| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| pdavit |
Posted - 20 Aug 2004 : 04:52:19
The cover sequence system is very unreliable sometimes. Here is a problem I faced recently:
Import movie details for X-Men and then XMen2. Now the cover sequence is common for both movies and not movie specific. So if you select an XMen2 cover to be your default one by moving it first in sequence it will be considered as the first one also for X-Men (number one) by eXtreme Movie Manager. As a result of that, changing the sequence in one of the two movies applies the same sequence on the other one so it's not possible to have different covers for the two movies.
I had some other types of problems in the past by the automated numbering of movie covers that I cannot remember now. I would prefer a better cover sequence management in the future. Maybe an option to manually define the filename for each slot in the sequence individually can be more reliable although less automated.
It is also not very clear the fact that when you select a cover you don't actually select the cover itself but the slot it is located. So, if you use the left/right arrows the slot can hold another cover from the one initially selected! In addition the "Move at First Position" feature applies for the visible sequence only and does not place a cover to the very first position of the whole sequence in the list!
|
| 18 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| pdavit |
Posted - 19 Dec 2004 : 19:36:02
Alessio,
The promised improvement didn't make it to v3.0b1! :( |
| FreaKBrother |
Posted - 05 Sep 2004 : 18:07:28
quote:
Originally posted by pdavit
I hope I made myself clear this time! :)
Ok I didn't interpret it like that when I read your first post.
I guess I missunderstood you 
|
| pdavit |
Posted - 05 Sep 2004 : 02:45:16
quote:
Originally posted by FreaKBrother
Personally I think that it shouldn't use the title because it introduces a lot of problems like what should happen when you rename the movie title in the database? Should the program rename all the cover files?
If you stick to only the movieID then it's unique and doesn't change at all.
It looks as if we are wishing for different things here!
My initial suggestion had the purpose of using the MovieID as part of the covers' filenames just to overcome the problem of having the same covers present on movies with the same title but which consist of many parts.
You, on the other hand, are suggesting a method of having cover filenames that are movie dependent (by the use of just the MovieIDs) but not movie-detail (i.e. the title) dependent so that future changes and adjustment can be transparent and problem free.
While this is cool (letting aside any advantages and/or disadvantages), it's not the same feature request. I'm wishing for a separation between similar covers for different movies of the same series though, you are wishing for a separation between dynamically or manually adjusted movie details and their corresponding covers.
I hope I made myself clear this time! :) |
| FreaKBrother |
Posted - 02 Sep 2004 : 17:28:46
Ok I get it. I haven't done stuff like that with my covers so I didn't think of it
But as you wrote it would be nicer to have such functions integrated into XMM
instead of having to use Explorer or some other program.
Hey Alessio I guess we are a pain in the ass with all our requests  |
| Alessio Viti |
Posted - 02 Sep 2004 : 14:44:37
Yes Mawu, please update the wishlist, I will look it
Bye!
Alessio |
| Mawu |
Posted - 02 Sep 2004 : 13:14:24
@Freakbrother
I agree with you that the unique movieID is the best way to name the covers. But we have to take into account, that there also some advantages when you can identify the covers by movie title. When I for example will copy covers of serveral movies for a friend it is much easier to do that with windows explorer or a picture database like thumbsplus than with xMM (particularly for large collections). Maybe it's possible to extend the cover managment features in the following way: scroll bar instead of the navigation arrows, additional sort options, additional folder operations (create, copy, move, rename)etc. (puhhh, I think I have to update the wish list ).
By
Mawu
|
| FreaKBrother |
Posted - 02 Sep 2004 : 12:31:47
Can you explain because I don't understand when it would be necessary to find the files without the help from XMM 
I think that XMM is supposed to handle what the covers are called on the harddrive. If I need to then I use XMM to find it that's why I use a database to handle the data for me and making it easy to find.
Personally I think that it shouldn't use the title because it introduces a lot of problems like what should happen when you rename the movie title in the database? Should the program rename all the cover files?
If you stick to only the movieID then it's unique and doesn't change at all. |
| pdavit |
Posted - 02 Sep 2004 : 05:14:24
quote:
Originally posted by Alessio Viti
Yes, you are right, this is why I have set the cover's name like the movie's title, for better find it.
Set the cover's filename like the MovieID is a solution, I will think to this.
Well, that won't help in located a desirable cover easily. It will make the covers unique and solve the problem I mentioned but then it will be really hard to locate the necessary cover manually if needed. That's why I've suggested the MovieID as an additional filename detail, i.e. a prefix.
So we currently have this format:
Lord-of-the-Rings.jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_1.jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_2.jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_3.jpg
...and it could be changed to this (456 is the MovieID of the specific movie):
456_Lord-of-the-Rings.jpg
456_Lord-of-the-Rings_1.jpg
456_Lord-of-the-Rings_2.jpg
456_Lord-of-the-Rings_3.jpg
So, if all three Lord of the Rings movies are included in the database the covers will be distinctively separated.
Small problem with this approach is that covers will lose the alphabetical order in this way which some users may not find a welcoming change. An alternative can be to replace the prefix with a postfix. So the above list could look something like this:
Lord-of-the-Rings_[456].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_1_[456].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_2_[456].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_3_[456].jpg
Slight problem with the latter approach is that a filelist with all three LoTR movies will look like this (presumably that 567 and 678 are the MovieIDs for the remaining two movies):
Lord-of-the-Rings_[456].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_[567].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_[678].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_1_[456].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_1_[567].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_1_[678].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_2_[456].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_2_[567].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_2_[678].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_3_[456].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_3_[567].jpg
Lord-of-the-Rings_3_[678].jpg |
| Alessio Viti |
Posted - 31 Aug 2004 : 18:07:14
Yes, you are right, this is why I have set the cover's name like the movie's title, for better find it.
Set the cover's filename like the MovieID is a solution, I will think to this.
Thank you! |
| FreaKBrother |
Posted - 31 Aug 2004 : 15:00:04
When I think about it again I realize that my idea about MovieID+databasename in the filename really sucks since the databasename might change 
I don't think that it should use the movietitle in the filename since sometimes the titles also change and it will be hard to set up a good "cover handling system". Maybe it should only use MovieID since that is the only unique thing for every movie (two movies can't have the same MovieID) but still keep the option to set the name manually in case you want to share covers between two movies. And then keep the files in seperate folders for different databases instead.
I know that it will be harder to find the right one when you just browse the folder in Explorer, but that's the reason why I use a database program so it can handle that stuff for me so I don't have to. And if I need to know the filename then I can check in the database for the filename
|
| Alessio Viti |
Posted - 31 Aug 2004 : 13:38:53
Thank you Guys for all these suggestions!
Maybe the best is to make different covers and pictures folder for every db, this will solve much problems.
About the MovieID, I will think about this.
Bye!
Alessio |
| Mawu |
Posted - 30 Aug 2004 : 19:15:43
quote:
Maybe like you suggested that it should use the movie ID number and maybe the database filename.
Because now you can't really use the "Clear All covers not linked to a movie" if you have several databases.
I agree with you, that the covers should have a unique filename.Maybe "MovieID+Movie Title" will be a good choice (to identify the pictures even in windows explorer). I don't think that it is a good idea to store the covers of several databases in the same folder. Maybe it's possible in the future to get an own config-file for each database, where you are able to select on own cover-folder.
Bye
Mawu |
| pdavit |
Posted - 30 Aug 2004 : 04:45:35
quote:
Originally posted by FreaKBrother
...and maybe the database filename.
That is also a very good idea although I would prefer a separate folder for covers of each individual database instead of having the name of a database as a prefix for the filename of a cover (i.e. my suggestion on movie IDs as prefix). The reason for that is of course the extremely large filenames that will be resulted.
But the problem mentioned on my first post must be solved. With your suggested workaround (and the method I currently use) I can manage in separating covers between the two movies but not sets/groups of covers since the "cover" field in the "File" tab can hold only one filename. I can use the conventional method and insert the remaining covers using the cover manager but those newly imported covers will appear on both movies. Not to mention of course that if multiple covers are automatically downloaded when you import a movie the result will be the same.
Luckily Alessio mentioned that he will look into the mater. So, we should just have to wait and see the implemented approach. ;) |
| FreaKBrother |
Posted - 28 Aug 2004 : 19:27:13
Yes I think the coverfiles should have a unique name. Maybe like you suggested that it should use the movie ID number and maybe the database filename.
Because now you can't really use the "Clear All covers not linked to a movie" if you have several databases.
I would prefer to have seperate covers/photos folders for different databases but I don't know how difficult that would be to do for Alessio. |
| pdavit |
Posted - 28 Aug 2004 : 18:46:01
2 FreaKBrother
This is actually what I did to solve the inconvenience. This is still though a workaround and since there is room for achieving perfection I thought it should be wise to mention the problem (logical other than a bug).
Thanks again though for the time to describe a solution.
|
| FreaKBrother |
Posted - 27 Aug 2004 : 23:46:02
quote:
Originally posted by pdavit
Import movie details for X-Men and then XMen2. Now the cover sequence is common for both movies and not movie specific. So if you select an XMen2 cover to be your default one by moving it first in sequence it will be considered as the first one also for X-Men (number one) by eXtreme Movie Manager. As a result of that, changing the sequence in one of the two movies applies the same sequence on the other one so it's not possible to have different covers for the two movies.
If I understand it correctly then the problem is that you want seperate covers and not have them share the same sequence.
Did I understand it correct
If that's the case then you can actually solve it by changing the filename sequence for the cover picture files on the movies.
An example with the "XMen2":
1) Select the "XMen2" movie in the list.
2) Change to the "Files" tab.
3) At the bottom of the tab you'll find "Cover" with the value "X-Men.jpg" (or something else).
Change that value to "XMen2.jpg".
4) Save the changes.
5) Now click the button "Cover Manager", click "Add a Cover" and browse and select the picture you want to import.
Now the picture gets imported with the new filename "XMen2.jpg" and if you add another one it will be named "XMen2.jpg" etc, etc.
The "X-Men" movie will now have the "old" cover pictures "X-Men.jpg" (or whatever it is) and not share it with "XMen2".
I think that the filename for the covers are decided by what you search for when you import the covers.
Usually it's the movies title that you have but if it doesn't find any movies when it searched for "xmen2"
and you change it manually in the "Movie:" field to "x-men" and click "Search Again" then
the covers will be named "x-men.jpg" instead of "xmen2.jpg".
Hope that solved one of your problems |
| pdavit |
Posted - 27 Aug 2004 : 21:35:16
Maybe (just an idea) if each image file has a prefix that corresponds to the individual movie ID number shown at the top left corner?
Please also check the other problem I mentioned concerning changing slots on long number of displayed covers.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
Panos
|
| Alessio Viti |
Posted - 26 Aug 2004 : 00:39:21
Hi Pdavit,
You are right, there are some problems with the Cover's Manager, especially when two movies "share" images. I am trying to fix this problem, maybe by change the way the covers are "linked" to every movies.
Thank you!
Alessio |
