PDA

View Full Version : Thumbnail Artwork not displaying



jwgraves
2005-07-05, 10:27
I have all my artwork in a separate directoty, with a naming convention of Artist_Album.jpg. When Browsing Albums, the cover art is displayed fine for each album. However, when Browsing Artwork, no artwork is displayed at all.

My interface settings are as follows -

Artwork Folder:
C:/My Music/Artwork

Artwork:
%ARTIST_ALBUM.JPG

Artwork Thumbnail:
%ARTIST_ALBUM.JPG

If I copy a specific jpg to the directory where the album resides and rename it to folder.jpg, then the thumbnail will display for that album. But if I use the variable filename feature for thumbnails, the thumbnails do not display when Browsing Artwork.

Also, I'm running Linux SlimServer Version: 6.0.2 - trunk.

Any ideas out there?

Thanks,
John

kdf
2005-07-05, 10:38
Quoting jwgraves <jwgraves.1rpizz (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

>
> I have all my artwork in a separate directoty, with a naming convention
> of Artist_Album.jpg. When Browsing Albums, the cover art is displayed
> fine for each album. However, when Browsing Artwork, no artwork is
> displayed at all.
>
> My interface settings are as follows -
>
> Artwork Folder:
> C:/My Music/Artwork
>
> Artwork:
> %ARTIST_ALBUM.JPG
>
> Artwork Thumbnail:
> %ARTIST_ALBUM.JPG
>
> If I copy a specific jpg to the directory where the album resides and
> rename it to folder.jpg, then the thumbnail will display for that
> album. But if I use the variable filename feature for thumbnails, the
> thumbnails do not display when Browsing Artwork.
>
> Also, I'm running Linux SlimServer Version: 6.0.2 - trunk.
>
> Any ideas out there?

This is a known bug:
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=952

unfortunately, it is not likely going to be fixed for the 6.1 release. The
database handling introduced in 6.0 made this feature unworkable without a
rework of how the variable names are replaced.

-kdf

JJZolx
2005-07-05, 12:24
This is a known bug:
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=952

unfortunately, it is not likely going to be fixed for the 6.1 release. The
database handling introduced in 6.0 made this feature unworkable without a
rework of how the variable names are replaced.

Until this feature is implemented once again, a better explanation needs to be given in the server settings. You know, something like "Under construction" or "This used to work, but doesn't anymore". Better yet, remove any reference to variable naming conventions altogether, although it appears to work in some places (the album view), so will undoubtedly continue to cause confusion until fixed.

How something that once worked, but was later broken, receives such low priority is the thing that continues to amaze me.

kdf
2005-07-05, 12:45
Quoting JJZolx <JJZolx.1rpobo (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:


> How something that once worked, but was later broken, receives such low
> priority is the thing that continues to amaze me.

not low priority, just very very messy. I also suspect that the percentage of
users who relied on this is somewhat less than those suffering from the other
issues on the table.

-kdf

JJZolx
2005-07-05, 13:56
not low priority, just very very messy.

If variable naming conventions are designated in either the artwork or artwork thumbnail prefs, then after a scan is completed, make a second pass, looping over all tracks in the database. In the second pass, the track files don't need to read again. Mostly you're just doing directory lookups and table updates.

Join tracks, contributors, albums, genres tables to get the substitution strings.

Contstruct the one or two filenames using the strings and do directory lookups. Update track and album artwork if the files are found.

This doesn't strike me as being messy. I don't know about time/efficiency, but there are probably some optimizations. First, I wouldn't permit all of the strings used in Title formatting - it's extremely unlikely anyone is going to name artwork using things like SHORTDATE, TAGSIZE, PATH, BITRATE, filesize or many of the others.

Ben Sandee
2005-07-05, 14:04
On 7/5/05, JJZolx <JJZolx.1rpspz (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com> wrote:
>
> This doesn't strike me as being messy. I don't know about
> time/efficiency, but there are probably some optimizations. First, I
> wouldn't permit all of the strings used in Title formatting - it's
> extremely unlikely anyone is going to name artwork using things like
> SHORTDATE, TAGSIZE, PATH, BITRATE, filesize or many of the others.

Allow me be the first to say it:

Patches welcome.

:-)

Ben

JJZolx
2005-07-05, 14:51
Patches welcome.

:-)

For a pony.

kdf
2005-07-05, 15:06
Quoting JJZolx <JJZolx.1rpv9n (AT) no-mx (DOT) forums.slimdevices.com>:

>
> Ben Sandee Wrote:
> >
> >
> > Patches welcome.
> >
> > :-)
>
> For a pony.

I'm sure sean could be convinced to send you one. Its well-know that
contribution has its benefits (beyond the satistaction of making the server a
better product):

http://www.slimdevices.com/dev_help.html

-kdf