"CoverFlow" for MM3

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:27 am

nohitter151 wrote:
Fraxav wrote:I surely will and let you know. But let's say that I mean a native cover flow function.
Well, this is clearly a debatable/controversial/touchy subject, but I believe this is what makes MM so great. Features like cover flow are great for newer, faster, computers, but can significantly bog down older/slower computers. With MM, you can install an app that works well on an older system and use "extensions" to add in the heavier stuff, so that the program is optimized for whatever computer its installed on. I personally think adding a native "cover flow" into MM would be a mistake, even though I do use Pretty Pictures and think its great!

I could not agree more. K.I.S.S.!!!!!!!!!

Morten · Post by **Morten** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:42 am

Native support for CoverFlow would mean better performance on that feature. Either way, it has to be enabled in order to take resources from your computer.

Dreadlau · Post by **Dreadlau** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:59 am

I'm absolutely not interested in having a coverflow in MM3. cause I don't think it's a convenient way to manage a collection. It can only show like ten different covers at a time. And since MM users generally got a large library...

The only thing I like about it is its eye-candy effect. Transparency, mirror effect, ...

By the way, Morten, I red you give recommendations to the devs for the theme engine.

Could you please ask them if they could implement alpha blending, mirror effects, and things like that.

Cause although I'm not a fan of coverflow, I still think MM need more eye candy.

Morten · Post by **Morten** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:39 pm

Surely MM's CoverFlow wouldn't be JUST a copy of iTunes' as I know it could be further improved.

Fraxav · Post by **Fraxav** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 5:48 am

Of course cover flow won't let you have all your music under your eyes, but hey, you just have to scroll to see what comes next and first, like you would with every list longer than the height of your screen

.
I'm supporting cover flow because it can merge together visualization, playback and ordered lists (especially if you go full screen).
As you (dreadlau) said, it also has an eye-candy effect that never hurts

.
And as morten said, Monkey Flow shouldn't (and hope won't) be just a copy of Cover Flow. Let's improve it! This means, in example, that you are going to set you eye-candy effects, the number and size of covers shown at a time, scroll effects, the order itself of the covers (in ordered line; in a line, but not allined; random...just like Pretty Pictures does), and hopefully more.
And of course I understand that MM3 has still more important things to think about, but maybe in the future...

P.S. I agree with dreadlau: more theme engine implementation!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 12:23 pm

Instead of making it look simply like coverflow, which does suck for huge libraries, i suggest making it look a bit more like the piclens browser add-on, which allows zooming in and out, quick and pretty scrolling, etc. when an album is clicked on, it could enlarge slightly, and bring up a slightly transparent song list next to the album cover. When double clicked on, it would zoom to a full screen now playing screen with coverflow at the bottom. THAT would be cool.

Wargazm · Post by **Wargazm** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 12:53 pm

there's got to be a more innovative way to incorporate visualization and eye-candy into MM without compromising on large-library usability. My suggestion is that if the devs are thinking of this as a goal, they should innovate and think of a more appropriate solution.

Fraxav · Post by **Fraxav** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:12 pm

Nobody here is talking about copying CF. This new Monkey Flow is going to be something similar just because the functions are similar.
Piclens is actually really near to coverflow. It is just improved and works for photos and not for a media player. And it could be another good source of inspiration for the new cover flow of course, especially for the possibility to view several photos at a time, so huge library owners will be satisfied.
I'm not a developer so I couldn't say what's better for this program, but I can say that in my opinion a coverflow is sort of missing.
The more ideas, the more innovations for this new feature.

Dreadlau · Post by **Dreadlau** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:48 pm

I kinda like more the pic lens approach than Coverflow.

An other thing ( and this may be off-topic ): How comes the album art views in MM3 are so slow even with a recent computer.
I mean that I cannot use it cause the images take a lot of time to load. I would find those views useful if the album arts displayed instantly.

Is it something that is for the next gen computers? Or does some programs have yet the ability to display lots of images instantly?

What are the limitations in this matter in Mediamonkey? How could it be improved?

Can someone drop some knowledge on this? Thanks

Fraxav · Post by **Fraxav** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:43 pm

Oh sure, piclens seems really bright. As I said it could satisfy large libraries and coverflow fans with its zoom in/out features. But let's keep in mind that we need something that has to interact with playback, and not only show pictures in a sweet way.
So, Monkey Flow could merge CoverFlow, PrettyPictures and Piclens...

P.S. Drealau: maybe your pics are extremely great in resolution, or you are trying to view covers of songs not yet scanned (so not added in your library and therefore neither in the database) or maybe you are working with more programs at a time, slowing MM...

Dreadlau · Post by **Dreadlau** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:48 am

My pics are generally +- 900x900. There are already in the library.
It's slow also if there's only mm running. ( every new lines of images need a second to appear and the scrolling isn't smooth at all )
I use a core 2 duo processor with 2go of ram.

Is the albumart navigation smooth on your computer?

Fraxav · Post by **Fraxav** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:54 pm

Actually, I have a core duo too and less ram, but I have this idea: even if you got a duo, it can always suck. I have 1.66 GHz, maybe not much but hey this is a duo! And instead I have to pull down graphical options of not so new games cause I miss processor power (ram and video are ok).
But this was off topic. Just to say that it depends...
Back on topic: my covers are 600x600, around 1.00 Mb each and with good resolution. In both the two tipes of album art views, my scrolling is always fine except for the first time (it has to load the pictures). Anyways, the loading time of the first time is decent.
You see...your pics are 900x900 and if you have so many files the loading time increases. But if you experiece this also after the first full scroll, you got a problem.
MM is still in "testing", some things are to be done yet.
If you want to discuss more I'll be happy to try to help you, but please open a new topic maybe in the MM3 developing section (so I can also post there a problem I had while adding some covers to test my scrolling for you). This is the wishlist

Bye.

Fraxav · Post by **Fraxav** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 4:42 pm

Hey, did anybody know about this?

gege · Post by **gege** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 11:16 am

Fraxav wrote:Hey, did anybody know about this?

It's been there for six months!

I just can't believe you didn't notice it!!!

Fraxav · Post by **Fraxav** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:17 am

Well, this discussion has been there for ten months, and this was in the wishlist, so I can't believe who noticed it didn't spent a word about it, here.
Btw, no, I didn't notice it

"CoverFlow" for MM3

Piclens type functionality

Re: "CoverFlow" for MM3

Re: "CoverFlow" for MM3

Re: "CoverFlow" for MM3