Remove Photos feature

[AJV_20 57]

I know this might be controversial and maybe even odd to have a request to remove features but clearly the Photos functionality is not a priority and honestly there are other apps that do a much better job at it.

The main reason why I think this feature should be removed is so the team can focus on more important things. There are so many feature request from many years ago that would be a lot more useful but it seems like the team is spread thin with supporting so many things. 
 

There are other things I think that should get removed but I know a lot of people use them so I guess is worth keeping but sometimes it helps to trim the fat. Quality over quantity.

[PuffyToesToo 346]

I'd like to respectfully disagree. I rely on this for my elderly parents. An all in one place for them to go to, where we can share photos or personal videos with them. Keeping everything all in one place simplifies their experience and makes it less complicated for them. Teaching them new methods or devices is difficult at best. Please don't assume everyone has the same capabilities or preferences that you may have.

[Happy2Play 9780]

Am a little confused for this request as it is as simple as not adding a photo library, correct?

[FrostByte 5392]

4 hours ago, Happy2Play said:

Am a little confused for this request as it is as simple as not adding a photo library, correct?

I'm not thinking that is the issue.  I thought they wanted it removed so the devs can concentrate on other things and because there are other apps that do photos "much better" and to reduce the size of Emby or "fat'.

[AlastorSitri 2]

Highly disagree. EMBY is easily the best photo manager if you need a client beyond web/mobile and is the #1 reason I use EMBY over Plex. The entire concept of scrapping it would be absurd, and you can just look at Plex as a key example to the response of them scrapping photo support over the years. 

I could make the same argument with music and Live TV, as I would argue many more people use photo functionality vs those 2 functions. 

[MistD 32]

Immich (https://immich.app) is slowly becoming the best self-hosted photos / home videos solution out there and Emby is light years behind it.

Emby, outside of Movies / TV Shows and partially Music, delivers subpar and pretty stale experience for everything else.
You can clearly see that some of the library types are there just an afterthought or "ported" from other library types (see audiobooks with library settings clearly ported from the music library type)

So, why struggling the efforts on a gazillions subpar features rather than focus on just the "pillars" and made them EXCEPTIONALLY  well.

We need to understand that different media types require a TOTALLY different UI/UX and user experience, with a complete different features based on each media type. 
No,  Photos / Videos / Music / Audiobooks / Books / Recipes ... or the kitchen sink, they don't go together in the same interface, within the same app.

So, I fully agree 1000% with the OP. Let's start the "Make Emby Leaner" movement  .

In my opinion, Emby should focus on Video (movies / tv shows) and Music and that's it, and provide a TOP NOTCH experience with amazing features for both (dedicated apps included). 

1. Let Immich do Photos and Home Videos
2. Let Audiobookshelf do Audibooks and Books
3. Let Mealie do the Recipes (just sayin)
4. .... and so on

Edited December 23, 2024 by MistD
typo

[beckfield 173]

I'm a big 'Disagree' on this as well.  Photos and music are my primary reasons for using Emby, and Emby is the best solution I've found.  I share my libraries with family members, and they don't want to deal with two or three different apps to see my media.  Further, my most common use of Emby is to start a music playlist, then start a photo slideshow, so I have music and photos playing while I work around the house.  Can't do that with two apps on a Roku (or, I believe, on an AndroidTV device).  And Immich doesn't appear to have a Roku app.

Edited December 23, 2024 by beckfield

[beckfield 173]

On 12/16/2024 at 12:17 AM, AJV_20 said:

Photos functionality is not a priority

Not sure why you say this.  I've reported a few issues regarding photos that were fixed fairly quickly.

[Guest]

I'm really shocked people are using an app that is primarily meant to play videos as a photo viewer. I'd recommend maybe using something purpose built.

[justinrh 260]

9 hours ago, generic345 said:

I'm really shocked people are using an app that is primarily meant to play videos as a photo viewer. I'd recommend maybe using something purpose built.

But maybe a simple photo viewer is sufficient for some users.  I know I don't view my photos very often and when I do Emby does just fine.  For anyone that needs more sophistication, they are, of course, free to use any other app to suit that purpose.

[Guest]

The middle ground, imo, is to remove bloat like photos from the core app and make it a plugin. People that want a leaner app without bloat win, people that want bloat win.

[justinrh 260]

This is a plausible idea.  However, what "bloat" are you incurring?  What problem would removing photos solve for you?

[Guest]

It's a feature that I would wager most users don't use. Therefore, it's bloat. Could make it a default plugin that ships installed and those that don't use it can remove it. Doesn't solve any "problem" but it makes the app more modular and removes features for those that don't want it.

Edited December 27, 2024 by generic345

[beckfield 173]

On 12/24/2024 at 10:00 PM, generic345 said:

I'm really shocked people are using an app that is primarily meant to play videos as a photo viewer.  I'd recommend maybe using something purpose built.

You might want to check into the history of Emby.  From its inception, its purpose has been to organize and play/view a variety of multimedia files, including photos, so it is purpose-built.  There is no truth to the idea that it was ever "primarily" meant to play videos.  I, for one, appreciate having a unified app for my photos, music, videos, and audiobooks.  For those who are looking for an app exclusively for videos, perhaps it is they who should look for a "purpose-built" app.

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, beckfield said:

You might want to check into the history of Emby.  From its inception, its purpose has been to organize and play/view a variety of multimedia files, including photos, so it is purpose-built.  There is no truth to the idea that it was ever "primarily" meant to play videos.  I, for one, appreciate having a unified app for my photos, music, videos, and audiobooks.  For those who are looking for an app exclusively for videos, perhaps it is they who should look for a "purpose-built" app.

Orrrrr you could get over it and accept that it's mainly used for videos now. My proposal means you get to keep your functionality, unchanged, and users like me get a leaner app without bloat.

[Clackdor 109]

30 minutes ago, generic345 said:

Orrrrr you could get over it and accept that it's mainly used for videos now. My proposal means you get to keep your functionality, unchanged, and users like me get a leaner app without bloat.

The only time you really have to see it in the UI is when setting up a new library.

What you're proposing would also contribute to more dev time spent on a feature that you see no value in just for the sake of "removing bloat" That time could probably be better spent on improving or implementing a feature that you do care about.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both the plugin approach as well as something being part of the core code. I'm sure the devs have their reasons for taking one approach vs the other for certain features.

Also, IMO if there's any feature that should be moved from the core code to a plugin it's Live TV. It's something I've personally never used. I'd also wager that it's probably one of the  most "bloated" features in the core code. I'm sure people that do use it wouldn't be too happy if others were proposing it should be removed altogether though.

[MistD 32]

Even if Emby's "heritage" is to be an all-purpose app, it does a pretty bad job keeping that "heritage".

It's a matter of focused development and allocating resources where it matters when you want to deliver THE BEST product and experience. 
If you're doing gazillion things at once, some of them subpar, it's obvious that you don't have resources to deliver the best experience top to bottom.

Ok, some of the user will prefer an "all-in-one" solution, that means they aren't "heavy" consumers of any of the media type, so they are fine with having just basic functionality for everything.

If you are rising above entry-level into any of the media type (photos, music, audiobooks etc) you will notice that having a basic, sub-par "all-in-one" solution doesn't cut it anymore, because the experience it's just bad, featureless etc.

We can dissect each media type and prove that it needs dedicated efforts and focused UI/UX for any consumption that rises above the absolute minimal, basic level.

Emby It's just a nice movie server, that's it. Music comes with a "good enough" mindset and everything else (photos, audiobooks etc) it's meh ...

Edited December 31, 2024 by MistD
typo