juvera wrote:
Indeed, the video hasn't been involved for years. Who would want to work with a video when subtitling? You can view and work on your computer simultaneously.
Don't get me wrong. When I work with a "video" it means a motion picture medium from VHS onwards. Some clients send me VHS, I have to capture. Others send DVD, or files: wmv, flv, mpg, you name it. Now and then a Betacam tape comes up, I outsource its transfer to digital video files with a studio.
juvera wrote:
I would never translate subtitles without at least checking it against the film and I would strongly advise anybody who embarks on subtitle translation not to accept doing so.
You wouldn't, I wouldn't but some people would. Last week a producer sent me a film with its script and its translation, in two columns side by side. The end client sent the script to some translator without the film. They were asking me to "adapt" it for dubbing. Bottom line, the end client paid for TWO translations.
juvera wrote:
When only the video is available, then one must watch it first, translate, mark dubious passages for re-checking, then print out the translation and check it again with the video running.
Maybe this is why my video translation is expensive enough to keep me out from the TV and commercial film dubbing and subtitling markets. I watch the video while transcribing the soundtrack. Then I translate the audio using an e-dictaphone, actually an Australian freeware named ExpressScribe. Previously, I used two large Akai open-reel recorders (their start&stop is immediate, and they last for several decades under heavy use).
juvera wrote:
I never used Trados for subtitling, but the appropriate software. None of those I was in touch with during my subtitling years used it to my knowledge, and I am talking about a lot of people.
Good for you! And for them too! But I've seen too many job ads requiring Trados as an absolute must, linguistic knowledge optional. And that script translation I fixed showed clear signs of improperly cleaned WordFast.
juvera wrote:
It is highly unlikely that they can't find a translator in Europe or in the US for a particular language pair, therefore second-hand translations are very rare. I would think it is more likely to come from the country of origin, using subtitles already translated into a major language, to be translated into another minority language. I never came accross it personally. To use second-hand translations for dubbing is more likely, but let's not stray away from our main subject too much.
Though I'm across the ocean from Europe, I know that some language, in spite of being well-served with translators, ave few, if any, that work with video.
Dubbing is extremely delicate, if anyone wants Disney-like results. I was once offered to translate 300 films, spoken in Chinese (of which I don't know squat) and subtitled in English. They wanted them lip-sync-ed in Portuguese. No way, Jose!
juvera wrote:
As you said, you mainly translate training videos, and that is a different area, where the need to translate it is likely to be for just one or a couple of languages.
Usually only the local one. So far I only had two cases where they wanted me to get the subtitles translated by someone else into Spanish as well. Thank goodness I understand enough of it, as I had to readjust some timespotting due to different phrase construction.
juvera wrote:
Having said that, the trend is to pay less and less, therefore good, experienced translators often give up this kind of work, with the exception of the one-off videos or DVDs, like the ones you are doing.
There are a lot of people doing film and TV translations now, without sufficient cultural background and experience, for very little money. That's why there are perhaps more bad translations that say 6-8 years ago.
Dead right! While the good ones leave the market, the wannabes gradually take it over, making greedy clients rejoice from it getting cheaper and cheaper. So if there are any upcoming new talents in video translation, they'll soon find something more rewarding to do.