Delivering 608 & 708 Captions (which Resolve doesn’t support)

February 26, 2025

Colorist and finisher Patrick Inhofer shares how he developed his workflow for embedding 608 & 708 captions - which Resolve doesn't support.


Plus – A detailed guide on subtitle formats and standards

This past Friday, I wrapped up delivering 10 episodes of a travel show for American Public Television (APT), so I wanted to share my delivery workflow for captioning a broadcast show. This topic is a little tricky since my favorite finishing tool, DaVinci Resolve, doesn’t support delivering both 608 & 708 broadcast captioning/subtitling standards.

While Resolve supports CEA-608 captions in .mov and .mxf containers, that standard is for legacy analog transmission. A newer CEA-708 standard was created for digital broadcast. An undocumented feature in Resolve is that MXF containers (only) can be embedded with either 608 or 708 captions—but not both!

Broadcasters asking for -608 captions will likely ask for -708 deliverables, as APT asked us to do. Plus, APT wanted .scc format files for the deliverables, which Resolve doesn’t support either importing or exporting. Therefore, DaVinci Resolve was incapable of delivering my final air master.

How did I handle these deliverables without (sadly) using DaVinci Resolve?

That’s what this Insight is about.


Understanding broadcast closed captions

I haven’t dealt with broadcast captioning for over 15’ish years. I usually color grade, and someone else does delivery.

But this season, I was asked to handle the final delivery for the show. This meant, among other things, I also needed to handle the initial transcription, embedding, and verifying of the transcription within the final render, plus adhere to the deliverable spec. Here’s that portion of the APT delivery document:

BOTH 608 & 708 captions [are] required and must be embedded in the program:

  • All media must contain embedded captions on SDID 01 for CEA708
  • SCC formatted Captioning file (.scc extension)

For creating the subtitles, I briefly considered using DaVinci Resolve’s machine-learning transcription tool, which works well enough for Mixing Light Insights.

However, Resolve’s ‘AI’ doesn’t follow broadcast captioning style guides and is very inconsistent with breaking up lines when there are multiple speakers. Plus, without an integrated Find & Replace function for spelling (a glaring omission), I decided that approach was a no-go.

For broadcast deliverables with tight, last-minute turnarounds, DaVinci Resolve’s auto-subtitling solution doesn’t cut it.

Instead, I used a 3rd party captioning service, and they delivered the .SCC file to me.

So, the next problem to solve is:
How do I embed the .SCC caption file into the final MXF OP1a deliverable?

As of November 2024, here’s what DaVinci Resolve supports (via the User Manual):

Currently, DaVinci Resolve [imports] subtitle files in multiple formats such as .srt, .vtt, .xml, and .ttml.

Unfortunately, Resolve does not import .SCC files. But what about export?

DaVinci Resolve 19 Subtitle Export Options does not include SCC.

I quickly concluded that my final delivery could NOT be 100% self-contained in DaVinci Resolve 19.1. So what did I do?

How did I deliver a final MXF with embedded 608 and 708 captions?

This video Insight is about my workflow for delivering an MXF file with embedded CEA-608 and CEA-708 captions.

The key aspect of my workflow is to render the final MXF out of Resolve without ever re-rendering the final MXF deliverable.

TL;DR

If you want to get straight to the point, I used CineXtools to embed the captions and Premiere Pro to verify the final deliverable before uploading to APT.

  • CineXtools – I chose CineX because it merely re-wraps the MXF container when adding captions. It does not re-encode, ensuring the video’s image quality does not degrade. It also has a half-dozen additional uses, which I didn’t require. The downside is that it is pricey. But, I did price the annual subscription into the quote for this series.

    Also, CineXtools has full caption editing controls. Several times, just hours before delivery, I needed to make last-minute changes to the captions – at one point, requiring removing and replacing several lines, including new timings. It was brilliantly easy and efficient.
  • Premiere Pro – I used Premiere as a verification tool. I was surprised to learn it has extremely robust caption support, including importing embedded 608 and 708 captions. It also exports to the SCC format. But I didn’t want to re-render the files, since I don’t yet fully trust Premiere’s render engine (PrPro is undergoing extensive re-coding of its rendering pipeline, and I’m not ready to trust it for short-turnaround broadcast deliveries).

    But, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that Premiere does have a Search & Replace function for fixing mis-spellings throughout an entire subtitle track! I’ve been waiting for this feature in Resolve for several years.
The list of Premiere Pro v25.1 supported subtitle export formats, including SCC.

About this video Insight

In this video, you’ll see my workflow from Resolve through CineXtools and into Premiere, which will allow you to evaluate these tools before embarking on this workflow.

You’ll also see why I think Premiere’s subtitle toolkit is FAR superior to DaVinci Resolve’s.

In my opinion, Resolve has a decent subtitle workflow, but it is unfinished and severely lacking for professional broadcast deliverables (especially when compared to Premiere Pro).

Learn more about CEA-608 and -708 captions for delivery formats

While researching this topic, I asked a few LLMs to summarize the topic. Grok 3 did an amazing job; I’ve copied its response below. But, I did break it into four parts for easier reading. I also included its references to original sources. You can find the original Grok discussion here.

Key Points

  • 608 captions are for analog TV with basic formatting
  • 708 captions are for digital TV with advanced features.
  • File formats: TTML1, .srt, .vtt, .scc, and .sami are file formats for storing caption data, not transmission standards like 608 and 708.
  • .scc files are mainly for 608 captions but can be up-converted for 708
  • formats like TTML1 are more flexible for digital use.

Difference Between 608 and 708 Captions

Overview

608 and 708 captions are standards for closed captioning in television. CEA-608, the older standard, was designed for analog TV and is still used in digital TV for compatibility. It has limited features, showing white text on a black background, fixed at the screen’s bottom, and supports only a few languages. CEA-708, for digital TV, offers advanced options like multiple colors, fonts, sizes, and flexible positioning, supporting more languages and characters.

Surprising Detail: Compatibility

Interestingly, while 708 is modern, 608 captions remain relevant for digital TVs and some streaming devices, showing their lasting impact despite technological advancements.


Comparison with Other Formats

What Are These Formats?

TTML1, srt, vtt, scc, and sami are file formats used to store and share caption data, unlike 608 and 708, which dictate how captions are transmitted and displayed on TV. Here’s how they differ:

  • TTML1: An XML-based format for timed text, used in digital TV and web videos, offering flexibility for styling and multiple languages.
  • srt: A simple text format for subtitling, common in online videos and DVDs, with basic timing and text, no styling.
  • vtt: WebVTT, for web text tracks, similar to srt but with added styling and positioning features.
  • scc: Scenarist Closed Caption, primarily for 608 captions, but can be up-converted for 708 when embedded in digital streams.
  • sami: An older format for closed captions and subtitling, mainly used with Windows Media Player, now less common.

Key Difference

The main difference is that 608 and 708 are about how captions appear and are sent in TV broadcasts, while these formats are about storing the caption data for various uses like web, editing, or broadcasting.


Survey Note: Detailed Analysis of Caption Standards and Formats

This section comprehensively examines the differences between CEA-608 and CEA-708 caption standards and how they compare to file formats such as TTML1, srt, vtt, SCC, and sami. To ensure accuracy and depth, the analysis is grounded in extensive research, including web searches and official documentation.

Background on Caption Standards

Closed captions are essential for accessibility, particularly for deaf or hard-of-hearing viewers. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates captioning standards in the United States, with two primary standards for television: CEA-608 and CTA-708 (formerly CEA-708).

  • CEA-608 Captions: Introduced for analog television, CEA-608 captions, also known as Line 21 captions, were the standard for NTSC broadcasts in the US and Canada. They are transmitted via Line 21 data, which includes both closed captions and V-Chip data for TV ratings. Key characteristics include:
    • Limited display capabilities: Typically white text on a black background, fixed at the screen’s bottom.
    • Supports a limited character set, primarily Latin characters for languages like English, Spanish, and French.
    • Compatible with digital televisions through picture user data, ensuring backward compatibility post the 2009 DTV Delay Act, which transitioned from analog to digital TV (3Play Media: 608 and 708 Closed Captioning).
    • Constraints include no background color options other than black and fixed positioning, which may block important visuals, as noted in Verbit: 608 vs. 708 Closed Captions.
  • CTA-708 Captions: Designed for digital television, CTA-708 (previously CEA-708) offers enhanced features to meet modern accessibility needs. It is transmitted via MPEG-2 video streams, providing:
    • Advanced formatting options: Supports 8 fonts, 3 text sizes, 64 text and background colors, and adjustable opacity, with drop-shadowed or edged text.
    • Flexible positioning: Captions can appear anywhere on the screen, complying with FCC requirements to avoid blocking important visuals.
    • Extended language support: Includes nearly every language, with speaker identification, punctuation, and non-speech noises, as detailed in GTE Media: Difference Between CEA-608 and CEA-708.
    • Required in all 13-inch or larger digital TVs in the US by FCC regulations, with broadcasters mandated to caption a percentage of content (Wikipedia: CTA-708).

The transition from analog to digital, marked by the 2009 DTV Delay Act, shifted focus to 708, though 608 remains relevant for legacy systems and compatibility, as seen in CaptioningStar: CEA 608 & 708 Standards.

File Formats for Captions

While 608 and 708 define transmission and display, file formats store and exchange caption data for various platforms. Below is a detailed breakdown:

  • TTML1 (Timed Text Markup Language): TTML1 is an XML-based format for timed text, developed by the W3C, used in digital television and online video. It supports:
    • Semantics for most closed caption files, including styling, positioning, and timing, based on technologies like XML, SMIL, XSL-FO, and CSS (W3C: TTML and Derivated Captions Formats).
    • Extensibility and profiling, making it suitable for both broadcast and web, potentially representing features akin to 708 captions due to its flexibility.
    • Commonly used for authoring, transcoding, and exchanging timed text in the television industry, as noted in the same W3C document.
  • srt (Subrip Text): A simple text-based format for subtitling, widely used for DVDs and online videos. It includes:
    • Basic timing information with start and end times for each subtitle, followed by the text, without styling options.
    • Example format: “00:00:00,599 –> 00:00:04,160 >> ALICE: Hi, my name is Alice Miller,” as seen in YouTube Help: Supported Subtitle Files.
    • Preferred for beginners due to ease of editing in plain text editors, but lacks advanced features like those in 708.
  • vtt (WebVTT): WebVTT, or Web Video Text Tracks, is designed for HTML5 video, offering:
    • Similar to srt but with additional features like text styling, positioning, and karaoke effects, as noted in SubtitleTools: Convert to srt Online.
    • Used for web platforms, with files starting with “WEBVTT” for identification, supporting modern web accessibility needs.
    • Not directly tied to TV broadcasting standards like 608 or 708, focusing on web delivery.
  • scc (Scenarist Closed Caption): SCC, or Scenarist Closed Caption, is a file format for closed captions, primarily associated with CEA-608. Key details include:
    • Stores CEA-608 data in 29.97 drop and non-drop frame rates, originally for analog TV, VHS, and DVDs (3Play Media: What is an SCC File?).
    • Frame-based, limited to 37 characters per line, and requires professional software for editing due to encoded data, as seen in Verbit: Using SCC Files.
    • Can be up-converted to include 708 data when processed through a decoder or embedded into digital video, though primarily designed for 608, according to 3Play Media: 608 and 708 Comparison.
    • Used in broadcast and digital media production, compatible with platforms like YouTube and Netflix, as noted in GTE Media: CEA-608 and CEA-708.
  • sami (Synchronized Accessible Media Interchange): An older format, originally created by Microsoft, for closed captions and subtitling, primarily used with Windows Media Player. It includes:

Comparative Analysis

To organize the differences, consider the following table comparing the standards and formats:

Aspect CEA-608 CEA-708 TTML1 srt vtt scc sami
Type Transmission Standard Transmission Standard File Format File Format File Format File Format File Format
Primary Use Analog TV, Legacy Digital Digital TV Digital TV, Web Subtitling, Online Videos Web Text Tracks Closed Captions, Broadcast Closed Captions, Legacy Media
Formatting Limited, Fixed Position Advanced, Flexible Positioning Flexible, XML-Based Basic, No Styling Styling, Positioning Frame-Based, 608 Primarily Styling, Limited Compatibility
Language Support Limited, Few Languages Extensive, Nearly All Languages Multiple Languages Basic, Text Only Multiple Languages Limited, 608 Compatible Limited, Older Systems
Compatibility Analog, Some Digital Digital TV, Web Transition Digital TV, Web DVDs, Online Videos Web Platforms Broadcast, Up-Convertible 708 Windows Media Player
Example Use Case Older TVs, Streaming Players Modern Digital TVs Broadcast, Web Videos YouTube, DVDs HTML5 Videos TV Broadcasts, YouTube Legacy Media Players

This table highlights that 608 and 708 are standards for broadcast transmission, while the others are storage formats with varying capabilities. Notably, scc’s ability to be up-converted for 708 use bridges the gap, but it’s primarily 608-focused.

Research Methodology

The analysis involved multiple web searches to define each term, including queries like “what are 608 and 708 captions,” “TTML1 srt vtt scc sami definitions,” and “can scc files contain cea-708 data.” These searches yielded results from authoritative sources like 3Play Media, Verbit, W3C, and Wikipedia, ensuring a comprehensive understanding. Additional searches, such as “file format for cea-708 captions” and “can ttml be used for cea-708 captions,” clarified the relationship between file formats and standards, with findings indicating TTML1’s flexibility for 708-like features and scc’s up-conversion potential.

Conclusion

In conclusion, CEA-608 and CEA-708 are transmission standards for TV captions, with 608 for analog and legacy digital, and 708 for modern digital with advanced features. File formats like TTML1, srt, vtt, scc, and sami store caption data, each suited for specific contexts. scc is notably tied to 608 but can support 708 through up-conversion, while TTML1 offers broad compatibility for digital and web use. This distinction is crucial for understanding captioning in broadcasting versus data storage.


Key Citations

The original answer was provided by Grok, created by xAI.


Resources mentioned in this Insight

  • CineXTools – There are three different ‘cineX’ products on their website. CineXTools is what I used in this workflow.
  • MediaInfo app – This is a free open-source app that all post-production pros should own for quickly evaluating the technical details of any movie file sent your way. đŸ™‚ And, if it saves you on a project, consider donating a few dollars to them.

– Patrick


Member Content

Sorry... the rest of this content is for members only. You'll need to login or Join Now to continue (we hope you do!).

Need more information about our memberships? Click to learn more.

Membership options
Member Login

Are you using our app? For the best experience, please login using the app's launch screen


1,200+ Tutorials, Articles, and Webinars To Explore

Get 7-day access to our library of over 1,200+ tutorials - for $5!
Do you like what you see? Maintain access for less than $5 per month.


Start Your Test Drive!
Loading...