Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW (Read 10626 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

i've noticed that tagging in itunes takes FOREVER when the files have album art embedded.  i'm using id3v2... any way to speed things up?

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #1 –
Don't embed album art. Seriously.

If you're not necessarily keeping the album art for iTunes or iPod display, just name your covers album.jpg or something like that, and put them in their albums' respective folders.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #2 –
Quote
i've noticed that tagging in itunes takes FOREVER when the files have album art embedded.  i'm using id3v2... any way to speed things up?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=352568"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


What size are the album art files? I use 300x300 .jpgs and embed them using Tag&Rename (not iTunes, though) and the process is very quick here.

--
Baxter

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #3 –
i'm embedding them for my ipod (and i suppose also for display on my computers)

why is this frowned upon?  i know that sometimes the art can get "lost" in the file if the tag is edited with a program that doesn't know how to handle the art (such as winamp, may it rest in peace) but if i'm careful and only use programs that are smart enough, what's the harm?  my ipod won't do cover.jpg or whatever, and i don't have the files sorted into album directories anyway, i just use tags.

so i am indeed curious as to why embedded art is a bad idea, but that said, since i'm having problems with the writing speed here, i'm considering trying to strip it.  does anybody know of a tool that will remove art but leave the rest of the tag intact?

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #4 –
It's a bad idea because it's wasteful of space to have images embedded in every MP3. It also has the potential to cause trouble for some players and get in the way of gapless or near-gapless playback.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #5 –
I disagree. Embedded album art is a great idea, and I recommend it to everybody.

If the player can't handle it, then the player is broken. Just don't use broken players and you don't have any issues with it.

As for wasted space, well, if your album art isn't ridiculously huge, then it's no big deal. Having a 300x300 cover art in the tag is a good idea. With JPG compression that's usually no more than 15k.

The advantages greatly outweigh the disadvatanges. Having the artwork embedded in the file means that it *stays* with the file. Renaming the file into a new directory structure doesn't lose the artwork. You don't have thousands of "folder.jpg" files sprinkled over your hard drive. You don't have to have special setups that depend on file names and/or locations. And it's damn near universal; all software actually worth using can read and display ID3v2 artwork. WMP, iTunes, probably foobar with the right plugin (and if it would stop erasing the artwork when retagging... here's hoping that's fixed in 0.9, as it prevents me from using foobar at the moment). Also iPod's, several other portable players, etc. Gapless isn't a problem if the unit is designed correctly in the first place.


As to the original question, iTunes gets slow when you initially embed the artwork, because it's having to rewrite the entire file, more or less. However, subsequent tagging operations will not be as slow as long as you're not making changes greater than the amount of tag padding used. Having excessively large files for artwork will also make it slow. I recommend no more than 40k for artwork for lossy files.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #6 –
>It also has the potential to cause trouble for some players and get in the way of gapless or near-gapless playback.

Any player which has gapless playback should really be able to read and skip over the size of an id3v2 tag, at least you would think so.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #7 –
And to add something that's iPod related to this discussion.

I *believe* the large album art display on the iPod is 200x200, so that's a consideration when tagging.  Someone on iLounge did the research on that on, so I'm not sure if it's credible...

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #8 –
Quote
And to add something that's iPod related to this discussion.

I *believe* the large album art display on the iPod is 200x200, so that's a consideration when tagging.  Someone on iLounge did the research on that on, so I'm not sure if it's credible...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=353251"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The iPod actually stores images in several possible formats. But it's important to understand that at no time does the iPod read the ID3 tag of a file. Ever. It's built in to skip the thing. What the iPod reads is the images that were put there by iTunes. iTunes reads the ID3 tag and resizes the necessary images to the images that the iPod actually uses. These get stored in unusual ways, but the specifics are now understood.

Anyway, the large images displayed on the iPod screen are stored internally as 176x220 size images. It can also store a 720x480 sized image for use on newer iPod's through the TV Output cable. Since I don't own one of these iPod's, I do not know if the album art can be displayed there in full resolution as well.

So using anything larger than 176x220 is overkill for just displaying on the iPod.

Edit: These images are also stored as RGB565 images, so using large color samples (32-bit, say) is probably overkill as well. The 720x480 images are stored as interlaced YUV422 images, looks like an NTSC-standard sort of thing to me.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #9 –
Quote
If the player can't handle it, then the player is broken. Just don't use broken players and you don't have any issues with it.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=352686"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Wrong. Album art is not a part of the ID3 standard. It's an ID3v2-specific field and ID3v2 is not a formal standard, let alone a part of the MP3 spec. Nothing needs to support it. Nothing even needs to be able to play through it.

An MP3 player that fails to play files with album art isn't "broken". Heck, an MP3 player that fails to play files with any ID3v2 tags isn't *necessarily* "broken".

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #10 –
Quote
Wrong. Album art is not a part of the ID3 standard. It's an ID3v2-specific field and ID3v2 is not a formal standard, let alone a part of the MP3 spec. Nothing needs to support it. Nothing even needs to be able to play through it.

An MP3 player that fails to play files with album art isn't "broken". Heck, an MP3 player that fails to play files with any ID3v2 tags isn't *necessarily* "broken".
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=353396"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There are "standards" and then there are "standards".

Though a de facto standard may not be a "formal" standard, it is still a standard nonetheless. And ID3v2 is part of the overall ID3 standard. And if an MP3 player is so backwards as to not support the most common implementation of tagging used, then yes, I say that player is absolutely broken. I also say that the player should not be used unless it is fixed.

Even if the player doesn't support ID3v2 tagging, it should skip over the ID3v2 tag. And even if it doesn't support the APIC frame (maybe it has no display), then it should skip over it along with anything else it doesn't understand. These are pretty basic assumptions when writing an MP3 decoder, no?

Now gapless support, on the other hand, is not a widely implemented addition to the MP3 format. LAME supports adding it, as does Nero, but no other encoder does. It's encoder-specific, not documented in any reasonable "standard". Several players have added support for it, but several others have not. Lots of hardware doesn't support it. Yet many people here have said that the iPod is broken (or just that it sucks) because it does not support gapless playback.

Yes, nobody *needs* to support either one. But failure to support them properly makes the device suck in those respects. Gapless I can live without (many can't... more power to 'em). Lack of support for album art and ID3v2 tags I cannot.

Hey, you're free to disagree, of course. This is all just my opinion.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #11 –
no. you are wrong. embedded album art is stupid.

glad to clear that up for you guys.

move along...


later

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #12 –
Quote
no. you are wrong. embedded album art is stupid.

no. you are wrong. embedded album art is quite smart and makes way more sense than having separate art files associated to the music by nothing more than filename or path/location on disk.

hope i cleared that up for you.

troll elsewhere...

later

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #13 –
OK, I'll jump in and get flamed   

From my vantage point, it seems the only issue is that there is not an agreed upon format for embedding art.  If there were, and it worked properly across differrent players and formats, then it would be pretty darn cool.

Speaking for myself, I would like to embed the cover art, along with the cue file, into one FLAC image.  Why not, if it works properly?

Yes, I know about Matroska 
flac > schiit modi > schiit magni > hd650

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #14 –
Quote
The iPod actually stores images in several possible formats. But it's important to understand that at no time does the iPod read the ID3 tag of a file. Ever. It's built in to skip the thing. What the iPod reads is the images that were put there by iTunes. iTunes reads the ID3 tag and resizes the necessary images to the images that the iPod actually uses. These get stored in unusual ways, but the specifics are now understood.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=353324"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

that's what kinda sucks about the iPod...twice as much space is used for the album art. Does anyone know if iTunes does the same thing? I know there is a iTunes xml file as well as a database file...now if I add album art to all my music that would make those files huge...
--alt-presets are there for a reason! These other switches DO NOT work better than it, trust me on this.
LAME + Joint Stereo doesn't destroy 'Stereo'

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #15 –
Quote
Does anyone know if iTunes does the same thing? I know there is a iTunes xml file as well as a database file...now if I add album art to all my music that would make those files huge...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=353446"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

iTunes definitely does not. The art it displays causes a read of the file's tag, it's reading the embedded art directly and not storing it in the iTunes Library Database.

Quote
From my vantage point, it seems the only issue is that there is not an agreed upon format for embedding art.  If there were, and it worked properly across differrent players and formats, then it would be pretty darn cool.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=353431"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No argument here. But, to be fair, there's not an agreed upon format for just general tagging either. Every format has it's own differing method for that sort of thing.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #16 –
Otto42, a question for you:

If i'm adding 200x200-ish jpegs (from allmusic.com) to .m4a files, then transfering them to the ipod, does the ipod then have both the ipod-formatted RGB565 version AND the mp4 tag containing the original? Or do the mp4 tags get stripped upon upload? That would make more sense.... just wondering if I should bother to optimize the art by hand before tagging or not.

If its only full-color jpeg in Windows, then who cares.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #17 –
i recall spoon mentioning something about album art and id3v2.. and that it did specify a way to embed it and stuff
http://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php?t=9456

personally i think album art is a pointless waste of space (just had to throw in my $.02)
Vorbis-q0-lowpass99
lame3.93.1-q5-V9-k-nspsytune

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #18 –
The definitive answer... The only way to display album art on ipod is using embedded.  Stupid or not, you have to use it.  No other way.  Blame it on apple.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #19 –
Quote
If i'm adding 200x200-ish jpegs (from allmusic.com) to .m4a files, then transfering them to the ipod, does the ipod then have both the ipod-formatted RGB565 version AND the mp4 tag containing the original?

Yep.

Quote
Or do the mp4 tags get stripped upon upload?

Nope.

Hope that clears it up.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #20 –
Quote
Quote
If i'm adding 200x200-ish jpegs (from allmusic.com) to .m4a files, then transfering them to the ipod, does the ipod then have both the ipod-formatted RGB565 version AND the mp4 tag containing the original?

Yep.

Quote
Or do the mp4 tags get stripped upon upload?

Nope.

Hope that clears it up.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=358930"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I just want to make sure you know that I mean mp4 tags, NOT id3v2. Any recommendations then on how to convert jpegs to this RGB565 format? Are the 16-bit jpegs, or something else?

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #21 –
Quote
personally i think album art is a pointless waste of space (just had to throw in my $.02)


so is --ape over --aps, but i use that too so embedded art isn't the biggest deal...

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #22 –
I know that there's no standard size for embedded images, but what size is everybody else using? I've been using 176x176 pixel jpgs.

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #23 –
Hi guys! This is my first post in this great forum (which i have been following for a very long time). I come from a linux environment and, for almost two years, i've been using Amarok which can handle the album art like iTunes does, ie. storing it into a file on your program's "library" folder. I was also curious to know if it would really affect the performance on, say, iPods, and maybe iTunes too. Reading this thread made me store the art into my library folder instead of embedding it. I would agree that this is the wisest solution.
 

id3 v2 with album art is SLOOOOOW

Reply #24 –
Quote from: Otto42 on
I disagree. Embedded album art is a great idea, and I recommend it to everybody.

If the player can't handle it, then the player is broken. Just don't use broken players and you don't have any issues with it.

As for wasted space, well, if your album art isn't ridiculously huge, then it's no big deal. Having a 300x300 cover art in the tag is a good idea. With JPG compression that's usually no more than 15k.

The advantages greatly outweigh the disadvatanges. Having the artwork embedded in the file means that it *stays* with the file. Renaming the file into a new directory structure doesn't lose the artwork. You don't have thousands of "folder.jpg" files sprinkled over your hard drive. You don't have to have special setups that depend on file names and/or locations. And it's damn near universal; all software actually worth using can read and display ID3v2 artwork. WMP, iTunes, probably foobar with the right plugin (and if it would stop erasing the artwork when retagging... here's hoping that's fixed in 0.9, as it prevents me from using foobar at the moment). Also iPod's, several other portable players, etc. Gapless isn't a problem if the unit is designed correctly in the first place.


As to the original question, iTunes gets slow when you initially embed the artwork, because it's having to rewrite the entire file, more or less. However, subsequent tagging operations will not be as slow as long as you're not making changes greater than the amount of tag padding used. Having excessively large files for artwork will also make it slow. I recommend no more than 40k for artwork for lossy files.



Exactly. I have Artwork ranging from 600x600 to 900x900, sometimes 1425x1425. I also have about 18900 tracks in iTunes. Using a Pentium 4 3.0 GHz processor, not even a latest Core 2 Duo. The performance in iTunes is not that slow. Like Otto said, subsequent ID3 modifications will be faster and I also recommend embedding Artwork.