Open petzku opened 5 months ago
Enabling this for all rendering schemes is probably not a good idea. However, libass has been working towards a "split rendering" system, where TS and dialogue could be rendered in different passes. This could be a good fit as a solution of sorts.
The controversial split rendering process has nothing to do with the user desire to rotate a video and associated subtitles.
The controversial split rendering process has nothing to do with the user desire to rotate a video and associated subtitles.
Surely it is necessary to allow rotating only some subtitles? I would imagine users could want both to rotate or not rotate "dialogue" text, but it should be fairly uncontroversial that "typesetting" should always be rotated along with video.
This is not straightforward. Not all typesetting is expected to be tagged for that first pass blending. I am pretty sure typesetters may have cases where they want a sign to be generated at the screen resolution, and yet still tied to the video orientation.
This sounds like an edge case with very little real-world practicality.
Expected behavior of the wanted feature
Somewhat related to #6400, but I believe this is a separate concern.
Rotating video currently does not rotate subtitles. This is generally desirable for dialogue text, but for on-screen text rendered diegetically ("Typesetting" or "TS"), it would be more desirable to follow the video. Images below taken from (at time of writing, unreleased)
[Kaleido-subs]
Blue Archive episode 10.Normal display
With
video-rotate=180
Enabling this for all rendering schemes is probably not a good idea. However, libass has been working towards a "split rendering" system, where TS and dialogue could be rendered in different passes. This could be a good fit as a solution of sorts.
Alternative behavior of the wanted feature
No response
Log File
No response
Sample Files
No response