Can one use MediaElch together with other movie managers without getting conflicts?

Horsley, 57 days ago

Can one use MediaElch together with other movie managers without getting conflicts? If, yes, how?

  • Donator

    Fusion, 15 days ago

    What is your fear in running them in parallel?

    for example MediaElch an TinyMediaManager. They both produce the same metadata regarding pictures and nfo. Maybe one picture type, not sure if it was a banner or poster, where they would use different naming schemes.

    I have checked and adjusted the naming schemes in both of them. Depending on the metadata source the extend of information within the nfo might differ, but else... not sure what you have in mind when talking about "conflicts"?

  • Horsley, 15 days ago

    [QUOTE]What is your fear in running them in parallel?[/QUOTE]

    E.g. overwriting files created by the / an other manger, reading data / files created by the / an other manager which could cause missing information / wrong information and such.

    [QUOTE]for example MediaElch an TinyMediaManager. They both produce the same metadata regarding pictures and nfo. Maybe one picture type, not sure if it was a banner or poster, where they would use different naming schemes.[/QUOTE]

    Und das könnte vielleicht zu Überschreibungen führen oder Fehlinformation und so.

    But, the biggest problem (or one of them) / lack is that ME does not show information or / and images of movies / series on drives plugged off.

    [QUOTE]not sure what you have in mind when talking about "conflicts"?[/QUOTE]

    I would say, any conflicts (I do not know) which might be caused.

     

  • Donator

    Fusion, 15 days ago

    Well, that is kind of by design.

    If you take two or more media manager and write images and metadata into the filesystem of course the last one to write the files "wins" (defines what images and text is present in the files) since there is no "only add information which is currently not present" option.

    Depending on the metadata and image sources of course the result will differ, but it is impossible for the software to know which set of information from which source you prefer / deem to be the better one for you.

    Regarding offline media i can't add anything to the conversation since i am only using always-on NAS storages.

    I guess MediaElch does not cache all images once they are written out into the filesystem. At most this should be optional, personally i would not want a second copy (stored where the media are is good enough for me).

    Maybe TinyMediaManager or others are better suited for this requirements, not sure.

  • Horsley, 15 days ago

    If you take two or more media manager and write images and metadata into the filesystem of course the last one to write the files "wins" (defines what images and text is present in the files) since there is no "only add information which is currently not present" option.

    Yes, so using 2 or more managers would not a good idea it seems.

    Yes, indeed, TinyMediaManager is very much better. Its filters are not very good but better than the ones of ME, it does not seem possible to filter by rating, country of production and year and such.

     

     

     

     

  • Donator

    Fusion, 15 days ago

    I would say the idea is neither good nor bad if you know what you are doing and which files and metadata you are updating.

    Usually i use ME, but sometimes firing up TMM as well when there are hiccups in the metadata-fetching (for db sources or whatever reason sometimes one works better than the other).

    And admittedly i do use them mostly for data fetching purposes only, less for managing or organising.

    Searching, Viewing, Sorting and other wizardry is done by Plex or Kodi.

  • Horsley, 15 days ago

    Usually i use ME, but sometimes firing up TMM as well when there are hiccups in the metadata-fetching (for db sources or whatever reason sometimes one works better than the other).

    So you use both managers with the same data / files?

    And admittedly i do use them mostly for data fetching purposes only, less for managing or organising.

    Searching, Viewing, Sorting and other wizardry is done by Plex or Kodi.

    Why is that?

  • Donator

    Fusion, 15 days ago

    yes, i do. They are writing the same jpg images. Of course which image specifically is chosen for actor, poster, banner.... or which plot/description depends mainly on the db source.

    I think the initial fill was done with ME. Since then i am only adding single movies or shows at a time. Only if the amount of data found for new items is not satisfying i am having a look at TMM and add it there (partially/completely overwriting what ME has fetched for this/these item(s) so far. Sometimes i change single pictures afterwards if one of them is not to my liking completely.

    Regarding managing, why not?

    I do not have any requirement for ME or TMM to actually manage or organise further then just to fetch images and other metadata (description, plots, etc).

    When searching for genres, years or other criteria i usally want to watch something, so logically i do this within the MediaCenter / Player like Plex or Kodi.

    And if i want to know if i have some very specific media (and do not have my Plex App around), sitting at the PC, i just fire up the file explorer and have a quick look at the network shares (since i do have a strict ordering system in folder/directory structure there already). That is faster then firing up a MediaManager and start searching there.

  • Horsley, 14 days ago

    Yes, starting TMM (and may be ME also) takes some time.

    So one can scrape with ME and then update the data source of TMM with TMM (or vice versa) without scraping and after one has the same movie / series information in TMM either.

    Which of them is faster? TMM appears to be very fast with scraping but it isn't with rebuilding the image cache. Scraping with Kodi runs completely without interacting.

  • Donator

    Fusion, 14 days ago

    Good question. Never had a stop-watch running, so really can't say.

  • Horsley, 12 days ago

    That's a pity. May be a usual watch or a wall clock would do it.