Onscreen signing - Freeview

Steed · 21-03-2001, 21:04

I recorded the programme "When Planes Go Down" which was on C5 last week through the OD box because it's a much better picture than the normal C5 reception.

When I came to watch it there was a man permanently in the bottom right-hand corner using sign language to interpret what was said onscreen.

Is it possible to not have this facility switched on?

It was not shown on the normal C5 channel only through OD.

I didn't have subtitles switched on.

Thanks in advance for any help.

lemON · 21-03-2001, 21:45

digital channels have to show a certain amount of hours of signing. You cannot turn it off.

Caxton · 21-03-2001, 22:13

I cannot understand if a person is watching the signing person it is difficult to concentrate on the picture as well. Try concentrating on the picture and immediately you lose details of the person giving the sign language. I would think his defeats the object of having signing. I can see the point of subtitles as they are on screen for longer and less immediate than the signing which relies on facial expression as well.

Bangers · 21-03-2001, 22:29

Quote:

Originally posted by smithm
I would think his defeats the object of having signing. I can see the point of subtitles as they are on screen for longer and less immediate than the signing which relies on facial expression as well.

The problem is, that many deaf people understand signing better than text, those that can read text, may not be able to keep up anyway. What you do need to remeber is that a deaf person will be used to signing, and therefor, able to concentrate on other things too.

MK · 21-03-2001, 23:22

I do not understand why the broadcasters only sign the digital versions of their channels.

Surely this will not be of much use to the majority of deaf people (who do not have digital).

My theory is that the broadcasters are required to sign a certain about of their output, they are unwilling to sign the analogue version because they do not want to alienate the majority of their veiwers (and loss out in the ratings).

By signing only the DTT output they still meet thier legal responsibilities to sign but without lossing "hearing" viewers.

I think they should either sign everything for the benefit of the hard of hearing, or not bother at all.

STORMIT · 22-03-2001, 07:33

Quote:

Originally posted by MK
...I think they should either sign everything for the benefit of the hard of hearing...

Now that's going a bit too far! OK, so I can take everyone's point about this, but this is Digital TV, now don't get me wrong but when DTV was talked about years ago they said you'll be able to watch football games and changes camera views yourself (Sky does this already I think on one of their many Sports channels!) So if this can be done, then surely there is a way of turning on and off the person who appears on the screen.

The whole of T4 Sunday on DTV is signed! So the majority of people will watch it on Terrestrial instead!

rattus · 22-03-2001, 10:08

As I think I mentioned on another post about this.. I asked channel four if you could get rid of the signing. They obviously said you could not at this time. They also said as part of their contract to get a mux they were obliged to sign a certain percentage of their programs and choice to do it on repeats. They also said that eventually their will be a virtual signer ala lara croft (their words not mine) who you will be able to turn on and off. If only all women were like that

Anyway I digress, their point was that the software is being writen at present and is a while away from being ready, so for now we are stuck with the woman in the red jumper

NR Lester · 22-03-2001, 20:37

I HATE the signing in the bottom right hand corner, surely they should find a way of turning this function on and off or have some kind of set top box especially for the deaf, why should the majority of peoples viewing be spoiled?

pyphon · 22-03-2001, 22:18

Quote:

Originally posted by NR Lester
I HATE the signing in the bottom right hand corner, surely they should find a way of turning this function on and off or have some kind of set top box especially for the deaf, why should the majority of peoples viewing be spoiled?

Wouldn't be so bad if there signing people were nice totty.

mickyperry · 22-03-2001, 23:56

The signing is for deaf people and you would be glad of it, if you were deaf.

OnNewie · 23-03-2001, 11:26

It would be nice if you could turn signing on or off like you can for subtitles. Perhaps they could do the same for DOGs?

daniel99 · 23-03-2001, 14:59

what is wrong with DOGs i kinda like them.
Daniel

Steve B · 24-03-2001, 14:10

I have noticed that the signing is present only on ONd and not analogue or sky digital. I dont understand why only ONdigital customers have the facility. I personally am unable to watch any program containing signing because of the destraction. I also find it hard to understand why this is required when subtitles are available. I dont wish to upset anyone but I would rather not have to put up with this, at least with the technology now available I see no reason why this new signing option should not be by choice, ie being able to switch it on or off. To impose it on subscibers who dont want it cant be right can it ?? I expect we will be at risk of being "politically incorrect" however if we make our views felt too strongly.

rezabelady · 24-03-2001, 19:37

there is signing on sky digital - i even saw some on nickelodeon this morning

redspiraluk · 24-03-2001, 19:47

How about topless signing - after the watershed of course - only joking. I think the problem with ONd is space yet again. To provide an on/off box in the corner of the screen (like text has) for signing would require space that ONd don't have spare at the moment.

cornishandrew · 24-03-2001, 21:15

The percentage of programmes that have to be signed is currently set by an EU directive and will increase until available on all channels within 10 years.

The reason you only get it on digital channels is the means of transmission that makes it feasable. Analogue channels can't support MHEG 5. Until it is available to be switched on and off we will ahve to put up with it.

daniel99 · 24-03-2001, 21:16

how abaut when analoge tresital is switched off will there be space then?
Daniel

steve wright · 24-03-2001, 23:05

To cornishandrew

The percentage of signing has nothing to do with the EU. It comes from the Broadcasting Act and was inserted in there after concerted lobbying from deaf organisations.

Personally, I have to use subtitles, but I can't sign and find signing just as distracting as the rest of you. However many born deaf people have difficulty reading English and so prefer signing.

Off-topic FAQ. How do you use quotes in this forum. I would have prefered to quoted cornishandrew but couldn't work out how to do it.

Mossy Monk · 25-03-2001, 06:24

click on the quote button under the post you want to quote from

steve wright · 25-03-2001, 08:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Mossy Monk
click on the quote button under the post you want to quote from

Thanks

Dave 8o] · 26-03-2001, 09:29

Quote:

Originally posted by NR Lester
I HATE the signing in the bottom right hand corner, surely they should find a way of turning this function on and off or have some kind of set top box especially for the deaf, why should the majority of peoples viewing be spoiled?

For the most part, the programs that are signed are repeats of shows that have been shown earlier that week or month and they are usually show late at night.

It would be fairly easy to switch the "signer" off and on, it would just need some of the bandwidth currently used for other channels, that way the signer images could be transmitted independantly of the program, the STB could then superimpose the signer over the top of the program for those that wanted it, just like the subtitles.

There would be a downside, there would be less room for channels, so take your pick, a few programs a week with a signer in the botton corner, or a few less channels.

arius · 26-03-2001, 21:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave 8o]
It would be fairly easy to switch the "signer" off and on, it would just need some of the bandwidth currently used for other channels, that way the signer images could be transmitted independantly of the program, the STB could then superimpose the signer over the top of the program for those that wanted it, just like the subtitles.

That would require the box to have two sets of decoding circuits and extra overlay circuits...would add an extra £300 to the cost of a box.

Caxton · 26-03-2001, 22:15

"That would require the box to have two sets of decoding circuits and extra overlay circuits...would add an extra £300 to the cost of a box". quote

Perhaps our caring Government could provide all people who need a box of this type a free one. There cannot be that many people who have ONDigital that need signing only, the cost would not be that great. They seem to waste a lot of OUR money on useless projects so doing something useful with OUR money once in their lives would be great.But I suppose when you can't even get a bed in a hospital there isn't much hope for that.

Steve B · 27-03-2001, 09:44

Not sure how the subject of Hospital beds got into the strand but to pick up on a point from the previous view, the option of a "special" box for those who need it may be the answer in future as is the case with closed caption vcrs
I'm going to stick my neck and maintain my stand that I really dont think this signing thing should be "imposed"
on subscribers who neither use or want it and there has to be a better way to deliver this service to those who do.

neilleeds · 27-03-2001, 11:44

It is daft forcing people who are not deaf to have a person distracting them and taking up about 20% of the screen, the amount of people who will use it is incredibly small. I am not saying there should be no provision for the deaf, but there are subtitles available on a lot of programs and the number will increase so in my opinion there should be no signing unless you can turn it on/off. The argument that deaf people find it hard to read English is just daft, after all it is their language, they need to write in it so they should be able to read it.

22-03-2001, 23:56	#10
mickyperry Banned User Join Date: Feb 2001 Services: ITV Digital Sky Digital NTL Digital Posts: 99	Don't be so sad The signing is for deaf people and you would be glad of it, if you were deaf.

24-03-2001, 21:15	#16
cornishandrew Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 10	ONscreen signing The percentage of programmes that have to be signed is currently set by an EU directive and will increase until available on all channels within 10 years. The reason you only get it on digital channels is the means of transmission that makes it feasable. Analogue channels can't support MHEG 5. Until it is available to be switched on and off we will ahve to put up with it.

21-03-2001, 21:04	#1
Steed Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 451	I recorded the programme "When Planes Go Down" which was on C5 last week through the OD box because it's a much better picture than the normal C5 reception. When I came to watch it there was a man permanently in the bottom right-hand corner using sign language to interpret what was said onscreen. Is it possible to not have this facility switched on? It was not shown on the normal C5 channel only through OD. I didn't have subtitles switched on. Thanks in advance for any help.

21-03-2001, 21:45	#2
lemON Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 139	digital channels have to show a certain amount of hours of signing. You cannot turn it off.

21-03-2001, 22:13	#3
Caxton Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Gender: Male Services: Sky+HD, Digital (HD when available) Terrestrial. 2mb Broadband Posts: 13,627	I cannot understand if a person is watching the signing person it is difficult to concentrate on the picture as well. Try concentrating on the picture and immediately you lose details of the person giving the sign language. I would think his defeats the object of having signing. I can see the point of subtitles as they are on screen for longer and less immediate than the signing which relies on facial expression as well.

21-03-2001, 23:22	#5
MK Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 637	I do not understand why the broadcasters only sign the digital versions of their channels. Surely this will not be of much use to the majority of deaf people (who do not have digital). My theory is that the broadcasters are required to sign a certain about of their output, they are unwilling to sign the analogue version because they do not want to alienate the majority of their veiwers (and loss out in the ratings). By signing only the DTT output they still meet thier legal responsibilities to sign but without lossing "hearing" viewers. I think they should either sign everything for the benefit of the hard of hearing, or not bother at all.

22-03-2001, 10:08	#7
rattus Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Newcastle Posts: 540	As I think I mentioned on another post about this.. I asked channel four if you could get rid of the signing. They obviously said you could not at this time. They also said as part of their contract to get a mux they were obliged to sign a certain percentage of their programs and choice to do it on repeats. They also said that eventually their will be a virtual signer ala lara croft (their words not mine) who you will be able to turn on and off. If only all women were like that Anyway I digress, their point was that the software is being writen at present and is a while away from being ready, so for now we are stuck with the woman in the red jumper

22-03-2001, 20:37	#8
NR Lester Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 59	I HATE the signing in the bottom right hand corner, surely they should find a way of turning this function on and off or have some kind of set top box especially for the deaf, why should the majority of peoples viewing be spoiled?

23-03-2001, 11:26	#11
OnNewie Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: southampton Services: every 20,000 miles Posts: 474	It would be nice if you could turn signing on or off like you can for subtitles. Perhaps they could do the same for DOGs?

23-03-2001, 14:59	#12
daniel99 Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Doncaster South Yorkshire Services: Sky+HD Multiroom, Freeview Freesat BT Broadband Posts: 10,428	what is wrong with DOGs i kinda like them. Daniel

24-03-2001, 14:10	#13
Steve B Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Northolt, West London Services: Tiscali, Ond Posts: 129	I have noticed that the signing is present only on ONd and not analogue or sky digital. I dont understand why only ONdigital customers have the facility. I personally am unable to watch any program containing signing because of the destraction. I also find it hard to understand why this is required when subtitles are available. I dont wish to upset anyone but I would rather not have to put up with this, at least with the technology now available I see no reason why this new signing option should not be by choice, ie being able to switch it on or off. To impose it on subscibers who dont want it cant be right can it ?? I expect we will be at risk of being "politically incorrect" however if we make our views felt too strongly.

24-03-2001, 19:37	#14
rezabelady Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: oxford/london, uk Services: Sky Digital, ITV Digital (FTA), FTA Digital & Analogue Multi-Satellite TV; BTinternet Anytime; GBA Posts: 738	there is signing on sky digital - i even saw some on nickelodeon this morning

24-03-2001, 19:47	#15
redspiraluk Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 79	How about topless signing - after the watershed of course - only joking. I think the problem with ONd is space yet again. To provide an on/off box in the corner of the screen (like text has) for signing would require space that ONd don't have spare at the moment.

24-03-2001, 21:16	#17
daniel99 Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Doncaster South Yorkshire Services: Sky+HD Multiroom, Freeview Freesat BT Broadband Posts: 10,428	how abaut when analoge tresital is switched off will there be space then? Daniel

24-03-2001, 23:05	#18
steve wright Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 259	To cornishandrew The percentage of signing has nothing to do with the EU. It comes from the Broadcasting Act and was inserted in there after concerted lobbying from deaf organisations. Personally, I have to use subtitles, but I can't sign and find signing just as distracting as the rest of you. However many born deaf people have difficulty reading English and so prefer signing. Off-topic FAQ. How do you use quotes in this forum. I would have prefered to quoted cornishandrew but couldn't work out how to do it.

25-03-2001, 06:24	#19
Mossy Monk Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 2,191	click on the quote button under the post you want to quote from

26-03-2001, 22:15	#23
Caxton Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Gender: Male Services: Sky+HD, Digital (HD when available) Terrestrial. 2mb Broadband Posts: 13,627	"That would require the box to have two sets of decoding circuits and extra overlay circuits...would add an extra £300 to the cost of a box". quote Perhaps our caring Government could provide all people who need a box of this type a free one. There cannot be that many people who have ONDigital that need signing only, the cost would not be that great. They seem to waste a lot of OUR money on useless projects so doing something useful with OUR money once in their lives would be great.But I suppose when you can't even get a bed in a hospital there isn't much hope for that.

27-03-2001, 09:44	#24
Steve B Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Northolt, West London Services: Tiscali, Ond Posts: 129	Not sure how the subject of Hospital beds got into the strand but to pick up on a point from the previous view, the option of a "special" box for those who need it may be the answer in future as is the case with closed caption vcrs I'm going to stick my neck and maintain my stand that I really dont think this signing thing should be "imposed" on subscribers who neither use or want it and there has to be a better way to deliver this service to those who do.

27-03-2001, 11:44	#25
neilleeds Forum Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Leeds Services: XBOX, Freeview (Humax 9200T), ADSL Posts: 408	It is daft forcing people who are not deaf to have a person distracting them and taking up about 20% of the screen, the amount of people who will use it is incredibly small. I am not saying there should be no provision for the deaf, but there are subtitles available on a lot of programs and the number will increase so in my opinion there should be no signing unless you can turn it on/off. The argument that deaf people find it hard to read English is just daft, after all it is their language, they need to write in it so they should be able to read it.