just figured out another tip that may help those getting artwork from WMP...
earlier, i described my process of using WMP to get artwork either during a rip, or after the fact. in a small, but 'annoyingly speaking' statistically significant amount of the time, WMP will show you the correct artwork in the now playing window, and yet won't place it during a rip, OR even give you the option to choose it when doing "find info" in the media library as i mentioned before! that is of course very frustrating but there is an obvious workaround i never thought of till now. simply rip a track or two with WMP! you'll get the artwork, and you can delete the rest. tell it to rip to a dir that u mark special for WMP, so as not to confuse yourself and possibly overwrite the wrong thing. the artwork files from WMP might be system files btw, so you need to make sure windows is showing them to you. then just cut and paste. now my followup Qs: kdf Wrote: > On 8-Jul-06, at 2:06 PM, MrSinatra wrote: > >> > > > > i looked at the wiki, and found it very confusing. where would one > > input those command switches? > > > c:\program files\slimserver\server\slim.exe is the command line for > windows > or you can set the debug switches in server settings->debugging (link > for the log is at the top) so in my shortcut for SS i put the switch i want to use with the artwork? kinda clumsy, but i at least know how to do that. can i use more than one switch for artwork? what if they conflict? and what if some artwork is taller than wide, while others are wider than tall? kdf Wrote: > > > what i propose makes more sense... = > > for you. other users, and reviewer complaints have cited 'too many > prefs' as confusing. > the argument goes on and on forever and I'm not really taking part in > that. I just stated the current situation. i think in this case i was unclear... from a design perspective, IF SS is going to incorporate server side resizing, then in that case, design wise, it makes much more sense to allow the user to set a single sequence to fit quality or bandwidth, rather than having a clunky and unnecessary two array system for large and small images. you could even allow the user to simply toggle the sequence with one switch between "quality" and "bandwidth." if there is another use for the two array system, then surely it could be left in... but at the moment i can't think of one. i also think allowing the user to insert their own filenames into that squence wouldn't be much harder than setting up a playlist. but i agree it is an "advanced" request. as to "too many prefences" i agree SS is overwhelming for many users. on that broader issue, i think a beginner interface would be appropriate, (something like SN's) and a user could be given the option to get to the more advanced options via a click to them from whatever beginner's SS settings page they're on. one could also just pick "advanced mode" to avoid the extra step. kdf Wrote: > > >> > > > > yes, i know i can add one name... but my question for you is IF i > do > > that, and that one filename i use ISN'T there, will it then simply > give > > up? or will it go back to using the default order? > > > > it is a name to stick ahead of the rest in preference. it can be a new > > name, or one of the other. It is just meant to be your "preferred" > filename. > this works for most people. ok, so i am taking that to mean that if my specified filename is not present, it will use the list it has as the next best alternative. i do wish that after that, if it found nothing, it would use the first *.jpg or whatever image file in there, it may find. kdf Wrote: > of course, you can always argue that one > user might want "butuglypic.jpg" and "reallynice.tiff" and be able to > use both, but they they are welcome to make their own software and/or > modify the current Open Source software to do exact what they want at > any time. i would argue that if SD were to see that allowing users to set the sequence given server side resizing makes sense, and if they would allow for the user to input one filename into that sequence wherever they choose, then allowing them to name X amount more filenames would not be a difficult extra option to implement, given what would already be there. kdf Wrote: > > > > > i would rather SS just always maintain aspect ratio and fit it as > well > > to the given size i set, ie. 125x125 > > > that's what the 'fit' options are for. > -k i'll have to play with those in the next release. greatly looking forward to 6.5, hope it comes out soon. -mdw -- MrSinatra www.LION-Radio.org Using: Squeezebox2 w/SS 6.3 - Win XP Pro SP2 - 3.2ghz / 2gig ram ------------------------------------------------------------------------ MrSinatra's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2336 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=25266 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
