Print

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

[iamfunny]

Hi,
Wondering if there is any way to move all the Album Art and JRSidecar.xml files to a specific folder.
I had all my movies nicely organised in a single folder and now the actual movies are the minority file in there

[Scolex]

Not that I am aware of, what I did was go into my folder and sort by type, selected all of the jpg and xml files, right clicked, selected properties and ticked the hidden attribute.

[iamfunny]

Thanks.
I would do this except that I have hidden files set to show.
If I just delete all these files do I lose all the data in my library or what is the impact?

[Scolex]

You lose the cover art for supported types if you don't have the save image in file setting checked, you will lose cover art and meta data for file types that don't support embedded tags and/or tags that are not native to the standard structure.

[glynor]

If you don't want MC to store metadata about your video files in the sidecar XML files, you can turn that off.

Options -> General -> Import and Tagging -> Store Tags in External Sidecar files

You can also delete the Sidecar files without impacting MC's Library at all.  Those files are useful for exchanging metadata with other copies of MC and with other applications (and are a backup if your Library gets totally hosed).  MC doesn't use them itself in regular operation, as it stores everything in the Library.

They store the "cover art" for Video next to the files because otherwise there was tons of problems with filename conflicts (it didn't used to be this way) and that was the simplest solution to all the problems.

[iamfunny]

Thanks for this.
Deleted all the other files in the directory.
Seems a really messy way of managing it. To be adding two extra files for every file that it reads just makes the actual file you care about become the minority file in the folder.

[JustinChase]

Deleted all the other files in the directory.
Seems a really messy way of managing it. To be adding two extra files for every file that it reads just makes the actual file you care about become the minority file in the folder.

I and others have requested that we be granted the ability to store these files in a separate location, as you've requested.  So far, our wish has not been granted.

The clutter you describe is my biggest gripe also.  I ended up turning off the .xml file creation, but still have to live with .jpg and .edl files mixed with my videos.  Like you, it annoys me that my videos, which I attempt to keep separate from other file types, are the minority in the folders meant only for video.

The reasons given for doing it this way are to prevent files stored in different locations creating/using a file with the exact same name in the 'communal' folder.  There are ways to prevent this, such as shortened or modified file names, or mimicking the folder structure of the actual media they are associated with.  So far, it has not been a desire of JRiver to modify this.

I don't bring it up often, but the occasional reminder that many users wish for this ability is meant as a friendly bump of the feature request 

[rick.ca]

I hope the developers will continue to be unmoved by pleas to refrain from using the file system as it's meant to be used. There's no reason files directly association with one another should not be stored at the same location. 'Messy' and 'clutter' are in the eyes of the beholder—one who chooses to look at these files (rather than filtering them) and make that judgment. The developers have more important issues and a reputation to be concerned about.

I don't know where else this could matter but a file manager. The screenshots illustrate how I deal with this in Directory Opus. And by 'deal with', I don't mean a 'problem', but an opportunity to view multiple useful variations of a file list with one click...

[iamfunny]

That's great if you have a $70 file manager but I dont manage files for a profession so am not willing to spend that type of money on a file manager.
I dont think its unreasonable to expect software not to mess up my directories - I dont know any other software that I use that suddenly fills any directory I ask it to monitor or manage with a ton of other files.
They all seem to be able to easily manage whatever I ask them and leave it looking how I set it up.
There's a reason they all have app data folders - so they can keep their data there.

[rick.ca]

That's great if you have a $70 file manager but I dont manage files for a profession so am not willing to spend that type of money on a file manager.

You don't have to. That just happens to be what I use. You can filter files with Windows Explorer (or other cheaper or free file managers) as well. The point is, if you can't be bothered, then it can't be that important. It's a matter for a file manager to handle, not an application which is saving files in the most sensible location.

I dont think its unreasonable to expect software not to mess up my directories...

It's a file system. What makes these 'my directories'? Even if you choose to see them that way, it doesn't make sense to install a program for managing those files and then dictate it must not save sidecar files.

There's a reason they all have app data folders - so they can keep their data there.

No, the main reason for those is to keep data separate from program files. Media is data, and it's perfectly reasonable to save directly related meta data beside them.

[iamfunny]

Guess we're all entitled to our own opinions and in my case I'm just lucky that all the other software I use agrees with me.
The files are Media Center specific and no other program that I know of natively uses them and so they should be treated as native files and not generic ones.

You say my data is the same - well its not - Its the content I actually care about and I use multiple programs to manage it.
If each program decided it wanted to save its own files to store information in right next to the files themselves then my directories would be a HUGE mess with my actual content relegated to a minority.
Saving a single folder.jpg for a music album makes sense - its adding a single file to multiple files and its a file that is recognised within my OS and also by numerous other applications.

If these .xml files are the same then I apologise but I'm pretty sure they aren't at all.

[rick.ca]

If these .xml files are the same then I apologise but I'm pretty sure they aren't at all.

They're unlikely to be usable by other applications, which is one reason they're optional. If they were usable, that's where the other application would expect to find them.

[glynor]

They're unlikely to be usable by other applications, which is one reason they're optional. If they were usable, that's where the other application would expect to find them.

I use them with other applications.

They're XML.  They're easy to parse.

[struct]

I appreciate the frustration, but some type of sidecar file (nfo, tbn, etc) it is pretty much the default way that most multimedia programs handle this problem (WMC, XBMC, others?).  The "normal" structure is one movie per dirctory and then all the covers, fanart, subtitles etc are put there.  I only say this because my brother was doing everything in the one directory (as I think you are) and it took him a bit to change, but I think he is happier now and it has allowed him to experiment with other software with a bit more ease.

TVShows seem to "normally" be all shows for a season in a directory, again allowing season art, etc to be placed here.

I have found having this structure and simplicity useful on occasion when trying to information from one type of program to another.  If they both handle these simple xml type files, basic translation is sometimes easy.

Craig

[rick.ca]

They're XML.  They're easy to parse.

Well, yes—but oh so messy!