# Duplicate cast with new scanner

**URL:** <https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793>\
**Category:** Plex Media Server\
**Tags:** server-mac\
**Created:** [December 7, 2021, 9:51am UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793 "2021-12-07T09:51:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 10\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tangentsoft](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ad7895/32.png) [@tangentsoft](https://forums.plex.tv/u/tangentsoft)\
**Post date:** [December 7, 2021, 9:51am UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793/1 "2021-12-07T09:51:42Z")

</div>

Server Version#: 1.25.1.5286

This new scanner includes a feature that lets it distinguish two actors with the same name, which is good since there are often cases of same names but distinct actors, but it now seems to overreach when dealing with unmatched movies.

The problem comes when you have two movies with a given actor, one listed in the online databases (IMDB, TMDb…) and one not listed anywhere Plex can find. Plex used to match on actor name alone in that case, but now it makes the unwarranted assumption that “unlisted” means “distinct person.” This is making a distinction on _lack_ of data, which seems backwards to me.

I get that it would be ideal if all movies were listed in all databases, but they aren’t. Sometimes someone hasn’t done the work to add the movie to the databases yet, and sometimes there are administrative reasons on the site that prevent some movies from being listed. There will always be movies where Plex has to guess.

If there are two actors with the same name and both are matched, _then_ it has cause to make distinctions, because both IMDB and TMDb have an actor ID, so different people will have different ID values.

Which is more likely: an unmatched movie has no actors in common with my matched movies, or vice versa? Surely it can go on the assumption that the curator (i.e. me) is likely to have preferences, so if I have two movies starring Joe Blow that they’re the same person, lacking any data to the contrary.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![drzoidberg33](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/plex/user_avatar/forums.plex.tv/drzoidberg33/32/4184_2.png) [@drzoidberg33](https://forums.plex.tv/u/drzoidberg33)\
**Post date:** [December 7, 2021, 10:17am UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793/2 "2021-12-07T10:17:58Z")

</div>

See: [Plex is creating new/duplicate Tags for Directors and Actors that are already in my server - #6 by drzoidberg33](https://forums.plex.tv/t/plex-is-creating-new-duplicate-tags-for-directors-and-actors-that-are-already-in-my-server/759723/6)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tangentsoft](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ad7895/32.png) [@tangentsoft](https://forums.plex.tv/u/tangentsoft)\
**Post date:** [December 7, 2021, 11:22am UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793/3 "2021-12-07T11:22:08Z")

</div>

The other thread recommends doing a Refresh All, but I already did that after the upgrade, as the software itself recommended I do upon its first restart.

Nevertheless, I followed the other thread’s advice, first optimizing the database, then doing _another_ Refresh All pass. The problem persists.

I believe this due in part to [a different odd Plex behavior](https://forums.plex.tv/t/prefer-local-metadata-library-setting-needs-refinement/724125) that I reported last June, which remains in the current software. Briefly, that change means Plex now requires that if you want actor pictures and such to be pulled from online databases that there be no competing Cast data in the MP4 metadata. It used to merge the file’s Cast metadata with the online cast data, but now if there’s any local Cast data at all, it completely overrides any online metadata found with the matching process.

Since that change, I’ve been going back through my library and deleting the Cast entry from movies that are expected to match, since I don’t want that file metadata overriding the data retrieved from the online databases.

On the other hand, this also means that movies I don’t expect to match _will_ have a Cast entry because Plex can’t get the data any other way.

What I’m reporting here is that since the new scanner change, Plex can no longer make the conceptual leap that Cast values in the unmatched movies may match cast data from online sources in the _matched_ movies. Plex used to be able to do that.

Simple test case:

1. Create an MP4 file using whatever method you like, with a title that’s unlikely to match anything in the online movie databases the scanner consults.

2. Use an MP4 metadata editor — I prefer Subler — to set a Cast member on this one with the same name as in a movie you have matched in the library already. You have to provide it via file metadata since we know this movie should not match in IMDB, TMDb, etc., because we just created it. If you’re struggling to imagine how this can occur in real life, one possibility is that you live in Hollywood and captured a video of Samuel L. Jackson on your mobile phone and have saved this video to Plex to enjoy. This will never match in the online movies databases, and attempting to add the movie metadata to TMDb or similar will be rejected, but it _is_ Sam Jackson in that personal video, the same one as in all the commercial movies.

3. Add the new movie to Plex.

4. Unmatch the movie if it mistakenly matched something in IMDB or TMDb despite your careful title choice.

5. Click on the actor in the Plex web page for that movie. Notice that it doesn’t take you to the pre-existing movies with the same actor. Plex considers the new movie to have all-new actors.

Prior to the recent scanner change, it would make a guess about the actor, assuming that if there was a name match with other movies in the database that it was the same person. ~99.99% of the time it would be correct for the “curation” reason I gave above. Now it assumes they have to be different people. I want the old behavior back without reverting to old software that will eventually be discontinued.

If you repeat this process with a second new movie, it will now match the other new movie’s actor (Samuel L. Jackson in my example above) but still not match with the commercial movies.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tangentsoft](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ad7895/32.png) [@tangentsoft](https://forums.plex.tv/u/tangentsoft)\
**Post date:** [December 7, 2021, 11:34am UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793/4 "2021-12-07T11:34:23Z")

</div>

Maybe what we want here is a feature that lets me do a “cast match”: if a movie doesn’t match anything in the online databases, let me do a search on people in the databases and tell Plex, “This person in the movie is _that_ famous person.”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![drzoidberg33](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/plex/user_avatar/forums.plex.tv/drzoidberg33/32/4184_2.png) [@drzoidberg33](https://forums.plex.tv/u/drzoidberg33)\
**Post date:** [December 7, 2021, 11:44am UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793/5 "2021-12-07T11:44:05Z")

</div>

Thanks for the detailed info.

And yes, currently if you have a actor/director/etc. pulled in from a tag it won’t match to the online version. We also updated the way we store people information in the database but I think I can add a work around for this so that local tags just link to the first online person tag with the same name. It will lead to some wrong matches but should be fine for the most part.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![willimoon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/439d5e/32.png) [@willimoon](https://forums.plex.tv/u/willimoon)\
**Post date:** [December 7, 2021, 4:10pm UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793/6 "2021-12-07T16:10:02Z")

</div>

I have the same problem

> [@Doublons sur un même acteur en bibliothèque](https://forums.plex.tv/t/doublons-sur-un-meme-acteur-en-bibliotheque/761987):
>
> Un exemple sur Mastroianni [image] alors que dans tous les cas on clique bien sur la même icône [image] heu en fait non, je viens de m’apecevoir qu’il y a 2 icones identiques en apparence [image] Un autre exemple [image] é accent aigu [image] é accent grave comment ca se fait qu’il y a les 2 ? Peut-on corriger ca ? Au secours, je me rends compte qu’il y a plein de doublons en fait !

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tangentsoft](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ad7895/32.png) [@tangentsoft](https://forums.plex.tv/u/tangentsoft)\
**Post date:** [January 24, 2022, 9:30am UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793/7 "2022-01-24T09:30:10Z")

</div>

Bump. Still occurring in Plex Web Version 4.69.1 with PMS 1.25.3.5409.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tangentsoft](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ad7895/32.png) [@tangentsoft](https://forums.plex.tv/u/tangentsoft)\
**Post date:** [March 24, 2022, 6:12pm UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793/8 "2022-03-24T18:12:34Z")

</div>

Bump again. Still happening with server 1.25.8.5663.

What’s the difficulty? You had it working right months ago, then you broke it — fair game, I understand — but now you can’t get it working right again. Why?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tangentsoft](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ad7895/32.png) [@tangentsoft](https://forums.plex.tv/u/tangentsoft)\
**Post date:** [May 25, 2022, 5:13am UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793/9 "2022-05-25T05:13:35Z")

</div>

Six months of duplicated cast members as of 1.26.2.5797…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/plex/original/3X/2/a/2acb9765406f63293d357b4ec509ec39aa28f2ad.png) [@system](https://forums.plex.tv/u/system)\
**Post date:** [August 23, 2022, 5:14am UTC](https://forums.plex.tv/t/duplicate-cast-with-new-scanner/762793/10 "2022-08-23T05:14:11Z")

</div>

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
