Jump to content

JPG Images in Library View? Can it be Disabled?


Pete90291

Recommended Posts

Pete90291

After the last Server update, saved JPG images now show in the library and play as slideshows? I would rather show only video files.. (avi,mpg,etc.)

Can this be disabled?

Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In what kind of library?  I think we expanded the home videos type to also support photos because many people mix the two and it wasn't intuitive to have to define your home video folder (with also photos) as photos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete90291

I believe that is it.. It a defined "Home video" folder both movies and JPG now show.. Can I change it back to only Video files?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bfir3

In what kind of library?  I think we expanded the home videos type to also support photos because many people mix the two and it wasn't intuitive to have to define your home video folder (with also photos) as photos.

 

Does Emby still create images for the video items in a Home Video library? I'm guessing this is accounted for and only image items that do not have an associated video item (matching filename) are shown in the library as individual items.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can you give us some examples of the file names? maybe show a screenshot of an entire folder? thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete90291

Example:

Home Video (defined folder)

Garden Movie.mp4 (video) (always showed along with thumbnail)

Garden Movie 1.jpg (jpg) (didn't used to show, now shows in folder along with .mp4 file)

Garden Movie 2.jpg (jpg) (didn't used to show, now shows in folder along with .mp4 file)

Garden Movie 3.jpg (jpg) (didn't used to show, now shows in folder along with .mp4 file)

Garden Movie 4.jpg (jpg) (didn't used to show, now shows in folder along with .mp4 file)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, yea we don't currently have settings for this, but it's possible for a future release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea because users have been setting up home video libraries and then reporting problems when their photos don't show up. Even though it is a new change i think it is the right default behavior.

 

In the meantime, until we have a setting, the photos won't show up if they're named in a way such that the video "owns the image". For example, Garden Movie-backdrop1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete90291

Yea because users have been setting up home video libraries and then reporting problems when their photos don't show up. Even though it is a new change i think it is the right default behavior.

 

In the meantime, until we have a setting, the photos won't show up if they're named in a way such that the video "owns the image". For example, Garden Movie-backdrop1.jpg

Thank you.I'll try to figure something out  :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete90291

Just noticed..

I was going to create a new Library Folder for Videos to correct the issues and noticed that there IS a folder type for PHOTOS??

It seem redundant to have photos show up in both the "Home Video" folder as well as a "Photos" folder? 

Should I be creating another type ie: usenet so that Videos only will show?

Thanks

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lexisdude

So that I am clear on this issue: the home videos is or is not going to also display pictures? I understand the desire to have home pictures/videos all together in one slot; but this can also cause a cascading issue for those that use the home videos for videos which are set up as filtered videos that need to be indexed as regular movies - but not included in the main sorts/indexes/new media. Perhaps I am just behind the times but this is how I have my library set up to separate things.

Doesn't unset make any media type displayable?

 

And I am not sure if i am reading this right but merging "pictures" and "home video" just does not seem like a wise move especially given for people that have separate porn picture libraries. Just not sure would be a good match mixed with videos of the kids. :P    But that's my thought

Edited by lexisdude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

bfir3

And I am not sure if i am reading this right but merging "pictures" and "home video" just does not seem like a wise move especially given for people that have separate porn picture libraries. Just not sure would be a good match mixed with videos of the kids. :P    But that's my thought

 

I also agree. All existing library types are locked to a single type of content right now except Unset which seems reasonable to me. What is the distinction being made that puts Home images with Home videos? Why should these automatically be grouped together and override default library behavior? If you really want to merge the photos with the videos for "Home Videos" libraries, why not just have an option for the type of library to "Show images as separate library items" or something like that?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lexisdude

I also agree. All existing library types are locked to a single type of content right now except Unset which seems reasonable to me. What is the distinction being made that puts Home images with Home videos? Why should these automatically be grouped together and override default library behavior? If you really want to merge the photos with the videos for "Home Videos" libraries, why not just have an option for the type of library to "Show images as separate library items" or something like that?

That brings up an interesting thought. Why not at library creation - instead of having all these various content types preset for each type of media library; why not set it up the creation to allow the user pick the content types they would like to be included. IE: Instead of having "Movies; Pictures; Home Movies; etc" to have the option to select or deselect what media types are available at the time of creation (video; music; pictures). We can rename the existing library to whatever we want anyhow - so allowing us to have the ability to filter each library by content sounds like more control for us and less frustration when changes are made.

 

Or probably more reasonable so that it does not interfere with the current architecture of how Emby uses the set libraries - to give us a single library type that will allow this and remove the redundant ones.

Edited by lexisdude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That brings up an interesting thought. Why not at library creation - instead of having all these various content types preset for each type of media library; why not set it up the creation to allow the user pick the content types they would like to be included. IE: Instead of having "Movies; Pictures; Home Movies; etc" to have the option to select or deselect what media types are available at the time of creation (video; music; pictures). We can rename the existing library to whatever we want anyhow - so allowing us to have the ability to filter each library by content sounds like more control for us and less frustration when changes are made.

 

Not all content types are compatible with each other.  This is why we have the content types in the first place - to allow us to better support specific types of content in terms of physical layout and features.  There is also a performance benefit.  If the server doesn't have to spend time trying to figure out what something is we can move through the items faster.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lexisdude

Not all content types are compatible with each other.  This is why we have the content types in the first place - to allow us to better support specific types of content in terms of physical layout and features.  There is also a performance benefit.  If the server doesn't have to spend time trying to figure out what something is we can move through the items faster.

 

I concur - I updated my original message because I did not take that into account. Perhaps just one library type that would allow this would be enough. Since we already have set ones; and unset ones - adding a single content library that would allow us to define the filters would be enough if it could be done. And by this I also mean including the instructions that any content placed into this directory structure be separate from the main layout - and exclusive to it's own library. Much like how pictures/home videos work - but with the ability to control what content is considered media when entering the library.

 

For example. If someone selects "video - pictures - and audio" ; the system looks at all pictures ; videos; and audio as media files and displays them like unset does. If someone selects "videos and audio" then any images such as "backdrop" or "folder" would be utilized as if it is in a normal video/audio directory.  Same goes with a single filter being used - in which case only that particular type would be considered media.

 

I am all for change and progress - but I just fail to see how altering the "home videos" to include pictures and changing the structure of what we are familiar with ; and the way the rest of the directories are structured to function is considered a step in the right direction. It has skewed my set up; and there is no optional library type for me to convert my existing libraries to. It also does not sound like I am alone in this.

 

At the very least - another library should have been created for those wanting to have video and pictures display together - rather than making a change to an existing library that others are currently using in a different way

Edited by lexisdude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

dcook

When you make these types of changes that have negative effects to existing users, can you not make them optional?

 

Instead of unilaterally deciding yourself that you want to have photos display in a home video library despite being able to setup a photo library properly all along.

 

I don't like how things keep changing for the worse and we have no way to "turn off" this new behavior 

 

 

Yea because users have been setting up home video libraries and then reporting problems when their photos don't show up. Even though it is a new change i think it is the right default behavior.

 

In the meantime, until we have a setting, the photos won't show up if they're named in a way such that the video "owns the image". For example, Garden Movie-backdrop1.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete90291

I agree, this new display format really makes the existing video directory cumbersome to navigate and nearly unuseable.. :(

at the very least we should have the option to turn off photos to only show videos.. or vise vera

 

 

I concur - I updated my original message because I did not take that into account. Perhaps just one library type that would allow this would be enough. Since we already have set ones; and unset ones - adding a single content library that would allow us to define the filters would be enough if it could be done. And by this I also mean including the instructions that any content placed into this directory structure be separate from the main layout - and exclusive to it's own library. Much like how pictures/home videos work - but with the ability to control what content is considered media when entering the library.

For example. If someone selects "video - pictures - and audio" ; the system looks at all pictures ; videos; and audio as media files and displays them like unset does. If someone selects "videos and audio" then any images such as "backdrop" or "folder" would be utilized as if it is in a normal video/audio directory.  Same goes with a single filter being used - in which case only that particular type would be considered media.

I am all for change and progress - but I just fail to see how altering the "home videos" to include pictures and changing the structure of what we are familiar with ; and the way the rest of the directories are structured to function is considered a step in the right direction. It has skewed my set up; and there is no optional library type for me to convert my existing libraries to. It also does not sound like I am alone in this.

At the very least - another library should have been created for those wanting to have video and pictures display together - rather than making a change to an existing library that others are currently using in a different way

Edited by Pete90291
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...