Caption delivery should be agreed with the people who will publish the film. A caption file, a version with captions visible in the picture and a player that supports selectable captions are different parts of a workflow. Identify the actual placements and test the proposed arrangement rather than assuming that one export solves every use.
The W3C caption resource distinguishes captions viewers can turn on or off from captions that remain visible. Use that distinction when describing requirements, while checking the current capabilities of the chosen publishing systems with their responsible owners.
Map the publishing destinations
List the website player, social placements, presentation use and any other confirmed destination. Ask who will upload the video, attach caption files where supported and verify the published result. A production handover can be technically complete while the public version lacks the intended captions because the upload step was unassigned.
Do not add speculative destinations merely to create a large export package. Identify the uses that matter now and the likely future needs that justify preparation. Ask production to distinguish additional caption formatting from a new creative adaptation.
Keep caption content separate from promotional text
Captions convey relevant audio information; they are not simply a selection of slogans placed over the film. A short social treatment with highlighted words may serve a design purpose without replacing the complete caption requirement for the intended audience.
Ensure names, specialist terms and meaningful non-speech information receive appropriate review. Do not assume an automatic transcript is ready because the words appear plausible. Assign the content check to someone who can verify the actual speech and subject matter.
Test conflicts in the frame
Visible captions can compete with product labels, speaker names and interface controls. Review the intended versions at realistic sizes and in the actual placement where possible. A clean edit-monitor preview may not reveal how the published player or platform overlays interact with the text.
If separate visible-caption versions are needed, define their relationship to the clean picture and caption files. Keep version identifiers clear so a publisher does not accidentally combine two caption layers or use an uncaptained version where the agreed workflow requires otherwise.
Hypothetical example
A fictional company plans to publish a film on its website and use a short version in a silent-viewing social placement. The initial brief asks vaguely for “subtitles”. The website team expects a separate caption file, while the social team expects text visible in the image.
The buyer records both workflows and assigns the upload checks. Production supplies the agreed assets, and the teams verify the published versions rather than checking only the local files. The difference in deliverables is understood before handover, reducing confusion over what the single word “subtitles” was meant to include.
Verify the result after publishing
Check synchronisation, completeness, readability and the expected viewer controls in the actual experience. Confirm that any later video replacement is accompanied by the matching caption version. Captions from an earlier edit may no longer align with the current film.
See Live Images services and send the publishing and caption responsibility map when defining deliverables.
Prepared with AI assistance for Live Images. Planning guidance is general; suitability and production scope must be agreed for your project.