Print

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

[silentmonolith]

Well, I have been using this program for over 2 years now and it amazes me with each update. I think it's the best media center software out there. Period.

I use J River mostly in Theater View hooked up to my big screen. The newly redesigned Obsidian skin looks incredible - I do have a little viewing problem though: many of my video files have long names and I'm able to see just the first few words. Is there any way of having some sort of text-scrolling feature? (or list the full file name at the bottom of the screen like in the outdated Noire skin? Thanks, and keep up the good work guys.

[JimH]

Thanks for the kind words.  I don't think there is a way to scroll.  You should see more text when you hover a mouse over it or select it.

You could reduce the size of the text.  Theater View options for Appearance/Size.  A higher resolution might also help.

Naming conventions?

[silentmonolith]

Thanks for your reply. I tried reducing the Viewing size but it just adds more thumbnails in the viewing space while the file name is still partially cut off. Increasing the resolution has the same effect. Naming conventions...do you mean manually changing the file names to something smaller? That would be a pain as I have aprox 200 shows and the library is increasing on its own.  Using a mouse is not an option - I am using a remote.

[raym]

Are you aware that you can change the list style from thumbnails to text? This is the one I use when I need to read long titles like these. At the top of your view, navigate to "More" and then select "Toggle List Style". Pressing it repeatedly will cycle through the 3 available list modes: thumbnails, lineup and list.

[Daydream]

Naming conventions...do you mean manually changing the file names to something smaller? That would be a pain as I have aprox 200 shows and the library is increasing on its own.  

I guess that's a subject for some debate. I'll explain my point of view. You are using "scene releases", and the names in MC are taken straight from the filenames. Those filenames have everything and the kitchen sink, inside them, hence the indications of "HDTV", "1080" or "720", the codec name, the team that released them, etc. To certain scrappers, somewhere in this world, that kind of data can be interpreted and be put to use, without no interaction from the user, at import time. However over here 1) this is of no use, MC uses a different approach 2) you end up with crazy long names that are of no use to anybody.

However you can put the filenames to work in your favor by:
- importing any useful information from the present naming convention to your MC database, and in this case even with your 200 shows you should be able to find common denominators at least per show (as in the file convention for this show follows this scheme, from which I'm going to import this and this element in dedicated fields in MC; either stock fields or custom fields). You pretty much just have to work identifying the filenaming schemes and I bet you can reuse them after determining a few since the scene releases do follow some logic. Then it's just pick the right scheme, parse this one (or more) show(s). You know, Library Tools - Fill properties from filename.
- once you have done that, you have at least 2 options: 1) you can choose what to be displayed for your files in Theater View and choosing the [Name] field will definitely be shorter and not the whole string as it is right now and 2) your newly imported fields plus whatever other fields you have filled in for your files, you can use them to mass rename everything in one shot (if that is acceptable) using MC's file renaming abilities. So that even the actual files get some proper names, i.e. X:\Stargate Universe\Stargate.Universe.S01E05.REPACK.720p.HDTV.x264-SiTV.mkv can become X:\Stargate Universe\1x05 - Light.mkv if you get the episode name from somewhere else; which in the end actually makes sense to humans .

This whole process underlines one fact: instead of displaying very long filenames that furthermore can't be used for much work 'cause they contain too many references in one field, you can bring order in, break everything down to a logic structure which will allow you to manipulate the content any way you want it in the future.

[silentmonolith]

...as I said earlier this product keeps amazing me! I'll have to chew on this one since it's a little bit more complicated. Thanks for your help.

[MrHaugen]

The other day, I was told you have a plugin called autotagger or something, that's supposed to pick up tings like directory location and tag the media correctly upon auto import. Combining this with a way of tagging series and episode numbers from all those s01e05 stuff automatically would really reduce the time tagging. Have not tried it yet though. Going to test it on my new library server one day (that is still waiting for auto sync )

[JimH]

... you have a plugin called autotagger or something, that's supposed to pick up things like directory location and tag the media ...

Maybe you know this, but MC's Library Tools can do this.  It's Move, Copy, Rename.

[MrHaugen]

Maybe you know this, but MC's Library Tools can do this.  It's Move, Copy, Rename.

The word here is Automagic! Doing manual work after an auto import is hardly the same as having tags written upon import When you add a lot of series and movies over time, some tags are a pain to fill inn. Especially if it's used to categories your media, like my "Video Type" tags. It have to be included to even show up in Theater View. It's annoying to do this for every season or series. Imagine people how add each episode that is released! I'm glad I'm not one of them.

Me, amongst others, have asked for a easy way to add tags based upon some Auto Import setting, with expressions who can add static values or values based on directories. Some sort of expression field would be the best. Could be incredibly powerful. A simpler solution might be to add field to each auto import and give it a static value. Select field, add a static value. Add another field with a static value. This should be a fairly easy thing to implement I believe.

Examples of what might be possible with a bit more advanced expression system:
1. Custom tag "Video Type" set to Series
2. sxxexx, SxxSxx xyy, xxyy = season and episode
3. All in front of Season = Name of Series/TV Show
4. All after episode (minus " - " or ".") = Name

Every time I've mentioned it I've gotten the Plugin answer, but it's something that should be included in MC one day imo.

[rick.ca]

Most users are going to want somewhat more information than is available in a torrent filename. If that means getting meta data from somewhere (automagically, of course), then there's no point trying to separate filename handling from the matter of getting sufficient information to identify the video in an online database. It's highly unlikely MC will ever take on this task entirely.

There are a number of different alternatives for managing video meta data. The Personal Video Database/PvdImport solution is particularly well suited to handling downloaded media. It will parse any reasonably patterned filenames using configurable regex. That normally provides enough information that the meta data can be downloaded to PVD. It's then automatically imported to MC by PvdImport.

[MrHaugen]

The best way to would be a online scraper function, yes. But adding tag values on import could be used for many other things besides Series, and would be a quick fix for import administration for some. Many of us tag TV Shows and Series with values as Series, Comedy Shows etc. Be it in custom fields like my "Video Type", or the default Media field with non editable crap values, which I don't remember the name of. Many of us HAVE to set this field(s) to the correct value before it's shown in Theater View, and this is something that could easily be set during auto import.

Although it might be unlikely that it's introduced a automatic Metadata function for Series/TV Shows any time soon, I don't think many would disagree that it would be best to have a built in function for this. It's much more likely that users will actually use it and you're not dependent on other applications being launched, the scrapping started, and then syncing this data between the two programs. Automatically or not. It's not how it should be in a perfect HTPC setup.

I DO understand that there is limitations here based on which databases you can retrieve info from, and the fact that much of this databases do not allow non-free software to get the data. At least not without paying for it. That is why I'm talking about this simple, but yet effective solution of getting simple tag data from file names.

[rick.ca]

It's not how it should be in a perfect HTPC setup.

This seems to be based on the premise all functions must be performed by MC. I suppose that would be nice, but it's never going to happen. And when the functions MC does not currently perform are done perfectly well by another application seamlessly integrated with MC, this argument loses a lot of steam.

If all you want to do is get data from filenames, there are some very good freeware file renaming utilities available. You could use one of these in conjunction with MC's Fill Properties from Filename function (or maybe the AutoTagger plugin) to do what you want.

Whether the purpose is to properly name a file so it can be correctly matched to it's entry in an online database, or just to isolate a few bits of useful information to tag the file with, it's best to do the renaming task at the beginning—before the file is imported to MC. Although something could be added to MC, it's not going to make the task any easier, and whatever functions are tacked on to MC are not likely to be as flexible and robust as the tools already available.

[MrHaugen]

You attempt to break down every suggestion on this forum, or is it just the ones that I mention? Yes, some things might not be necessary to include in MC, but should we keep it all out? No. Some things do really belong in a MC app. When it comes to online meta data for series, I DID say that this might be hard to accomplish, and I do understand why this sort of things might have been dropped out of development plans for a while. Surely we can survive for now with alternatives, but I believe that an integrated solution would be best in the long term.

I think that there have to be a separation between metadata lookup and Auto import tasks. Not only getting info from file naming. There are just some things that you'll never get from a metadata DB. And this is things like entering custom Video Type or Media Subtype tags, which many of us use to sort different kind of videos and series.

A simple but effective way of setting static tags upon import would NOT be much work. This would be a similar function as XBMC's way of setting media type depending on directories. I just refuse to believe that many hours would go into such a dev job, and there are lots of people that would benefit from setting values directly upon import. This could be used for all kinds of media and library fields.
YES, the autotagger plugin might work (have not tested yet), but it seems like confishy have abandoned it, and who knows in which build it will stop working? There are also many that don't know that such alternatives exists. It's not even on the Skins and Plugin page.

[rick.ca]

You're missing my point.

A simple but effective way of setting static tags upon import would NOT be much work.

I have no objection to something like Fill Properties from Filename being applied automatically at the time of import. I agree it should be very easy to implement, and would be of some use to some people. But it doesn't address the need for the filenames (or pathnames) to comply to a reasonably consistent pattern. You imply this might be addressed with "a bit more advanced expression system." True, but now you're talking about something that's not so easy to implement or use. And even it would require some degree of consistency in filename patterns (generally not found in downloaded files) to work properly. If anything needs to be done to filenames before import, then they may as well be renamed properly. That's best done with a tool designed for the job. Once that's done, a Fill Properties from Filename function will work perfectly.

And this is things like entering custom Video Type or Media Subtype tags, which many of us use to sort different kind of videos and series.

If your filenames are named according to a consistent pattern, you can do this now with Fill Properties from Filename. As it's one-step select-and-run operation, it not being automatic is not a big issue. If your files are not so named, it's not reasonable to expect any kind of MC enhancement is going to provide an effective solution suitable to all situations.

[Daydream]

Fill properties from Filename it's a fixed solution, I pick 100 files, I write down the exact filename structure, press a button, stuff happens. I pick another 300 files, change the designated structure, press a button, etc.

This happens manually, after import time, meaning more time spent. We want intelligent automation, less time spent, and all the bloody metadata pulled while we drink a couple of beers (XBMC scrappers win supreme). So somewhere between here and there, maybe we should be able to specify at import time a main filename structure, and a couple of fallback structures if the main one doesn't work (would this be able to differentiate between movies and series? discussion). Or maybe make it possible to plug an entirely different import procedure?

[rick.ca]

maybe we should be able to specify at import time a main filename structure, and a couple of fallback structures if the main one doesn't work

That's sort of what I meant by "something like Fill Properties from Filename being applied automatically at the time of import." If a simple consistent filename pattern is used (e.g., Title (Year) S00 E00 Type Whatever.ext), then those data elements in the filename are easily captured. But there has to be some degree of consistency in the filename pattern used. All I'm saying is it's not reasonable to expect MC to impose that consistency if it doesn't already exist.

We had this debate in the development of PVD's file scanning function. In the end, a very powerful and flexible regex-based system was implemented. With this, users can adopt whatever file naming conventions they want (even sloppy and somewhat inconsistent ones). Properly configured, it parses all the necessary information with 100% accuracy. Users still complain because they can't be bothered learning anything about regex.

XBMC scrappers win supreme

How does XBMC do that? I suspect it requires strict adherence to a file/path naming convention.

[Daydream]

That's sort of what I meant by "something like Fill Properties from Filename being applied automatically at the time of import." If a simple consistent filename pattern is used (e.g., Title (Year) S00 E00 Type Whatever.ext), then those data elements in the filename are easily captured. But there has to be some degree of consistency in the filename pattern used. All I'm saying is it's not reasonable to expect MC to impose that consistency if it doesn't already exist.

I'm not so sure about that, but then again, I'm biased, 'cause I'm a control fleet. The MC app, this forum, etc should make a stand: "we will help you this far, but after that get your collection in order if you want it to work because right now is fubar!"

Users still complain because they can't be bothered learning anything about regex.

Hmm... that's a love-hate relationship for me. I know some regex but I couldn't tweak PVD all the way to what I wanted to do. Then again, there are a few flavors of regex.

How does XBMC do that? I suspect it requires strict adherence to a file/path naming convention.

To the best of my knowledge (I'm not an expert on scrapers) it's also regex, perl programming and whatnot. You prep the content to be scanned by marking it as 'movies', 'tv series', 'clips', etc, then for movie -> imdb, for series -> tvdb.com (for series you can also mark if the folder has one or more series). The online sources can be changed if necessary. However the mechanism is rather elastic (many fallback strategies?), even if you have slightly different filenaming schemes inside the same series, the right names (and metadata) gets picked up right (i.e. \Californication\3x01 - Wish You Were Here.mkv and \Californication\3x03.mkv won't present a problem, they will both show up in season 3 with the right metadata and complete names). The user never, ever, has to touch the regex (you can't really anyway, since it's buried in the program, not like an option to tweak).

It's not magic though. From what I recall I believe there are some guidelines as to what your filenaming schemes can be. Even they state that it will work only that far (but it does cover a lot). So, again, the better order you have in your collection, the better and faster results one would get. The logic advantage of that should be a strong enough incentive to make people having good organized collections.

[ThoBar]

The other day, I was told you have a plugin called autotagger or something, that's supposed to pick up tings like directory location and tag the media correctly upon auto import. Combining this with a way of tagging series and episode numbers from all those s01e05 stuff automatically would really reduce the time tagging. Have not tried it yet though. Going to test it on my new library server one day (that is still waiting for auto sync )

Check my sig....

[MrHaugen]

You're missing my point.

I have no objection to something like Fill Properties from Filename being applied automatically at the time of import. I agree it should be very easy to implement, and would be of some use to some people. But it doesn't address the need for the filenames (or pathnames) to comply to a reasonably consistent pattern. You imply this might be addressed with "a bit more advanced expression system." True, but now you're talking about something that's not so easy to implement or use. And even it would require some degree of consistency in filename patterns (generally not found in downloaded files) to work properly. If anything needs to be done to filenames before import, then they may as well be renamed properly. That's best done with a tool designed for the job. Once that's done, a Fill Properties from Filename function will work perfectly.

Correct. The best way would be to have files with a consistent naming scheme. IF you have that, it sure would be sweet to have MC picking up that Series name, season number, episode number and episode name automatically so you don't have to go out from Theater View and find you're keyboard or mouse.

If your filenames are named according to a consistent pattern, you can do this now with Fill Properties from Filename. As it's one-step select-and-run operation, it not being automatic is not a big issue. If your files are not so named, it's not reasonable to expect any kind of MC enhancement is going to provide an effective solution suitable to all situations.

I'm not really taking about a Fill Properties from Filename thing here. The two things are a bit separated. You will not find data such as "Series" or "TV Show" in the filenames. So you can't use Fill Properties. Many of use use View Schemes based on standard Video Subtype data or custom field like "Video Type" to separate series from Movies, Music videos and others.

What you are suggesting is:
1. Rename files to a standard - Ok, that would be the best in most cases anyway
2. Enter Standard View, select files, Fill tags from filename, select correct naming scheme. This takes time, and far from everyone want to do any things like this on their HTPC. You also want to fill the Media Sybtype data with this tool, but the data is nowhere to be found.
3. You have to: Enter action tag window, select show all tags, scroll down to Media Subtype and select "Series". Even more time is spent, and more steps is necessary every time you import a new series, season or episode.

You REALLY want to do this extra steps for every import? I just can't believe that...
All I'm saying is that an easy way of filling some properties from Auto import would save us a lot of trouble. Even if it was rough.

The easiest thing to fix, would be step number 3. Simply say that ALL files for this Auto import should set a value xxxxxx in library field named yyyyyyy. This would make it possible for all to actually find the media under our Theater View Views. Even though the other tags might be screwed up.

A easy solution for Fill properties from Filename could also be added. You don't HAVE to use super complex stuff to find every possible combination in the filenames. A simple list of name scheme possibilities in priority would do fine. Even a single solution with and without episode names, would be fine. You have to carefully rename your files though.

[rick.ca]

You REALLY want to do this extra steps for every import? I just can't believe that...

There's no need to rant. You're forgetting I use a huge amount of video data and my workflow is almost fully automated. I've only tried to explain that any sound workflow necessarily starts with effective and consistent file naming, and that's probably best done outside MC.

You will not find data such as "Series" or "TV Show" in the filenames.

It's not necessary that such information be in the filename. You can use expressions to determine such things. Imagine a scheme where you get Title, Year, Season, and Episode from the filename. Anything with an episode number is obviously part of a series. This, and other classification data might be determined from the directory the file is found in (i.e., some classification is done at the file renaming stage). AutoTagger is very handy for this sort of thing.

Even a single solution with and without episode names, would be fine.

I thought the point of your argument was you needed to extract more information from filenames. If there were simple the option to automate Fill Properties from Filename using a specified pattern, you would have a powerful and flexible tool for doing that—as long as your filenames were consistent.

[MrHaugen]

There's no need to rant. You're forgetting I use a huge amount of video data and my workflow is almost fully automated. I've only tried to explain that any sound workflow necessarily starts with effective and consistent file naming, and that's probably best done outside MC.

The problem is the word "almost". Why should it not be automated by simple code in MC? This almost thing means that people have to find a keyboard and a mouse and enter standard view to tag things, maybe several times a week. Is that what you really want to do in a "complete" Media Center? Maybe that's ok for you, but I think your pretty alone.
We do agree that the best way is to have consistent file naming before import. So I don't understand why you still bring that up. 

It's not necessary that such information be in the filename. You can use expressions to determine such things. Imagine a scheme where you get Title, Year, Season, and Episode from the filename. Anything with an episode number is obviously part of a series. This, and other classification data might be determined from the directory the file is found in (i.e., some classification is done at the file renaming stage). AutoTagger is very handy for this sort of thing.

Expressions might be a possibility. Have not done much expressions yet. Again you talk about pugins. Would it be a crime to implement a easy solutions in MC, so that more people might use this things as well? Of the people that use Series and TV Shows in MC, how many do you actually think that knows about AutoTagger? And how many of this do you think will ever try it? I'm one of those computer geeks that test all sorts of thing, and I'll use it for sure. I do think that people like me is in the minority though.

I thought the point of your argument was you needed to extract more information from filenames. If there were simple the option to automate Fill Properties from Filename using a specified pattern, you would have a powerful and flexible tool for doing that—as long as your filenames were consistent.

It was, and it still is. As you mentioned, todays expression field might be of use to get data that is not in the file name it self. The code in Fill Properties from Filename would be more than enough to automate todays tagging upon Auto import, if the users renamed their files correctly. I'd MUCH prefer using some time to rename the files on my server, than I would want to screw up my HTPC experience.


I'm getting so sick of defending my wish of a built in, simple way of automating everyday media import. I don't understand why we have to have this kind of arguments when we basically want the same thing done. You've brought up a nice suggestion to use expressions to set some tag values, but other than the you've only proved that you'd rather want to have 25 different applications and plugins to do the job.

[gappie]

you dont have to defend yourself mrHaugen. and who knows if mc picksup your idea and find an elegant solution.

in the mean time you could make something like this in a view.
take for instance a view in Theater View
the files for series look forinstance like this:
H:\Series\SerName,season,episode.mkv
now make a new view in Theater View and set this in the rules:

Code: [Select]

[Media Type]=[Video] [Filename (path)]=[H:\Series\]now make add an item, make it an expression and call it Serie: put this in the expression:

Code: [Select]

listitem([Filename (name)],0,/,)another item, also an expression, call it season and add this:

Code: [Select]

listitem([Filename (name)],1,/,)and an other call it episode with

Code: [Select]

removeright(listitem([Filename (name)],2,/,),4)now you have a view in Theater View that calculates the names. this can be finetuned and made usable for some more formats i guess. and you could also do it via calculated libraryfields instead of the view items.

expression can be fun.

 
gab

[Daydream]

expression can be fun.

True that. But I hope you know this is not the way to do it. Theater View is a 10ft interface, supposed to work on an HTPC. The moment you have to start writing code to get where you want something is very wrong.

[gappie]

True that. But I hope you know this is not the way to do it. Theater View is a 10ft interface, supposed to work on an HTPC. The moment you have to start writing code to get where you want something is very wrong.

yeah..sure.. but i also said:

in the mean time

.
its not about writing code, its just making a view to show what you want. when you dont want to make views, use the dvd part of mc and stop using bittorents, or is that the next thing you want to do via thv.

 
gab

[rick.ca]

I don't understand why we have to have this kind of arguments when we basically want the same thing done.

I think the reason is perfectly clear. You believe all conceivable computing needs should be addressed by one application. I prefer to use the best available tool for the job. In the abstract, neither view is right or wrong. But you're constantly whining that MC does not do what you need it to do. I'm getting the job done, I'm making good use of many wonderful features that do exist, and I'm very happy with the results. I'm also happy to see MC evolve and take on more of the tasks that produce these results, but I see no need to suffer in the meantime.

This doesn't mean I see any reason to withhold my opinion about what direction MC development should take. And generally speaking, I'll argue strenuously it should not attempt to do everything. To illustrate... I use MC instead of WMC or other alternatives. I don't need to explain why here. For exactly the same reasons, I use Directory Opus instead of Windows Explorer. Now what do you think my opinion is about the idea MC should become a file manager? It's about the same as my opinion about DO becoming a media manager—the idea is absurd. I don't mind MC doing file management tasks—having some overlap in capabilities gives me choices and makes it easier to use them together. But (for just one example) MC doesn't have a regex file renamer that allows me to rename batches of downloaded files to a consistent format with the click of a button.

When a new feature is suggested, I am inclined to point out how the need might be addressed with existing features. I'm sorry if you think I'm being argumentative and unfair—but I'm not going to stop. Even if you don't consider my suggestions helpful, others might. They will also counter the false impression the program is completely deficient and incapable of handling the situation the suggested feature is meant to address. And if pointing out alternatives weakens the case for the new feature, that's as it should be. Even if the suggestion is worthy of implementation, the developers also need to prioritize the many requests they receive. I imagine the discussion of pros and cons and existing alternatives is just as useful to them as the suggestion itself.

[JimH]

Rick, MrHaugen,

Both of you could use the backspace a little more often.  Just make your point without getting personal.

Whiners.... (just kidding)

[rick.ca]

Theater View is a 10ft interface, supposed to work on an HTPC. The moment you have to start writing code to get where you want something is very wrong.

I disagree. Working "out of the box" is nice, but I'm sure the reason most of us prefer MC to other media managers is that it's flexible and configurable. The only thing that is "very wrong" is having no way to get to where you want—as so very capably demonstrated by most Microsoft products.

[rick.ca]

Both of you could use the backspace a little more often.

Yes, I know. Believe it or not, my backspace has been heavily used, but somehow missed that one. 

[Daydream]

I disagree. Working "out of the box" is nice, but I'm sure the reason most of us prefer MC to other media managers is that it's flexible and configurable.

I'm not so sure, the concept MC pushes these days is not very clear, in my opinion. For some (long) time it was powerful database features, powerful ways to do things (expressions) etc. Nowadays the import routine has been dumbed down to the opposite extreme of past options, and advanced features for dealing with video files are not coming.

The fact that other users picked up on some of those tasks it's the effect of that, and it's creating a micro-system of relationships that is somewhat dubious in nature (to me) and may set an undesired trend - replace (or fork) functionality instead of complementing it.

I only have one personal interest with MC and that is skinning and everything that derives from it. For the rest I'm looking at the global impact. So I have no problem with complex expressions or expressions in general to achieve something, even for videos. Is just that generically that shouldn't be the out of the box experience. Complexity and skills should be put to work to make things more streamlined, not to be passed along as the whole book - "here, learn this for next 3 months and you can do everything after. BTW, there is no other way." You can't sell that. You can't teach it either - there will be another 3000 posts about how to do what.

Again, in general, not anything pointed to anybody. And Gappie I'll give it a try to your expressions .

[gappie]

i hope the OP, silentmonolith, is still following this thread. 

 
gappie

[silentmonolith]

i hope the OP, silentmonolith, is still following this thread.  

 
gappie

lol, yep, I'm still around. I never imagined  this topic would stir up so much passion. lol. Conclusion? River MC has powerful music library features...not so powerful when it comes to videos (unless you're a code master ). Thanks to these posts I've discovered XBMC and I was quite impressed with its video management features.

[MrHaugen]

And Gappie I'll give it a try to your expressions

Same here. Thanks for the examples. Seems to do some of the things I'm looking for.

When it comes to the rest of the discussion, I'll back out. I don't think it helps to repet my self any more