Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jaguu]

I think it is a major deficiency ot the new tag window not allowing to display the complete set of fields.  Where else can I get a complete dump of all the tag values of a file and maybe copy/paste to the clipboard?

I don't see any reason why some tags should not be available for display in the tag window. Just one example. If I want to see where the cover art of the currently playing file is located I could simply look up the tag info in MC11 and check the value of the image file tag. This is no longer possible.

If I want to get that information now I have to include the field "Image File" in a view, so that I can look up the information, which is very cumbersome.

On the one hand you give the user plenty of customization freedom, on the other hand you hide some customization possibilities for no apparent or logical reason.

What reason could there be to not having the whole set of tags available in the tag window?

Personally I feel the whole work done on improving the tag window did not give satisfactory results. As I already wrote before the thing that makes sense to me is the display of tags depending on the view scheme (much more than the dependence of the media type).

If I have a view scheme about classical music, I want to see those tags concerning classical music and I do not want to see those tags in any other view scheme. And I don't want to see classical music tags in view schemes for other music. If I have a view scheme "images of nature" I do not want to see there tags used for my artwork collection, but only those tags related to that view scheme.

I also miss the functions "show all tags", "show user tags" "show user defined tags" and "Show only non-empty tags". They may not be necessary in playback mode, but when one is doing severe tagging work they come in very handy.

[RobOK]

I agree with these points.

[glynor]

Other deficiencies and issues have been reported here:

http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=34556.0

[RobOK]

yes, but that thread is being ignored, other than:

We recognize that some people won't find it worthwhile to go forward.  We respect that decision.

(Trying hard not to be cheeky.)

[JimH]

Why do you think it's been ignored?

Some threads are "read only".

[RobOK]

This is my first participation in a J River beta test -- I'm glad to be able to help.  To me, it's frustrating that a lot of really great ideas are presented by the beta team and there is little or no reaction from J River on the ideas.  I've been a participant with other software testing where there is more back and forth between the core users and the developers.  To be fair, you never said you would comment on anything, I brought that expectation to the table.

The tag window seems to get the most commenting by the testers and the least commenting by J River.  Several users specifically have asked J River for a comment on this topic.  That is why I commented that it is being ignored. 

I really like the product and just bought my MC12 license.

[JimH]

Thanks.  We're not entirely happy with tagging either, but we've had some other things we've been working on and haven't been able to spend much time on tagging. 

We're doing a lot of work for corporate customers right now, so we may not be able to respond to suggestions, good or bad.

[hit_ny]

Let's forget for a moment what has been taken away from MC 12's tagging window.

11.1 as well as previous versions gave me pretty much everything. I did not feel overwhelmed by the detail. You had the choice to either show all or only visible.

The question is how to improve on 11.1's tagging window ?

I'm not talking cosmetically but rather functionally.

[jgreen]

IMO, the new tag window is faster and easier than the previous, and seemingly just as powerful.  It could use further work but it's already better (as in more useful).

[glynor]

Thanks.  We're not entirely happy with tagging either, but we've had some other things we've been working on and haven't been able to spend much time on tagging. 

We're doing a lot of work for corporate customers right now, so we may not be able to respond to suggestions, good or bad.

Thank you Jim.  I understand.   

[lalittle]

Thanks.  We're not entirely happy with tagging either, but we've had some other things we've been working on and haven't been able to spend much time on tagging. 

We're doing a lot of work for corporate customers right now, so we may not be able to respond to suggestions, good or bad.

Jim,

Thanks for this response.  This is the information that I believe many of us were looking for -- i.e. why there seemed to be so little response from JR on this subject.  Your post explains the situation, and I look forward to further discussions on this subject after you guys put our your other fires.  This is definitely a VERY important subject for a lot of us, which is why the developements in MC12 in this arena have us so concerned.

On a related note, I was a little confused by this:

Why do you think it's been ignored?

Some threads are "read only".

The thread being referred to here is not "read only," so I'm unclear what you're saying.

I think the reason that some people feel this issue has been "ignored" to a large extent is the fact that JR has been so quiet in the threads dicsussing this.  As RobOK said, there has been VERY little "back and forth" on this subject even though overall it is one of the most discussed subjects pertaining to MC12.  As I already mentioned, you have now explained why this has been the case (thanks again for this), so it's no longer a mystery to us.

Thanks,

Larry

[lalittle]

IMO, the new tag window is faster and easier than the previous, and seemingly just as powerful.  It could use further work but it's already better (as in more useful).

How the new window strikes any given person is dependent on how that person utilizes the window -- i.e. on their specific preferences when it comes to tag editing workflow.

As stated in the other threads on this subject, MC12's Tag window is only "just as powerful" as MC11 IF you happen to be somebody who didn't use the aspects of the Tag window that were removed from MC12.  If, on the other hand, you are somebody who DID use the extra features that MC11's Tag window offered, MC12's version of this window is very noticeably deficient.  To these people, MC12's Tag window is most definitely "less powerful" that M11's Tag window.

Thanks,

Larry

[lalittle]

If I want to get that information now I have to include the field "Image File" in a view, so that I can look up the information, which is very cumbersome.

They just added the ability to see the "image" field in the Tag window (which I've been wanting as well) so this is no longer an issue.

Personally I feel the whole work done on improving the tag window did not give satisfactory results. As I already wrote before the thing that makes sense to me is the display of tags depending on the view scheme (much more than the dependence of the media type).

I agree with you -- I would LOVE to have the Tag window change depending on the current view scheme, which MC11 was able to "basically" do with it's "Visible Columns" category in the Tag window.  On top of this, I would also really like to change the ORDER of the field list in the Tag Window rather than just having it alphabetical (which is fine for a default order, but not for my personal use.)  I like to have DIFFERENT tags at the TOP of the Tag window depending on what View Scheme I'm using since this makes it possible to set up View Schemes specifically targetted toward certain types of tagging/organization work.  Once again, MC11 offered this by using the "Visible Columns" category, which displayed the Tags at the top of the tag window in the same order as the order of the columns in the current view scheme.

I do think that there is a value to having the Tag window display tags based on Media Type, but since Media Type is a subset of the View Scheme, wouldn't the abilty to change the Tag window display based on View Scheme cover this?  In other words, wouldn't it work like this (for example): 1) the Tag window changes based on the View Scheme, 2) the View Scheme decides what Media Types are displayed.  When you combine the effect of 1 and 2, the Tag Window would in turn display Tags based on Media Type.

Larry

[glynor]

I agree with you -- I would LOVE to have the Tag window change depending on the current view scheme, which MC11 was able to "basically" do with it's "Visible Columns" category in the Tag window ... When you combine the effect of 1 and 2, the Tag Window would in turn display Tags based on Media Type.

(rest omitted for brevity)

Yes.  I agree completely here as well.

Though perhaps (in a nod to the "clean" looks of the new Tag Window) the "top portion" of the MC12 tag AW should remain the [Name] tag with the image and some file data below.  Then, where we currently have the Alphabetized list, I'd like it to work as Larry describes.  Just a possible idea... (Personally, I wouldn't include quite as much at the top -- drop the Ratings and Last Played -- but that's just me).

[lalittle]

(Personally, I wouldn't include quite as much at the top -- drop the Ratings and Last Played -- but that's just me).

It's not just you -- I agree with this as well.  I don't mind having the "last played" visible, but since I NEVER use "Ratings," this just gets in the way, and once in a while it accidentally gets changed, which just makes me have to change it back (which causes it to be re-synched to iPods and re-backed up.)

Larry

[Jaguu]

I also do not use ratings at all and would like to turn them off altogether. A simple option: Turn ratings off!

Yes, I saw that the image file tag and others have been included, so this issue is solved!

[darichman]

On top of this, I would also really like to change the ORDER of the field list in the Tag Window rather than just having it alphabetical (which is fine for a default order, but not for my personal use.)  I like to have DIFFERENT tags at the TOP of the Tag window depending on what View Scheme I'm using since this makes it possible to set up View Schemes specifically targetted toward certain types of tagging/organization work.

While I think I may have already done so elsewhere  (?) I'd like to add my support for this...

Even if we just look at music, there are so many different types, that fields which may be relevant in some view schemes simply clutter up the Tag window in others...

It becomes even more difficult when we move to media categories which span more than one "Media Type"... Illustrative Example: I have a view scheme called "Film & Television" which lets me organise all types of media (soundtracks, episodes, full length movies, trailers, images etc) by the movie or show they're from... If I'm tagging muliple file types, the tagging system fails dismally (because it's relying on the fact that it's "audio" or "video")

As lalittle suggested, the current behaviour of selecting which fields are displayed based on media type could be better met by tailoring it to which view scheme we're looking at...

[glynor]

It's a little hard to believe after all this time, but I just discovered a new (and fairly serious I think) Tag Window deficiency.  Since I've now switched over almost entirely to MC12 (including my HTPC) I've been forced to battle my way through using the new Tag AW on occasion (ugh).  I still use MC11.1 when I have to do real work (or more often just put it off), but every so often I need to jump in there.

And so, I've discovered that I can't use it at all on my HTPC.  Because it's only monitor is a large standard def TV I have Windows' large fonts option enabled, and I also very slightly bumped up the size of MC's fonts (under Tools --> Options -->Tree & View --> Select Font I have it set to Size = 11).

So anyway... The Tag AW is all messed up.  The Tag AW "header" (the part of it where it lists the file's Name, picture, date, type, size, length, rating , and last played date at the top before it switches to "alphabetical mode") overlaps the tag in the first "alphabetized" field below.  So, when I go to modify the "Artist" I have no idea if I'm clicking on artist or the rating (since they overlap).  I'll try to post a screenie of it later (I can't now because my wife is using the Photoshop computer for homework right now).

Either way... I would understand if I had pumped up the fonts by a large amount, but my change was very modest (and works fine everywhere else in MC12 and everywhere in MC11).  These "header" items need to make sure to push the "alphabetical" items down based on the actual, selected font size not based on an arbitrary fixed size.

[glynor]

Ok.  Here's a screenshot of what I'm talking about.



So... Notice in the above shot.  I'm pointing at where it says "Album", but I also have the Ratings stars there, and behind it it says 9/18/2006.  Not to mention that "never played" is definitely encroaching on the "Album" field's space.  When I click there, am I editing the Ratings or the Album field?