Collection naming question

[Happy2Play 8224]

But that still would only apply to "Group items into collections" option, if you unchecked that option all the items would still be visible.  But I guess it is still about the view you are looking at this from.

[Gilgamesh_48 942]

@Luke @cayars I just tested and it does hide the collection if everything inside is hidden BUT that is not the behavior that I need.

As you know it is possible to have movies in multiple collections and, when using auto box sets there are some collections created that do not make sense to me or contain movies that I do not want in a collection with the other movies that are in the collection but I do want to be able to see the movies.

@cayars showed me a way, using a "NOSHOW" tag, that would allow me to use auto box sets and hide the collections I do not wish to see but that does not work. In this case it does not make sense that you cannot hide a collection just because something inside is not hidden.

If there were another way to hide a collection then that would be fine but there seems no other way. I would REALLY like to be able to hide some collections and not some others with most of all the same content inside.

This would also be fixed for me if there were a choice as to how collections are displayed for each collection as I have requested in a feature request recently.

I know that not everyone wants this much control over how libraries can be browsed BUT it would sure be handy for many people I believe if there were choices as to how collections are displayed or not displayed without having to hide the contents.

Thanks for looking at this and it does seem that using tags and parental controls is the least intrusive method so far suggested as it would only mean allowing collections to be hidden regardless of the content's status.

[Gilgamesh_48 942]

3 hours ago, Happy2Play said:

But that still would only apply to "Group items into collections" option, if you unchecked that option all the items would still be visible.  But I guess it is still about the view you are looking at this from.

But I do NOT want it to apply globally. I want most collections displayed just the way they are but I want some to display the collection and their contents and some to display just the contents and some to hide both contents and the collection itself.

Mainly it is about "choice." The administrator of a server should have a choice about how each collection is displayed to each user and either collection tags (easiest) or a change to how collections can be displayed would allow that.

This failure to honor parental controls for collections is a bug. It may be an intentional bug but it is none the less a bug and, if it is intentional, it is poorly thought out and needs to be fixed. 

Fixing this bug would expand not reduce the functionality of Emby and I want more flexibility at almost all times.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Gilgamesh_48

[Gilgamesh_48 942]

Is there any official response as to weather this bug will be addressed or not?

This is a big bug in how parental controls work it should be fixed so that it actually works as it should. Parental controls should allow any item with the correct fields available to be hidden by the use of parental controls. 

I find it strange that the current behavior could in any way be considered correct.

[Gilgamesh_48 942]

On 8/6/2020 at 11:41 AM, Gilgamesh_48 said:

Is there any official response as to weather this bug will be addressed or not?

This is a big bug in how parental controls work it should be fixed so that it actually works as it should. Parental controls should allow any item with the correct fields available to be hidden by the use of parental controls. 

I find it strange that the current behavior could in any way be considered correct.

I guess that Emby has no interest in making parental controls work as they should. It clearly is not considered at all important by Emby.

@cayars has a very good method of hiding some collections and not others and that method does not even impact any other part of Emby making it nearly perfect. The only problem is that it does not work because Emby has chosen to make it not work and not allow collections to follow parental controls like every other part of Emby does.

This is the first time I have been disappointed by Emby's response to a reported bug/issue without giving a good explanation as to why the apparently improper behavior is believed to be correct. I hope Emby's lack of interest in this parental control bug is an aberration and not a sign of Emby shoving their heads in the sand, as Plex does, to avoid seeing that which does not conform to their vision of a perfect Emby,

I know I cannot have everything I want but previously I at least received a coherent argument as to why what I felt was a bug was not or why a feature could not/would not be implemented.

Maybe it is, in this case, that Emby knows this is a bug and has a great reluctance to admit it.

All I want from this is for some collections to be able to be hidden and others to be shown. Parental controls, by tags, would make it easy but that seems to be unable to be understood by the developers. If there was a field added to the metadata for collections that could hide a collection that would also work but there would need to be some way to unhide a hidden collection.

The simple solution seems to be for collections to correctly follow parental controls.

[Carlo 4329]

It likely never occurred to the Devs we would use the feature this way but it's a natural progression of using tags to hide things elsewhere like individual TV Channels, specific TV Show episodes (not just the whole show), etc.  I'm of the belief if the item allows editing the TAGs then it should fall under parental security.  Same for any individual items if in a grouping of some type like playlists, collections, multi-versions.

[Gilgamesh_48 942]

This flaw in the parental control operation is still not addressed by the developers. It is a BUG because collections cannot be hidden using parental controls like every other type of content can be.

It is VERY disappointing that official Emby ignores this bug.

The official silence is deafening.

[rbjtech 4218]

If I create a test user - set them with parental controls of PG-13. 

When I login with that user -

a) only see titles PG-13 and below 

b) only see Collections with content PG-13 and below.

c) if one (or more) of the items in a collection is PG-13+, then it is missing from the collection.

d) If I edit the metadata on a Collection itself to PG-13+, then it doesn't show at all(but the movies contained within it (PG-13) do.

 

I believe this works as intended - Am I missing something ?

 

edit - yes I am , just re-read the thread - I guess you are referring to honouring TAG's as opposed to Rating.  I'll do some more digging ..

 

Edited August 24, 2020 by rbjtech

[Gilgamesh_48 942]

19 minutes ago, rbjtech said:

edit - yes I am , just re-read the thread - I guess you are referring to honouring TAG's as opposed to Rating.  I'll do some more digging ..

Yes. For me honoring tags for parental controls is at least as important as ratings because it gives me a higher degree of control. 

Tags for parental control works in movies, TV and music but it does not work for collections. I hope it is just an oversite.

[Gilgamesh_48 942]

Just to be through I tested again with a collection with a parental rating of "X" and put several movies with varied ratings from "PG" to "NC17" in it and I created a user with parental restriction of "R" and then found that user could view that collection and everything inside it. 

That is a user with a restriction at "NC17" could view a collection rated "XXX" just because some movies in it were rated below "NC17'." I do not think the content of a collection should override the collection's rating. 

That shows that not only "Tags" do not work but regular parental controls do not work as well.

This is a BUG that Emby has, so far, been unwilling or unable to address and there has been no official response at all.

[Happy2Play 8224]

It is do to a collection not being a real item it is a virtual item made up of multiple real items, Collections can never truly have a parental value even if you personally assign one.  So it can not be a bug if it is designed that way.  But hey everyone has a different opinion.

Even if you could hide the collection with a higher Parental value, couldn't the user just select ungroup to still see all the item in the library as they are of a lower value?

 

[Gilgamesh_48 942]

Just now, Happy2Play said:

Even if you could hide the collection with a higher Parental value, couldn't the user just select ungroup to still see all the item in the library as they are of a lower value?

Of course they could. If you remember the original purpose of this whole discussion is to be able to hide a single collection while showing others. For me this is really needed in the regular view. The collection could still be shown in the collections view. 

I just want a way to selectively hide a collection. 

I use the auto collection plugin and it creates a few collections that simply have no meaning for me. 

Any of the following would solve my needs.

1. Tags working as they should in collections.

2. A field in a collection's metadata that says "Hide me"

3. A way to make the contents of one collection visible while keeping other collection's contents hidden.

Also if parental controls are not supposed to work on collections why are there fields for parental controls in the collection's metadata.

Your argument that "collections" are not real is rather absurd. Collections are quite real and very useful. I simply want them to be more useful.

Actually I believe that there should be a way to make any collection visible/invisible when "group items into collections" is chosen or at least to show items and the collection on an individual collection basis.

Note: Plex is able to do this correctly. Right now Plex is better at handling collections. I guess they have to win at something but I really think Emby could increase the usefulness of collections by making them just a bit more flexible.

It seems that having Emby correctly handle collection's parental controls would just be easier than other solutions. Not better just easier.

[rbjtech 4218]

 

20 hours ago, Gilgamesh_48 said:

That shows that not only "Tags" do not work but regular parental controls do not work as well.

This is a BUG that Emby has, so far, been unwilling or unable to address and there has been no official response at all.

I cannot re-produce this behaviour in my quick test below.

20 hours ago, rbjtech said:

If I create a test user - set them with parental controls of PG-13. 

When I login with that user -

a) only see titles PG-13 and below 

b) only see Collections with content PG-13 and below.

c) if one (or more) of the items in a collection is PG-13+, then it is missing/unavailable from the collection.

d) If I edit the metadata on a Collection itself to PG-13+, then it doesn't show at all(but the movies contained within it (PG-13) do.

 

ie I can set a rating on a collection and it it honoured (independently from the collection content),  I can set a rating on individual items within a collection and they are not shown.  

So parental control for collections appear (for me) to work as designed - I haven't got around to looking at the TAG situation yet.

 

[Gilgamesh_48 942]

1 hour ago, rbjtech said:

 

I cannot re-produce this behaviour in my quick test below.

ie I can set a rating on a collection and it it honoured (independently from the collection content),  I can set a rating on individual items within a collection and they are not shown.  

So parental control for collections appear (for me) to work as designed - I haven't got around to looking at the TAG situation yet.

 

@Luke has said that it is not possible to hide a collection by parental rating unless all items within the collection would be hidden.

On 8/2/2020 at 4:09 PM, Luke said:

Collection visibility is determined by the visibility of the items inside the collection, and in the future, sharing with specific users.

So that means if you have access to at least one item in the collection, then you have access to the collection.

I think that is in direct contradiction of what you say you are seeing. The way I understand it is that you can hide a collection if and only in every item in that collection is also hidden. That is exactly what my testing and @cayars' testing seem to confirm. It is not the behavior I and @cayars want but it is the way it is designed to work.

I am not holding my breath for this to get fixed because, for some reason, @Luke and company believe it is correct as it is. I disagree strongly but it is their software not mine and their opinions are really the only ones that count in the long run. I believe that tagging collections and denying that tag to a user should make that collection hidden from standard browsing for that user but the Emby Gods are in disagreement with that idea and it is up to them what is really "right."

They always answer my prayers but, sometimes, the answer is no.