Print

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

[Daydream]

One more thread, one more time, with a feeling now

To be clear it's not my intention to critique the current status of Theater View, which is a solution that works. I do appreciate what JRiver has done with it. However I probably have a different vision. If it resonates with anybody here, devs and/or users, further discussion may be useful. If it doesn't (especially with the devs) I'd appreciate them saying so if possible. It won't make me appreciate MC any less, quite the opposite.

On specifics, cause we talked on this subject enough for 3 novels:

1) JRiver policy, front and center: are you going to take on your rivals, regarding Theater View? It's rather easy to see for anybody that knows anything that MC has no rival when it comes to any other parts of the applications except Theater View. Here you have. So, is it gonna be yes, no, maybe? A flat out no will make everything that follows superfluous.

2) Vision: there's a dilemma: the 10 foot interface besides its particular usability has to deal with a plethora of database features that other programs don't have (go JRiver). If nothing else it can be seen from the discussions here and here that attempts to come up with various combined ideas are subject to much arguing. We've used MC for years now. The expectations on the usability part is that there will be something more that nobody has in the Theater View - a more advanced type of navigation, in place filtering, etc. Magic.

3) Skinning: this is a tough one. I'd like the entire Theater View  interface skinable. No more hardcoded things. Elements should be able to be positioned with fixed (pixel) accuracy. Rollers, thumbs and info panel should have customizable position, background, fonts and, at the far end - animation (slide in/our, fade in/out for certain elements). This will collide gracefully with ideas like customizing the InfoPanel from Options in the Standard interface but it can't be help. There are zillion features that can be listed as needed. It's not reasonable to expect me to list them all in one go.

4) Skinning: certain new elements should be brought in and linked by some kind of relationship. I'm talking about symbols for audio and video codecs used, studios, resolutions (ie 1080p) and so on. Listing these details as text it's nowhere near as appealing and useful as having their already known symbols/icons displayed. Fanart should be present too, after all we're talking about the experience of watching something. The more pleasant the presentation of an entry - the better. For whoever doesn't know what fanart is in the context that means custom backgrounds for the detail view of every entry. With the extension of a custom number of screenshots from the movie/episode/etc that gets display in various ways if you remain on an entry for a longer time.

5) Skinning: there is current trend to expand the area allocated to a field (upon selection, interaction) if the content of this field exceeds the space initially available (think Description or Actors fields). This is one style. However you can't really build something complex with this since you can never account for how far something will expand. The other solution would be to scroll inside the initially allocated space which will remain fixed.

6) Skinning: I see a trend to push for 3D elements in Obsidian (the big coverart) or the 3D view. It's one idea. However from where I'm coming that's rather a no-no. Can it be skinned? Can I design my own parallelepiped in 3ds Max and plug it in Theater View? Yeah right (well I don't know anything about 3ds Max). Bottom line these things can't be skinned, it's just another way to lock down design and if you ask me they are rather unappealing.

7) Aggregation: there are a couple of elements that don't exist and we're in dire need of. For example Series and Seasons should be standalone entries with their own coverart, metadata - properties in general. While at the same time having certain relationships up and down in the context of the mentioned content. There's no other way to nicely say this, we need it and we need it yesterday. Modify the stacks behavior in order to be referenced individually, work any other kind of magic - we need this. More skilled people than me in all things databases are welcome to pitch ideas.

8 ) Start Page, use of space: too much empty space. One idea would be that there can be stats about your collection, your recent imports, playing now, various other stats system-related (customizable) etc. Plugins?

9) Weather Page, use of space: would in be possible to bring in more info - 24, 36, 72 hours, week, month? On a 1080 screen it's a lot of empty space. Could the graphics be customizable? Can we have the custom backgrounds that change in sync with the current weather (sun - sunny background, rain - rainy BG, etc)? Provided that we have the BKGs stored somewhere with some logic for the naming convention.

10) Coverart display: name under covert art / posters should be optional. If one has covers for all his albums, and covers/posters for all his movies the name listing under every element may not be necessary -> save space, have the thumbnails close together, display more of them. Depending on the type of coverart (which will tell the title details without additional text titles under them) this can bring an extended number of views in Theater View.

11) Coverart display: use an overlay that determines the transparency section in order to "cut" the corners (or other parts) and have rounded (or freeform for the crazy) thumbs/coverart

So far for now. Who's with me?

[steveklein]

those are all very good, well-written suggestions.

[raym]

Totally with you on all the skinning points.   

Real plugin support is something i wish for too. That's why products like Media Portal do really well.

In reference to the start page, I don't mind the free space. Not big on clutter so media library stats etc would just be noise to me and I'd instantly be looking for ways to turn it off. Howerver, what I would like is the date. I still find it unusual that this is not possible.

Great post!

[darichman]

Daydream - Your posts about theatre view are usually spot on, and this one is no exception... I do think that J River has come a long way with theatre view and we shouldn't underemphasise the hard work and progress the developers have made, particularly in the last few months. The journey isn't over yet, however, and I do hope development will continue.

You make some good suggestions here - some will probably be natural developments throughout the version's liefspan anyway, and some would definitely require a fair bit of work to realise. I particularly agree with your points about the skinning engine, and also dealing with series/seasons etc in a meaningful way. I think MediaPortal is a good illustrative case here and should maybe set the barr to strive for.

I have a few ideas and opinions that I'd definitely like to discuss, but my med finals start tomorrow (eep!) so I'll have to get back back to this in a week or so...

[rick.ca]

So far for now. Who's with me?

You sound like George Bush. Do we have to agree with you on 11 points?! But wait, one rather minor issue—skinning—is blown-up into four, so there's really only 7.5 points... No—I agree on a few, disagree on few, and I'm indifferent on the rest. In the interest of brevity, I'll express only my disagreement...

3) Skinning: this is a tough one. I'd like the entire Theater View  interface skinable. No more hardcoded things. Elements should be able to be positioned with fixed (pixel) accuracy. Rollers, thumbs and info panel should have customizable position, background, fonts and, at the far end - animation (slide in/our, fade in/out for certain elements). This will collide gracefully with ideas like customizing the InfoPanel from Options in the Standard interface but it can't be help.

I don't know much about the technology of skinning, but if you do, I suppose I can draw a conclusion from this comment. If I have to sacrifice straightforward essential customization features we have now to facilitate skinning, then forget it—I can live without skinning.

5) Skinning: there is current trend to expand the area allocated to a field (upon selection, interaction) if the content of this field exceeds the space initially available (think Description or Actors fields). This is one style. However you can't really build something complex with this since you can never account for how far something will expand. The other solution would be to scroll inside the initially allocated space which will remain fixed.

I appreciate "eye candy" as much as anyone, but my main objective is to be able to display the information I want to see. For movie information, this is a huge challenge for a theater view display. Not only do the amount and nature of the information elements vary considerably, it's impossible to predict exactly what I want to see at any particular time. At one moment I'll want to see a condensed version. The next, I'll want to see only the contents of a large memo field. But I'll never be sure of what I want to do next, so I expect it to flow gracefully and intuitively from one to the other. There may be room for improvement, but I'm very pleased with the what's been done in this regard so far. If skinning can't be done because of this behaviour, then that's another reason for me to be happy without skinning. The idea of relegating my information to fixed spaces makes my skin crawl.

7) Aggregation: there are a couple of elements that don't exist and we're in dire need of. For example Series and Seasons should be standalone entries with their own coverart, metadata - properties in general. While at the same time having certain relationships up and down in the context of the mentioned content. There's no other way to nicely say this, we need it and we need it yesterday.

Sure, it would be nice if series were easier to handle. But considering I have this now without much difficulty (using dummy files for series and sorting episodes by season/episode) I can't agree with "dire need" and "need it yesterday."

3) Skinning: this is a tough one. I'd like the entire Theater View  interface skinable.

Perhaps I should temper the comments I've already made about skinning. I'm not against the idea, but I wonder if you're being an effective advocate for it. I don't expect anyone to have the same point-of-view as me, but it seems obvious MC users tend to be serious about the information content of their collections. So I doubt I'm completely alone in my attitude about skinning trespassing on my information needs. I'm sure some good ideas can be borrowed from other theater view applications, but don't push it too far. I can't remember which is which, but I have looked at a number of those. In some cases, I was able to reject them out-of-hand. I may have been impressed by the visuals, but I could could sense the developers and users didn't have nearly the appreciation for good information management as there is here.

I don't believe good artistic design, information management and functionality have to be mutually exclusive goals. If you insist they are, there will be no progress toward the only acceptable outcome—a creative balance. I don't buy the argument I have to compromise my information needs for a pretty skin. Tell me how to make my information can be made pretty!

Maybe part of the answer to the vision thing is to never compromise the areas in which MC is already the leader, but to add things that build on, enhance and showcase those strengths. Besides, do we really need the most visually awesome theater view? Would most of us not be proud to say, "Yes, it's not the prettiest, but look at what it can do!"

[Daydream]

Relegating information, skinning trespassing information needs... I'd say spend some time to understand skinning. Your concerns are totally unreal.

It seems that either I didn't make a certain point too clear or you misunderstood me. Advanced skinning it's not about wiping clean the current layouts and their functions. It's about opening them up. It's about options. If the current setup does it for you, please, stay with it. I would never advocate to be removed. I just want it to be one of many. My comments about fixed areas, options placement, etc were just intended to illustrate that there are many more ways to create an interface. Otherwise I hope you'll not be too disappointed when you'll want to have something different and will discover that the entire development was done around one singular, rather fixed thing, and there is no turning back.

Sure, it would be nice if series were easier to handle. But considering I have this now without much difficulty (using dummy files for series and sorting episodes by season/episode) I can't agree with "dire need" and "need it yesterday."

That is not an example of versatility, it's a expression of how far somebody will go to concoct a replacement of a needed feature. Do you think you will be in a strong position if you'd have to explain that that's a good way, to anybody that uses MC with series?

Besides, do we really need the most visually awesome theater view? Would most of us not be proud to say, "Yes, it's not the prettiest, but look at what it can do!"

I beg to differ. Strongly. We don't live to index and collect metadata just to gain technical proficiency in playing with it. We want to display it. You are getting too close to the current mechanics, too close to the 'screen'. You are losing perspective of all things possible.

[rick.ca]

Your concerns are totally unreal.

Of course they are unreal. I was responding to your pontificating about how things should be. I'm not for the status quo and I'm not against skinning. I have no fear I'll be disappointed because the development team is stupid and naive. I'm confident they don't take your ramblings very seriously at all.

Do you think you will be in a strong position if you'd have to explain that that's a good way, to anybody that uses MC with series?

Why would I do that? I acknowledged improvement in this area would be welcome. I was objecting to your gross overstatement of the seriousness of matter. You make it sound like the developers are stupid or negligent for not having done what is so obviously necessary long ago. There's no other way to nicely say this, you're crying wolf.

You are getting too close to the current mechanics, too close to the 'screen'. You are losing perspective of all things possible.

Really. Because I don't share your "vision," I'm losing perspective?! 

[Daydream]

Really. Because I don't share your "vision," I'm losing perspective?! 

As somebody that indexes even the movies that he hasn't seen it yet, yes you are losing it. In my opinion you are outside of the your comfort area on this topic and that's my final saying to you. I have no desire to quarrel any further, or to transform this in another thread about what you say and what I say. I'd like to hear the other people too.

[JimH]

Daydream,
We do take your ideas seriously.  Threads that start with a long list aren't always the most effective way to influence development.  The Theater View area has a lot of different use cases and it's not simple to satisfy most of them, so we're a little cautious about sweeping changes.

With respect to argument vs discussion, maybe you're not fully aware of rick.ca's perspective.  He was deeply involved in testing for the PVD Import plug-in (video metadata).

Jim

[rick.ca]

The Theater View area has a lot of different use cases and it's not simple to satisfy most of them, so we're a little cautious about sweeping changes.

Assuming this means you prefer more of an evolutionary approach, is there anything you can tell us about what direction is being taken or what's "up next" that would help narrow the discussion?

[darichman]

Aggregation: there are a couple of elements that don't exist and we're in dire need of. For example Series and Seasons should be standalone entries with their own coverart, metadata - properties in general. While at the same time having certain relationships up and down in the context of the mentioned content.

I'd like to comment on this point. I promise not to use the "R" word

I think it might be instructive to first have a look at the current use possibilities in theater view, particularly with respect to series. The way theater view works at the moment involves us navigating down through organisational "categories" until we reach a list of files. The categories may be fields or expressions. The file list is determined by filters and searches we apply at each view level. As things stand, information is only shown at the file list level. There is no mechanism to show information at any other level within the organisational hierarchy. For movies this is probably okay - the "file level" and the "movie" level are one and the same. For series, this poses a rather severe limitation - if we use a Series > Season > Episode hierarchy, we are faced with a choice: Do I display information/coverart for the episode, or the series? We can't do both.

MC enables us to use flexible and comprehensive database tools to power the theater view front-end. This approach is incredibly powerful, and I'm not aware of any other home theater programs that work like this. The rub, however, is that it becomes difficult to apply the same rigid structure used successfully by XBMC, MediaPortal and others. In these programs, the structure is quite simple. File belongs to season which belongs to series. File appears based on strict navigation down these memberships. While flexibility is certainly lost with this approach, it does open up a big possibility - information can be displayed for "Series" and often for "Season". Also, various forms of artwork, categorically including posters, banners and backgrounds can be displayed at each level as well... something which is not possible in MC. It is largely this possibility which makes these programs so visually appealing. Also, the positions and layout of all of this is then modifiable by skinners.

I'll try to support my position with two usage situations (maybe others can jump in with others? - Rick, I know you have a system of dummy files for archiving information, perhaps you could elaborate on this? Do you use it navigationally in any way, or just for displaying info?

Use case 1: I am browsing my TV series (as a category) and am deciding which show to watch... in this case, a Series synopsis, credits etc would be really useful, as it will tell me a little bit about the show before I 'commit' and bring up the episode list.

Currently, this is all we have available for listing TV series. Note that there is no information, only a thumbnailed list of the series themselves (as categories)


Click to enlarge.

Would would be really nice to see is this (dummy files used for illustrative purposes):


Click to enlarge.

Note that the poster & synopsis refer to the whole series, and not just a single episode...

Use case 2: I have been watching Battlestar Galactica for years. I am familiar with the show, and the series synopsis is probably not much use to me. I have selected "Battlestar Galactica" from my Series view and now have a list of episodes. An episode synopsis and some basic info is now the most important thing.

It would be nice to navigate through season first, although this isn't critical:


Click to enlarge.

And then to the episode list...


Click to enlarge.

Note that the synopsis is for the individual episode. (I forgot to change the thumbnail to an episode thumbnail, sorry)

Some examples of implementation in MediaPortal:


Click to enlarge.


Click to enlarge.


Click to enlarge.


The practical implications of doing all of this would include:
1. Need some way to store separate information for episodes, series etc
2. Ability to assign images to different levels of navigation (or different "categories"). Once again, this could be brilliant with artist images in music
3. Allowing theater view to show information at a particular level (eg a "show info panel" in view setup - the fields shown in the info panel would need to depend on the "category" level at which it is displayed)

A long post from me, sorry.
Anyone else?

[rick.ca]

Rick, I know you have a system of dummy files for archiving information, perhaps you could elaborate on this? Do you use it navigationally in any way, or just for displaying info?

As you are probably aware, I do this to facilitate importing information from PVD to MC. MC, true to it's name, will only manage information about files that exist. Since no files exist for things like series and seasons, no information about those things can be recorded. The simple solution is to create dummy files to which that information can be associated (and configure MC to recognize them—I use a .log extension). With the dummy file recorded as the filename in PVD, and it being recognized by MC, a match is made and the information can be imported (automatically by the PvdImport plugin). There is no season information in PVD and I don't attempt to create any in MC, so I'm only importing information about each series. Episode information, of course, is imported in the usual way, being matched based on the media filename.

The information imported includes Series title, season, episode and episode title. These can be used to configure an appropriate Theater View view. It can't be anything like what you're describing, but at least the information and some of the functionality is there. Just sorting by series-season-episode places the series record first, followed by the available episodes. There's a poster for the series record and screenshots for the episodes, so that provides a visual distinction between the two. This simple scheme works for me because I tend to watch and delete, rather than collect episodes.

To accommodate a full series, one could include dummy files for each season (which might just be a copy of the series record), and include the series and season categories in the view. They would then select a series and a season and see a series/season record followed by the episodes. If one were not interested in episodes already viewed, they might leave season out of the view, but restrict it to episodes not viewed. Then selecting a series would immediately display a series record, followed by the episode "up next." Alternatively, "viewed" and "current season" flags could be included in the view to include or exclude viewed episodes and future seasons.

[raldo]

Since no files exist for things like series and seasons, no information about those things can be recorded. The simple solution

I have earlier suggested introducing to MC something I'd call a "Virtual Record". A virtual record could be "anything":
o Person
o Series
o Season
o A movie you saw in the theatre

A virtual record could contain MC Tags: Image links, descriptions, etc. Edit: Each virtual record exists as a regular MC record (similar to a song, a video, or an image). But a virtual record has no physical representation on disk, i.e. [Filename] is empty.

Now, say you use virtual records to provide meta data to levels in theater view. For example, a TV show would typically have these levels:

TV Show (Meta data provided by a virtual record named [Series] )
Season (Meta data provided by a virtual record named [Series]season[Season] )
file (Meta data provided by file)

In the theater view config dialog, there could be an edit box where these smart expressions were used to look up and then display the info.
--------
And with respect to meta data, Personal Video Database could be of use

[Daydream]

What do you guys think about this...



... as an idea trying to marry two completely different things? Meaning rollers-navigation and metadata displayed in a fixed environment.

This is not trying to be better than anything, just to stir the imagination. The ideas at work here are:
- retain the rollers (I will always be for them)
- retain some (half) the navigation space
- display coverart/fanart/symbols, etc
- I've added something in there: the second roller, once you hit the end criteria (in this case you get to the episodes) doesn't show anything anymore. In this case there are options that will trigger various data views for the top half of the screen / full screen. 'Info' is right now (didn't put running time and ratings on it but those should be there too); Cast & Crew is an example for (possible) big listing fields, but of course there can me more / other fields still on the top half of the screen; 'details' would be the full blown details on the entire screen.
- the big fields up top ('Description', 'Actors'...) will scroll in-place after a defined amount of time of staying with the item (2-3 seconds)

There are some problems with the concept, regarding both design and logic (and Stargate fans might notice another mixup). Just thought that an image might be more interesting. The driving idea is that what you see should 1) help you make a choice 2) look pleasant. The metadata we accumulated (and I've always been for more, more, more) is treated as having different degrees of importance, hence the methods and priorities to be displayed differ.

I'm curious if you can give it a try on a 1080 screen, how does it look to you. I believe the font in TheaterView can do with some small adjustment (or better, allow for changing the size).

[MrHaugen]

I think Darichman hits the spot with his sugestions! This would do so much to Theater View. Only thing I find missing is symbols of Watched and Not Watched, but this can probably be added as number at the Info pane. Only for each episode though, not a counter for each Series and Seasons. That's not ideal. But that's another discussion I guess. I think Daydream's suggestions are good as well, but as Jim says, it might be better to take on one thing at a time

With Darichmans suggestion we only need a few more tags for bios/synopsis on a series and seasons (or some dummy files? Not sure what that would involve, but if it works...), and Series/Artist tags for cover art would do the trick. We allready have a very good way of setting views and what to show in the info pane. What we now need is a way to pinpoint at wich level we want to see the info panel. Would it be that hard to include this in the Views option?

[darichman]

What do you guys think about this...

I definitely like it. There are so many possibilities, to be sure. If anything further happens with the default layout, I think it will need to keep in mind the current architecture - which does work quite well. When it comes down to it, there are probably two areas which would need some work to see this fully realised: 1) Some way of storing non-file-centric information and 2) Opening up more elements to skinners - it's probably much easier to let the user base do the work prettying things up, and letting development staff focus on the important functional things under the hood.

As for custom art, icons etc... TheTVDb has an open use interface for any program. It really just needs someone to write the plugin for MC, and some way to use the graphics in theatre view

I blew your picture up on my 1920 x 1200 display. I'd use it, for sure

In the meantime, I might try Rick's dummy file approach, so the information can be accessed if I really want it at least. It's just going to be a bit painful creating a few hundred text files and tagging them all so they show up in the right views and don't interfere too much with video schemes 

[MrHaugen]

I'll install MC14 on my HTPC, include the Movie metadata import plugin and test more intensive on this matter my self. There is only so much you can test on a laptop with few movies, small display and no remote control.

I hope there will be put some more effort into making Theater View more Movie and series friendly. We have come a long way, but are not near the end yet. I'll hopefully come back with some suggestions later on.

[dm233]

I definitely like it. There are so many possibilities, to be sure. If anything further happens with the default layout, I think it will need to keep in mind the current architecture - which does work quite well. When it comes down to it, there are probably two areas which would need some work to see this fully realised: 1) Some way of storing non-file-centric information and 2) Opening up more elements to skinners - it's probably much easier to let the user base do the work prettying things up, and letting development staff focus on the important functional things under the hood.

As for custom art, icons etc... TheTVDb has an open use interface for any program. It really just needs someone to write the plugin for MC, and some way to use the graphics in theatre view

look at all the decent media centers out there - XBMC,MePo, meedio, on and on they all tend to support some sort of series sorting either internally or through the use of plug-ins.  So far up to MC13 the video aspect has always felt as a bolt on after thought.  (havent had time to check out any of the new version builds so cant really comment on it, but so far the discussion and development direction looks promising)  where MC has always excelled is in its library function and playback quality for audio and to that that there is no rival.  but the focus I believe has never been squarely aimed at video until recently.  In general the 2 paradigms dont normally mesh all that well and why no Media center out there gets it right on all fronts.
Going to daydream's points, i think they can be summed up a little more concisely...

1.  a way to skin or simply a mechanism to display information and graphical elements tied into the core application.  At least a decently documented set of APIs or better understanding of the display implementation would go a long way into being able to develop user supported skins.  i wouldnt expect the JRiver developers to go out of their way to build an entire framework to support custom skinning but at least an understanding of the interface elements and their behaviors would go a long way to a start in user generated themes and ideas.

2.  a good documented interface or API to the library.  How can someone create fields? update fields or store information either internally or as a pointer to file location?  why cant i create a scrapper to pull info off of tvdb and use that to populate library fields??

given these 2 points it should be fairly reasonable to construct a framework to customize the theater view and use the resources of the community to develop the necessary tools to build it should jriver development resources be limited.  at least some statement from JRiver would be helpful.  I know on my part it would be and may yet see me move away from a cobbled together environment using MePo/4threcord to handle live tv and recording, MC for audio and meedio to tie it all together at the presentation layer.

being able to configure and access the Theater view is a good start.  someday... someday...

[JimH]

So far up to MC13 the video aspect has always felt as a bolt on after thought.

If you're going to express your opinion (and thank you for doing so), it would be nice if you could try today's version.  MC13 could be a year old.

[dm233]

If you're going to express your opinion (and thank you for doing so), it would be nice if you could try today's version.  MC13 could be a year old.

**sorry for the long post**

I have tried the new version and while I havent been able to dig as deep as I'd like into into some of the new features, it certainly looks promising for the near future and is an excellent preview of things to come.  the developers are doing great job at increasing the functionality to higher levels.  I'm very keen to see what the Dev team has in store for improving TV recording with this release...

but back to the issue at hand...  so far every indication in the preview releases so far have been pretty much business as usual.  trying to extend the idea of music management into other media contexts (discussed at length in numerous posts on media management and organization)  put simply its fairly inelegant to implement any sort of non-convoluted, automated process to the idea.  in the end it shifts a majority of the burden to individual users to design their own schema within the framework of MC and leaves even some of the technically proficient users out in the cold with its complexity, steep learning curve, and large amounts of time required to bring one's idea into the how they what their library to be within the MC framework.  Its fantastic for  obsessive collector types like myself who will spend hours managing a collection with glee, while actually sitting back and enjoying the actual media becomes an afterthought.

I'm not advocating that the MC develop every user idea and put it into a release, such talk is nonsense and is a complete waste of development resources that can be used on other more important projects. Stick to the core infrastructure and extend the main philosophy behind using MC in the first place- infinite customization.  beyond just the library management and organizational model but into the presentation layer and data acquisition layers as well.  the hardest part of organization and management is already robust and open to the idea of infinite user customization. integrating the presentation layer and data import components is sure fire success and a a path to true multimedia media nerdvana.

This is where WE the community come, like myself, there are countless others that would love to develop and extend the the functionality of an ideal media center.  MC's core engine by far the best in class.  playback is generally flawless and superior on all audio fronts and one can organize and display a collection on an infinite # of categories.  move outside of that core and things become fairly convoluted fast as new ideas and methods are jimmied and squeezed into the existing audio paradigm.  one of the main ideas in this thread has been about getting an idea like a TV series to be displayed in theater view.  So far AFAIK there isnt a really easy/reliable way to achieve this.  sure creating dummy files, custom data fields ,etc are valid work-arounds, but again its trying to shoehorn in functionality into an non-appropriate paradigm.  a workable solution would be the ability to create new interfaces as needed based on any information contained in the library as a sort of universal view. and add information as required.  simply put any button/item/action in theater view should be able to map any view, expression, file location (local,remote,web), library field, etc...  and down into the menu hierarchy.  If i want to add a section for scifi movies staring eric estrada to the main theater view menu then why not.  adding rollovers should be just as easy. Items points to an object or series of objects and information can be displayed or acted on.

Using a lot of the existing framework it possible to modify the infrastructure to the infinite customization philosophy behind MC's audio roots into the presentation layer especially at the 10ft view.  a simple implementation would be along these lines... this is pretty much off the top of my head and is not definitive nor is probably complete in thinking all the way through but is an illustration of using the existing paradigms and development, tweaked to improve the presentation layer for the 10ft interface.

concept -

• highly customizable interface thats template driven using tags or expressions. 
• templates should be standardized and user generated as well as a stock configuration/newbie options
• menu items can be defined as views , tags, expressions, an external application launcher would be nice!!! (would resolve some of the bluray support, iso mounting, and live tv issues/shortcomings, etc...)
• needs a way for the user to easily define behaviors, views and objects in a template.  theater view option config panel, as a plugin, direct edit of the xml, etc...
• a configurable path for additional artwork, fanart, central folder location for sidecar files.  location and naming scheme based on the same tag/expression dev drivers

templates - pretty much everything can be distilled down to a few templates, it may be possible to use some of the existing framework\concept already in place with modification to support this idea.  breaking them out, here are some ideas for what the templates could possibly contain and some of the required info needed to drive the interface.  again no way definitive or even possibly correct but a starting point for discussion.  standardizing the template and documenting it would lead to a great number of shared resources in the community and spawn new projects and functionality.  platforms live and die today based on the value of the community that supports it.  would apple be owning the markets mind share on smart phones now if it didnt have a robust community turning out useful applications to run on it??

home - main home screen
just about every field in all the templates would require values for size, position, text properties and action behaviors.  it would be astounding and light years ahead of anything else if the option to define parameters based on tags/expressions was there.

• menu- this is the meat of this template.  here is where the main home page links to the components in the interface.  ie.. music, movies, tv shows, bluray, photos, etc.  these items are linked to it's sub-menu template based on a view, an expression or... fingers crossed external application)  it could be text and/or icons
• background image(s) - path to file(s), behaviors- resize, crop, stretch,etc...  filename either absolute or an expression. change the background image based on time of day or based on whats in playing now, etc...
• any menu item images or animations
• widgets- an interesting idea where can have time/date, weather, movie times, rss feeds, the possibilities are endless...  but the idea is small useful light weight apps

sub-menu screens - link from main menu, broken down into 2 separate templates
- list view template-  basically the current one pretty much fills the bill already.  thumbs, cvoerart/posters/ text or any hybrid of displaying items.
- track info template -extending the current design to present additional info

• create based on tag/expression like media type- music, movie, tv series, photos, etc...
• use roll overs and static info from tags - location, little or lots of info its up to the user.
• artwork- cover art/posters, fan art, etc
• info display- where to put info from roll overs and static info

advanced\future ideas

• able to create custom templates for each item.  like create a custom template for a specific series or genre of music
• store templates as library tags - import/exportable templates
• integrated search- if i im displayed an actor, a director or any other info defined in the library, selecting it would search on the value.  a use would be along the lines of say im looking at the info for spaceballs, clicking the scifi comedy genre field or any other tag would search on that value and return things like ice pirates or star wars episode 1.
• a way to integrate web info.  would make it possible to grab info from imdb, tvdb or any other site on the fly for a piece of media.

everything here pretty much already exists in the current implementation.  good documentation on any template designs and standardization will go a long way to providing this type of customization and can be extended to just about any media type. some interesting designs would probably sprout and would provide the basis for further ideas. like linking the home main menu to another "main" menu and get all creative with that.  the largest obstacle of course is putting a framework around the user configuration interface.  a decent example of how to do this would be the sageMC menu scheme builder components that are fairly straight forward. a tree view with the ability to change each parameter is probably the quickest and easiest to implement since templates are mainly xml files with standard information inputs and values.

some new movement needs to happen in the space or MC will never compete with the other players.  its a bit sad really since the core engine and management functionality is the best out there and shows what some good focused development can achieve.  it would be great if this release will go beyond the already shaping up web interface component and really get into the meat of the current and future state of media center development towards the living room and put its considerable expertise towards the 10ft interface issue with other types of media beyond music and where it doesnt require a phd in to understand how to implement it.  i for one cant wait to see whats in store in upcoming releases and hope to not have to use web interface with another media center just to use the MC core because of presentation deficiencies.

[darichman]

**sorry for the long post**

Welcome to the forums dm233, and also, great post and some nice ideas

[MrHaugen]

Very good ideas DM233. It covers most of what I've been thinking of my self.

[maid]

Maybe a silly question but how do i get Thumnails to display?

Cheers

[beernuts]

My pc has one purpose - to run MC14.  It's primary controller is a 2button presentation mouse, and it runs in theater view from bootup.  It stores my photo collection, MP3's, M4A's, AVI's, and ripped copies of my purchased DVD's.

Clicking back now takes me to the parent folder, not the home page.  Thanks for fixing this in mc14.

I'd prefer to have the audio playback control/progress bar tool available in Playing Now view, not just Big Screen.  It's more intuitive.  Keep it consistent.

Once I click my way down to an album folder, or a folder containing a single AVI , or a DVD worth of bup's vob's and ifo's, it would be way more useable to doubleclick the folders image and have it's contents start playing.

What it does, it does quite well.  But I'm the only one in my household that can use it.  Please offer a theater view that your grandma can figure out.  Perhaps tie it to Party Mode.  Or just strip down the menu options in Theater, and leave them all in Standard.  Select, Play, Stop - that's it.  No options.

Yes, bring in your grandmothers to test it.  They'd be delighted to see what you do for a living!

That's my $25 worth of feedback.  Good work.  Carry on.

[globetrotters1]

I totally agree with the main poster of the topic, the design of the Theater View has to be finally totally skinnable. This has absolutely no negative meaning on all the good work which has been done since MC12!

Jim is always pushing people to use his Obsidian roller version. Which is cool. But what the heck do you do with your beloved wife if she tries and tells you 'I don't wanna use that, far too complicated!' and if you have to move it back to your (especially tweaked) Acajou version? Yes, the new version might be better in the developer's eyes... right, but who is using the Theater View? The users... the clients

I had a longer discussion about the width of the vertical slider in MC14... just not a real solution for someone with our types of touchscreens we use

In a skinnable system I could just tweak the width of this column and everyone would be happy, even my beloved wife!

I'm sure, you can't make it perfect for just everyone. As many clients you have, as many versions or variations you have finally. So you have to streamline it, push people to use a certain version... or make it fully skinnable

btw: the tweakability in MC14 is far far better developed than ever before... almost happy there

(hope my English is understandable in this post and no one feels bothered by my words )

[JimH]

Your English is fine.  Easy to understand.

You could try tweaking the newer "Obsidian Touchscreen" when it's on the MC14 board.   Tell your wife we want to hire her as a consultant. 

[The Big Labinski]

High friends, I could not find my answer regarding theater view in the forum - may be I´m not able to search correct  .

So here are my questions:
Is it possible to get the theater view only to a second monitor and the normal MC window on the first?
Is it possible to send then the playlist from MC directly to the separat displayed theater view?

Reason:
I want like to use my beamer or TV to show the poeple whats running now in MC

thanks in advance.

The MC adicted

[The Big Labinski]

Hi again.


I just found out now that ac3 and mpa files are not played when you switch from normal view to theater view. In theater view you have to push "play" again to it.