Jump to content

[FEATURE REQUEST] - Ability to save People images in media location (.actors)


johnodon

Recommended Posts

johnodon

I have to imagine that this has been requested before but the only place I can really find it is here:  http://emby.media/community/index.php?/topic/8830-xbmc-nfo/&do=findComment&comment=243547  Even still, I think that thread only requests that Emby look at the .actors folder for metadata.

 

Since so many of us here use Kodi, I would love to have the ability for the Emby scraper to save People images to the media location (specifically in the .actors folder such as \\server\Movies\Rudy (1993).actors\Sean_Astin.jpg).

 

John

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this is how Kodi does it but it just seems like a terrible solution to me.  I guess, theoretically, you could have different pictures for each actor based on character but, where in the world are those going to come from?  The duplication of images would be massive.

 

When you choose an actor to look at all their items in your library, what picture is supposed to be used?  When you refresh metadata for an actor, where is it supposed to put their picture...?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't this result in a lot of redundant data?

 

I guess if the metadata source included actual cast photos for the specific movie you would get a better experience - but what metadata sources have decent coverage for that.

 

Derp: what ebr said! I should have been faster!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

johnodon

I know this is how Kodi does it but it just seems like a terrible solution to me.  I guess, theoretically, you could have different pictures for each actor based on character but, where in the world are those going to come from?  The duplication of images would be massive.

 

When you choose an actor to look at all their items in your library, what picture is supposed to be used?  When you refresh metadata for an actor, where is it supposed to put their picture...?

 

I'm curious...how does the Emby for Kodi plugin handle this?  When enabled, does Kodi still use local images, or, does the plugin redirect to the Emby location?

 

If the latter, I may revisit the plugin.

 

As a side note, I don't use actor thumbs for looking up films.  I only use them for the aesthetics.

 

John

Edited by johnodon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious...how does the Emby for Kodi plugin handle this?  When enabled, does Kodi still use local images, or, does the plugin redirect to the Emby location?

 

 

I dunno.  @@Angelblue05.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pünktchen

I like to see this feature as well.

Just for the case of rebuild the server database without hitting online sources!

It doesn't matter if it's the same actor image in many folders, harddrive space is really not a problem nowadays.

I think we wouldn't have those many "missing actor" posts here in the forum if Emby has implemented reading and writing of actor images and metadata alongside the media folders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deathsquirrel

I see the need to be able to backup actor images so they don't need downloaded again on server rebuild, but this not a good way to accomplish that.  If the server backup plugin doesn't back these up that would be a good enhancement there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MrWebsmith

+1 for a version that prevents a long rebuild of these.. like deathsquirrel is saying.. im moving to a new server and the people rebuild and chapter image rebuilds are taking FOREVER.. would love to be able to "point" these at a location/db/file/whatever that i can backup/transfer to the next server build and speed this process along

 

so that 1 +1 for people.. and another +1 for chapter images.... i would be find personally storing these with the media or wherever

Edited by MrWebsmith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angelblue05

I dunno. @@Angelblue05.

We use Emby resources for everything. Actors are provided by your server, and we just give Kodi the link to them as any other images such as posters, backdrops, etc.

 

With the add-on, we take over Kodi's database. So you really end up with Kodi as an excellent front end player, and Emby as a complete backed for metadata and artwork.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the need to be able to backup actor images so they don't need downloaded again on server rebuild, but this not a good way to accomplish that.  If the server backup plugin doesn't back these up that would be a good enhancement there.

 

+1 for a version that prevents a long rebuild of these.. like deathsquirrel is saying.. im moving to a new server and the people rebuild and chapter image rebuilds are taking FOREVER.. would love to be able to "point" these at a location/db/file/whatever that i can backup/transfer to the next server build and speed this process along

 

so that 1 +1 for people.. and another +1 for chapter images.... i would be find personally storing these with the media or wherever

 

This solution already exists.

 

Just point your "Metadata" folder to a network share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pünktchen

A personal backup is one thing, another would be you can take a movie folder with all images and metadata to friends and family...

and tada... all is there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happy2Play

 Currently my People folder is over 50GB.  Changing this to actors per movie would what at least quadruple at a minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angelblue05

I believe Kodi saves compressed artwork, while maintaining a good quality for your resolution.

 

With emby, I can understand saving at maximum resolution because it serves different clients.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happy2Play

I can understand that, but if I have 60 movies by Nicolas Cage why would I want 60 images of him? 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angelblue05

Exactly, that's why I'm saying if it's something Kodi does, it is because it compresses artwork so you end up using less space.

 

For emby, it would never be a viable option in my opinion. Just the space it would take...

 

Anyway :) I don't really care about actors picture - just main ones. I don't even like that Emby sometimes put a picture for less important characters/directors/writers lol. I'm ok with using imdb to see who played what.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by Angelblue05
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway :) I don't really care about actors picture - just main ones. I don't even like that Emby sometimes put a picture for less important characters/directors/writers lol. I'm ok with using imdb to see who played what.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The server give you the option to whatever you want to download any of these.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angelblue05

The server give you the option to whatever you want to download any of these.

Ohhh I just saw the option, it must be newish because I've never seen it before. I've just unchecked the ones I didn't want. Thanks! :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Koleckai Silvestri

As an option, I have no problem with this. Options are good and give the software suite depth. I would never use it. One of the reasons I stopped using XBMC was the duplication of data everywhere. It isn't efficient or easy to handle.

 

Still deleting extra folders from when Emby started using NFO as it's primary format. Just a big terrible mess.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Options are good and give the software suite depth.

 

No, they aren't.  And this is why:

 

 

I would never use it.

 

 

And that would be the case for a large majority of people.  I've been on this rant before but more options are not a good thing.  They complicate everything when we want to be going towards "it just works" instead :).

 

But, that is really neither here nor there.  This design (putting actor images in with the media) probably is what it is because it dates back to a time when no one thought about actually having the people as entities you could manage data for themselves.

 

We do have that concept and, therefore, storing multiple copies of their images inside of every media item in which they appear is simply not a practical approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deathsquirrel

No, they aren't.  And this is why:

 

 

 

And that would be the case for a large majority of people.  I've been on this rant before but more options are not a good thing.  They complicate everything when we want to be going towards "it just works" instead :).

 

But, that is really neither here nor there.  This design (putting actor images in with the media) probably is what it is because it dates back to a time when no one thought about actually having the people as entities you could manage data for themselves.

 

We do have that concept and, therefore, storing multiple copies of their images inside of every media item in which they appear is simply not a practical approach.

 

Options confuse the hell out of people. I manage tech support for a product that has a plethora of options.  There are oftentimes 2-3 ways to accomplish the same task.  The sheer volume of confusion and support questions generated by that design decision is appalling.

 

I'm a big of keeping things simple and testable. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Ian-Highlander

I really don't get why anyone would want to waste so much disk space (not to mention the un-necessary mess it makes of a file system) housing multiple copies of the same files to serve up as people images (presumably the people info in xml or nfo is also duplicated all over the place?), why on earth would anyone want that on their file system. I know one thing it would drive my OCD crazy  :lol:

 

Please please never do this Emby, or if you do, then make it an optional switch so the sensible ones amongst us can switch it off  :P

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Koleckai Silvestri

I hope as an option that the default would be off. A single library scan can create a mess that takes forever to deal with.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

For the next release and in the current beta, behavior is improved to help with this.

 

When scanning in new titles, even if you have existing metadata we'll still go out to the internet to try and pull in people information. 

 

Also, when opening individual person detail screens, there will be some on demand refreshing to attempt to fill in metadata for people that don't have any. 

  • Like 1
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...