[Implemented] - Multiple Cuts Of Movie

Feature Suggestions
503

I felt like the purpose of my post was clear, to show this feature, at least to some minimum standard, could be implemented quite easily.

In any case, your assertion that this can’t be used for this feature is absurd. Right now Plex sees two different versions of a movie on your hard drive just fine. If you scan two versions of Aliens be it two different resolutions or two different cuts, Plex recognizes multiple versions of the same film exist.

Currently Plex chooses to surface resolution and bitrate to the user when selecting between these versions. A while ago it only surfaced resolution, they added bitrate at a later date. If Plex wanted to it could easily surface the file name or something else.

There is absolutely nothing within the current versioning system that prevents it from being used this way. Would it be better if an actual feature for multiple cuts were developed, absolutely! But we’ve been asking for this for almost a decade. It’s been a top feature request for basically that whole time. So maybe we can convince them to, with minimum effort, give us SOMETHING instead of waiting another 10 years and continuing to get nothing.

Screens are pretty big, they can display lots of text, no reason text needs to be cut off. All the player apps I’m using could easily display 2-4x the characters in the version selection box. Even on an iPhone.

Again, this was never meant to be an ideal solution but I’d rather something than sit here waiting for nothing.

If not the file name, Plex is already parsing part of the file name for metadata lookup… update naming convention documentation so that it could recognize text that comes before “Edition” or something similar like the language tags for subtitle files.

Again not ideal, better than nothing.

I understand development is hard. I also understand that implementing this feature in an optimal way would take a not inconsiderable amount of work. However this has been a request for years and it isn’t like it is a niche request. If you’ve got productive suggestions, let’s all work together to try to help move this feature forward. If you’re just gonna repeat “development is hard” to poo-poo someone else’s idea I’m really not seeing the point. It’s not like the developers need help ignoring this request.

504

I was just giving an example of a big potential problem with your supposed Easy solution. & why it will likely be dismissed outright.

For movies Plex pretty much ignores the filename for Metadata lookup unless the folder name doesn’t provide a match. This is a point I’ve mentioned a few times before, the Scanner & Metadata Agent are different pieces. & when they alter the Scanner things get hinky. I’ve given examples I think in this thread, but it may have been another, of the plethora of issues with the special features which are handled by the scanner. & I can’t imagine -shorts or a Shorts folder are more complex than text that comes before “Edition"

This was one of the things I suggested, which would still be a Scanner issue, but would be using a different convention that isn’t already used to minimize issues.

That’s why I’ve been trying to brainstorm a suggestion, not just a request, that would satisfy while being simpler to add. Which is where, with the help of people picking apart potential problems, we came to what I think is not only the best solution, but the easiest to implement as well. The idea of having an editable Info page where users could manually add names to each of the files listed there. It requires no rewrite to the scanner program (something that I feel has likely been most holding back this suggestion), it is completely user controlled, which may annoy some who don’t want to have to manually edit each movie but means it would have zero chance of causing issues with libraries already in existence, ideally I’d see it fixing some of the special features issues too potentially with a check box for something like Different Cut with a text field to put the name could also have check boxes for Special Feature or the different feature categories. It wouldn’t be limited to only a few options like any form of scanner based solution would.

My comment in no way was saying “Development is hard” but rather pointing out things that could possibly be preventing that suggestion from working. It’s only because of those type of comments that we got to what I think is the best suggestion.

505

Going forward I think it’s best that everyone be open to the ideas of others without making assumptions on whose ideas can or can’t work and being dismissive of others based on those assumptions.

1 Like
506

The way a think-tank works is people present ideas & others try to find the flaws. That’s how to build ideas to make something better.
I am not Plex.
Nor a Plex Dev.
Me pointing out potential problems in no ways dismisses a suggestion. But ignoring the holes & saying “they should just do it” does nothing to improve suggestions.
The more variety of ideas presented the more likely one will get implemented.
Your comments particularly are mostly just saying “this is easy, they should just do it” & speaking frankly your comment was ignorant, not thought out, & really just a juvenile “WAHH, I WANT IT! GIVE IT TO ME” That does nothing to help move this forward.
Now that is me dismissing your idea because it really was useless. See the difference?

507

You guys can have an argument on the best way to argue somewhere else, it’s not helping here. I agree DavisNL’s initial claim that there are small improvements which would be helpful and a step in the right direction, the lack of stepping at all is a concern. Adding the filename, even if it was clunky and ugly, is preferable to the current design.

The majority of software development is done with small tweaks and iteration. Hours of brainstorming and arguing only gets you so far. Clearly there are a lot of complaints about visibility into different versions, so this is an easy solution that devs should start out with and then iterate.

The bigger issue is that iteration doesn’t seem to be happening on this feature which is a big disappointment. If this discussion doesn’t help something get fixed there’s no point in having it.

I almost want to work part time at plex to fix things like this. Github has a dedicated project for fixing little annoyances: https://github.blog/2018-08-28-announcing-paper-cuts/

2 Likes
[Feature-Request] Built in local authentication server (prevent plex.tv outage)
508

Up until a few months ago there wasn’t really any suggestions aside from ones with major issues. I hope that the solutions we proposed, through back & forth, can give the Devs something to work with. Because the same suggestions like “use the file name” have been there for like 8 years. Obviously that suggestion is not one they like. For whatever reason. I don’t know for sure, I just offer what I can see as possibilities. & aside from the ones I like, in the last few months a dozen other suggestions were made too. There’s a lot for them to work with that they haven’t had in the last 8 years. Give it time

Except if they implement something bad most likely it will stay. Improvements from there will have to be based on that. It’s like steps, if you go 2 steps up the wrong staircase you can’t sidestep to a different staircase, you’ve already chosen the staircase you are ascending. & especially since it’s such a big feature request going the wrong way & then backtracking will just cause problems for people who made due with the bad solution in the 1st place.
Which, again, is another benefit of the solution I’m endorsing, it does not require any file renaming, so instead of making people go back down the bad staircase before they can go up the better one at worst the staircase will be replaced & everyone is just at the bottom, no work required to get there.

509

@Plex

Any updates? :stuck_out_tongue:

510

Copied from the “Play Version Thread”

Plex ignores anything in the [square brackets] for metadata and sorting. Per guidance from folks on here I use the brackets for descriptive terms such as [B/W] vs [colorized], [Extended] vs [Theatrical] and [1080p] vs [4K] (Plex obviously recognizes the latter but I use this for my own file management purposes)

Given this, here’s an idea…what if Plex simply included the contents of the [square brackets] in the “Play version” list. Then you see resolution, bit rate (like others I’m not sure of the value in this one) and whatever description was included by the media owner.

1 Like
511

Yep, agreed. This is exactly what Emby does. Simple approach and we can finally see the difference between the list of versions.

@elan Did you see the post above? Can Plex add text in to the info on the Play Version screen so we can see which version of the video we’re selecting?

512

I really hope the devs take a look at this.
With more re-releases of movies like the Godfather and Star Wars, it makes watching a pain.
And, now the mobile and Android TV versions of Plex don’t even warn you easily there are multiple versions like the desktop version.

513

Lol, it’s a feature requested since 2012, I mean, it could be really cool to have such but come on, it’s not like the Plex team wants this implemented judging by how long this feature is requested.
Emby does support multiple versions (resolution / movie) imo, why not take Emby’s way of managing multiple versions and selecting them ? Plex way is ok but it’s rather clunky since most of the client will just hit play, unaware of the multiple versions.

514

I just noticed a “More Info” link in the Android TV app that shows basic info like bitrate that could potentially help determine which version of a movie to play. It’s not ideal, but it at least helps to identify which row to pick in the Play Version list. The only problem is that it only shows 1 file in More Info. Anyone know of a way to get the info for ALL versions to show up? The web app seems to show info for all versions, but that’s the only app I’ve found so far that has it. It would be nice if the More Info was available for all versions in the Android mobile app and Android TV app.

515

Because that’s what it’s designed for. It’s not designed for different versions, it’s designed for different quality versions optimized for different devices. With that you don’t WANT to have a choice presented, you want it to just know which one to play. More users use it that way than to have different versions like a Director’s Cut. From a Plex Employee in another thread we know that this is something being discussed currently. So it’s not like Plex does not want to, it’s that they’re not going to just do it how someone else does just to have A solution, they want a good solution

1 Like
516

Excuse me, Sir. Where do you have that info from? You’re saying that people prefer to store different quality version of the same movie rather than different editions. I am not sure why somebody would say something like that.

There were and there are a pletora of “collector editions” (VHS/DVD/BluRay) so selling different editions of the same movie is a long-standing business model.

I can see that you don’t want to stream your 4K movie via internet and therefore store two quality versions of the same version.

But - every single user with multiple editions has no official way of storing their editions “Plex way”. So some are using the “version thing”, some are duplicating Plex objects and rename them, some create collections.

Comparing numbers doesn’t get us too far here.

Remember, handling editions must have a way of handling different quality versions of each edition, too. Different editions can have different run times, different titles, different descriptions, different age restrictions, different audio tracks. At the same time, editions should not pollute collections, should not double in search results, should have their own view status, etc.

Presenting editions visually is only a minor detail.
It’s an extra layer inside a (let’s say movie) object and containing media info as well as any other info inside a normal movie object.

Database-wise, this is a big change that affects every bit of code of server and players.

1 Like
517

Probably because that’s indeed what Plex had in mind when they created their version support (be it for versions optimized using Plex itself or by combining different-quality versions of the same video). That being said… you’re right a lot of users have been using this very same feature to store their different editions/cuts.

btw… I believe LostOnTheLine’s point was that more users use it for editions than different-quality versions.

TL;DR: the whole point of this thread is to get better support for those different editions. One “low-hanging-fruit approach” suggested is to build this on top of the version selection (e.g. by including more information from the file itself). However that’s only one of the suggestions.

1 Like
518

That’s what the Versions is intended for. As someone who used to have my server on a NAS that didn’t do well with transcoding I had optimized versions of about 5,000 files… No matter who you are & how big a collection you have I doubt you have more than 5,000 movies with different editions. My point is that taking something that is used by many, though I’d say less of those in the forums who are the more power-user types, & changing it so that it’s inconvenient for the many is most likely a reason Plex hasn’t implemented this. There needs to be a solution that doesn’t involve taking something away. Those who use versions for actual versions don’t want to have a pop-up, they want Plex to just choose the right one for them. That’s a major reason I am so behind the Details Tab solution, it solves the problems without any impact on the current system. Sure it makes a little bit of legwork, but those who like the customize don’t usually mind a little legwork if it gives them more control.

As for where the numbers are from, common sense. You seem to think everyone is like you, so everyone wants the things you want. But as a pure numbers game while the number of movies having special editions has been increasing, & the number of people caring about those special editions is increasing, most people only care about the special editions of certain favorite movies. & the ratio of movies that have special editions is still less than 1 in 20, though I’d be surprised if it’s 1 in 50. So say we’re dealing with 100 people who have 100 movies, that’s 5 special editions each, for 500 total. A generous estimate I believe. Then let’s say we have 100 people with 100 movies & only 5% use different versions. An overly conservative estimate I believe. That’s 500 total from only 5 users. So they are even. But let’s say they each add 1 movie… No longer even, 5 movies, 10 movies?

True, there’s no official way, but there are ways. They aren’t left out in the lurch, there needs to be a better way certainly, but not at the expense of others.

No, I meant I believe the quality version is more used. As stated above. & there’s also that those who use different editions are most certainly among those who use quality versions

519

Quite a number of assumptions… I will not compete in your numbering game. If you want your 5000 files to be stored in different quality versions, you are still only one person doing so. I have no intention to take anything away from you or other users.

How common your own use case is… i cannot say - and I don’t care. I have no idea of why you are defending the versions feature here… it is simply of no importance in this thread. I understand that another user had suggested using Plex versions for editions, too. I did not. If you would have read my post earlier today, I had laid out necessary steps to implement the “editions” feature properly in the database and I had no comment at all on how to present that in the UI.

Are you interested to talk about proper ways of implementing “editions” support in this thread? If not than thank you for anything you had to say. It was heard and understood. Please leave this thread clean for the topic it is about. Thank you.

1 Like
520

Because advocating for something that takes away something else is stupid. It is of importance to this tread when you want to destroy it to get what you want. That’s no different from saying that how much traffic on this road is of no importance to whether we should build a Walmart that blocks that road. It’s not directly relevant to how many people will shop at that Walmart, but it makes a huge difference to how many people will be pissed because something they use regularly is being taken away. Things affect other things. & the idea that you think “defending” the versions makes it clear you see it as a zero-sum game, but it’s not. It’s not this or that, one does not have to “loose” for other to “win”. Instead of trying to replace something that people use, an idea that I point out more because it’s a reason the developers will ignore it than because I want to “defend” the feature, we should focus more on thinking of ways to implement it without breaking other things. I don’t understand why that’s so difficult for some people.

I cannot find that comment, if you are referring to

That isn’t steps to implement, that’s a list of wants.

Isn’t a way to implement, it’s a bunch of fluff words that really have no meaning. Kinda sorta true, but not exactly useful in any way.

I did notice while trying to find that that I was mistaken, I thought you had posted about the brackets but that was Rossdillon & I apologize for assuming you were continuing that.

But still I advocate the Details Tab solution, which came about by trying to find common ground with other suggestions a month or two ago.

  • In a tab on the movie settings, similar to the Info tab where the files are listed
  • List of each file as listed under the Files section
  • Next to or under each file a Checkbox for Alternate Edition
  • When you check it you get a Name field, a Content Rating field, maybe a Primary Version or Sharing Labels or other things.
    This would in no way hinder the play version feature &, though not perfect, is the most practical & by far the most complete solution seen on this thread
521

Here are a few numbers to consider:

8 years and 1229 votes.

This thing capsized in the harbor and is leaking oil.

3 Likes
522

That may be true, but when I joined this discussion a few months ago I couldn’t find a single suggestion that didn’t have issues.

The way I see it is that having that many votes means the problem is with the How to do it not the Should we do it. That’s why we need to be trying to think of ways it might work &, more importantly, think of reasons they might be rejected & try to work around those

1 Like