off subtitles. I never had subtitles on for anything that gave me the option. (I even bought DVDs from overseas occasionally to not get subtitles)

But now every other show is frequently incomprehensible.

Either they've put lead in the drinking water, making us all not understand the spoken word, or they've made dialog audio shit.

> You may notice that in movie theaters—the most focused and immersive watching experience there is—they don’t show captions except maybe when translating foreign language.

Well, it just tells you come from the English speaking country. For the rest of us, subtitles in a movie theatre are among most normal things in the world.

I bet they don’t show subtitles when the film is in your native language.

You’re right - except I don’t think there are many countries where national movie industry can seriously compete with international (predominantly American). Therefore, subtitles are a standard for your movie going experience.

I think it's not as universal as you believe. I personally use closed captioning as a crutch when I'm half-ass watching something, because if my mind wanders and I miss hearing a line I can usually just read it without having to pause and rewind.

If I'm actually fully immersed in the movie or whatever, and I can understand the dialogue, then I don't need the captions and I leave them off.

I have an additional theory:

In the past, that line needed to come in loud and clear, or people would just miss it, probably forever. Now, we can rewind, or of course turn on subtitles, so there's not as much pressure on the audio finishing to be super clear.

I agree, but also find it surprising that younger generations are more focused on what they are watching.

I'm a background watcher for sure, and this trend with CC suggests to me that the whole "2nd screen" thing isn't playing with the younger generation.

Any insights as to why that may be?

To give more context, I was always a "background media" person. Even as a kid I'd draw while in front of the TV, I was never a focused participant.

Because the younger generation is watching Netflix on their phones. There is no second screen phenomenon because there is no second screen.

I use CC even in my native language especially when I background watch. It's easy to work while watching a tv show (only works with relatively boring work) if I know I can quickly glance at the subtitles if I missed anything.

What kind of work can you do while watching? You're just doing two things badly. Unless you mean physical work that doesn't engage the mind like cleaning or doing the dishes?

Work that's mind numbingly easy to do... Anything that I know exactly how to solve but need to just spend the time implementing.

With television you turn it on and there are a few mediocre choices you can tune out. On streaming platforms you have to specifically select a program to watch. When Gen Z watches/listens to something in the background it's much more likely to be a long YouTube video or a podcast.

I personally use my phone sometimes when CC are on, splitting my attention—CC make it easier to not miss too much flirting back n forth.

By contrast I always pay attention when CC is off.

Given how much younger people use their my phone, I’m gonna say my hypothesis is plausible.

Your tone is a little smug here. If I’m paying attention to something I’m watching on TV, I can hear the dialogue. I want to be able to actually watch the performances of the actors, or whatever else is on the screen, instead of reading captions.

Sounds right - my parents (early 70s) don't pay attention to what they are watching even tho watching TV is the only thing they are doing at that time. They both even regularly fall asleep watching TV/movies at night and literally don't care that they missed most of the show/movie they were "watching." They aren't interested in watching the parts they slept through in the morning.

Well sure if the actors mumble all the time trying to appear enigmatic, the comprehension is surely greatly improved. I m not american and often i find it very hard to listen to what is said in tv series/movies. This is a new trend in acting btw, older TV was not like that.

Older people are more likely to be alone and the TV helps to break the silence. TV is usually tv shows where people speak properly so that helps i guess

>To me it seems closed-caption usage is correlated with actually paying attention to television consumption.

The alternative is that the new generation has no ability to focus on anything and needs the same information piped to their brain through both their eyes and ears. Up next: smellovision captions.

Closed captioning only very recently become not crap. It used to be mainly served as those black bars with white text coming in about 30 seconds too late and with ridiculous typos.