Skip to main content
Topic: Say NO to embedded art? (Read 19590 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #25
I see no need to search for the cover arts - i have my originals and my scanner. The only case where you need to search for it is when you lost your original (happens pretty rarely)

Not everyone owns a scanner; not everyone wants to own a scanner.
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #26
I have a scanner and I still don't like to scan my cover art.  I would rather spend 1 second looking up a 500X500 cover art picture than 5 minutes getting an album out and scanning the cover.

On a side note, I embed all of my album art.  That is the only way for my iPod touch, Zune, Creative Zen, PSP, and PS3 to display it.  Otherwise I would have to have iTunes look up the album art, the Zune software look up the album art, not have album art on my Zen, and manually associate the album art with a picture on both my PSP and PS3.  The process of embedding the album art in 10,000+ songs is nothing compared to the time it would take to do all of those other methods.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #27
I don't really care about cover art. It's just the music that matters.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #28
Album art, to me, is part of the overall music-listening experience.  It's cool to instantly browse to an album by view, instead of just text.

I embed all artwork;  the storage usage equates to about 1 additional song per album, which isn't that much.  I use only 600x600 album art -- that is the ideal size IMO.  When I can't find the art, I just leave it blank and keep looking.

iTunes' "Get Album Artwork" has been a big help, but lately I've been getting all my art from AlbumArtExchange.com.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #29
...I just wondered if  the general consensus was to leave encoded files as raw as possible...


Why?! That doesn't make any sense!!!!

As for album art I use it because my iPod can display it. When iTunes doesn't have one for download I look for them in Google Images. There is no need for scanning them in 99% of the cases (and I don't bother scanning the last 1%.)


Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #31
I just got done setting an ipod up for a friend of mine who really likes the cover flow feature.  The only way I could get iTunes to display artwork for albums where it cannot be downloaded (or was wrong or of low quality) was to embed the images.  At least I assume that's what iTunes is doing.


I don't mean to quote an old post but I didn't see this one earlier when I made my first reply.  iTunes is not embedding the album art in tracks where it obtains the art from the iTunes Store.  Instead, iTunes is storing an uncompressed image (normally 600X600) in another directory and then just associating that picture with all the songs in that album.  That way it isn't embedding 1.5MB pictures with all sorts of audio files.  That would cause a drastic increase in file sizes and album sizes.  I don't know why iTunes just doesn't settle for ~76k jpeg images instead of using an uncompressed format.  I don't think that images as small as 600X600 (let alone displaying these images on 320X240 and 320X480 devices) need to be uncompressed.  I found out the hard way that iTunes uses these abnormally large pictures by using a program that looked through iTunes and automatically embedded the artwork it was using.  All of the sudden my 160kbps VBR mp3 files went from taking up 4.5MB (for a 3:20 song) to nearly 6MB.

You are right though, you need to embed the album art if iTunes can't download the correct album art or if the album art it downloads is bad.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #32
It would be so fantastic if one could have album art act the way iTunes makes it act when it downloads it from the iTunes Store (referencing one file instead of having multiples). I'm pretty sure it would save me a few gigs of space.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #33
@kornchild2002,

That was surely not the proper way to do embed iTunes artwork. It is supposed to save the Artwork as JPEG first and then embed them. This way an Artwork would hardly be 1.5 MiB in file size.

@ozmosis83,

The purpose of embedding artwork to every file is so that you can create a custom playlist of your songs, copy them to your USB or whatever, and take  it somewhere else and still have your artwork. If you only had artwork in one file that referenced to the whole album, then when you take one track out somewhere else, you are most likely not to have the Artwork with the song.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #34
Another case for embedding artwork:  performance.

I've noticed that iTunes - specifically Cover Flow - seems to run faster when the images are embedded (as opposed to "linked" as how Get Album Art does it).  Linked images seem to always lag while loading a preview, especially when switching the view setting (Song, Album, Artist, etc.)

MCoreD is also right about being able to assemble playlists or file compilations and being able to copy them while maintaining artwork. 

I would only resort to scanning covers as a very last resort.  To scan a large collection, and properly clean up for use would be time-prohibitive.

Edit:  grammar

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #35
I could care less about cover art, so I don't embed it, but I don't think that there is any problem with doing so.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #36
For the record, I think it's less of a huge task to search online for album art than it is to scan the cover art to each CD you have.
I guess I'm one of those people who think "it's better to do it yourself". I just prefer to scan them myself cause then i will be able to control the quality. Most album art i saw on the net is kinda low quality. Of course it also depends on what kind of music you are listening to, it's hard to get HQ scans for some more "exotic" music.

Also, because I'm doing a "full" backup of the music and the art, I like to have things like .. barcode & other stuff to match my physical copy

Not everyone owns a scanner; not everyone wants to own a scanner.
True, although i don't really understand why someone would not want to own a scanner... unless it's a money issue.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #37
Embedded art of at least 300x300 will enhance the soundstage and 7th dimensional tonality of the music.
Anything of lesser quality will adversly effect the bass imaging and likely lead to tinnitus.

I am kidding, of course....

I have tried both and prefer embedding.
It seems like a much "cleaner" way to do it and embedding works better for my portable devices.
I do love album art, for me it is an integral part of the music.

Edit: Humor added.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #38
@kornchild2002,

That was surely not the proper way to do embed iTunes artwork. It is supposed to save the Artwork as JPEG first and then embed them. This way an Artwork would hardly be 1.5 MiB in file size.


Who says that iTunes is supposed to operate that way?  iTunes pretty much does what it wants regardless of what people think how it is supposed to operate.  iTunes has operated this way ever since Apple introduced the feature to download album art from the iTunes Store.  I think it uses uncompressed png files but I am not quite sure what format the images are stored in.  The only thing I know is that they are uncompressed as they take up between 1-1.5MB and, when I save them as jpeg images, the file sizes are drastically reduced to ~76k.

I would much rather have iTunes operate the way you mentioned but it has never operated that way and it probably never will.  For some reason, it Apple thinks that it needs to work only with uncompressed images with many of them looking crappier than compressed jpegs that I could download off of the internet at fraction of the file sizes.  A prime example is the All That Remains "Overcome" album.  The artwork that iTunes downloaded was washed out and it took up way too much space.  I downloaded a jpeg from using a Google image search that looked better and took up less space.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #39
True, although i don't really understand why someone would not want to own a scanner... unless it's a money issue.

...or a dozen other credible reasons.
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #40
True, although i don't really understand why someone would not want to own a scanner... unless it's a money issue.

...or a dozen other credible reasons.



As I said, I own a scanner.  It is actually a all-in-one Office unit made by HP.  I have used the scanning feature about a dozen times since I have owned it.  I purchased the unit way back in 2001 as well and it still prints just fine.  I just don't scan anything.  In fact, I haven't scanned a single album cover.  I have only scanned other pictures that were required for homework in some of my early engineering classes.  I think it is just easier to go online to find a picture.  Now I use my printer's copy feature quite often.  But that is is just it acting as a color/black and white photo copier, I don't scan those copied documents.

I have many reasons why I don't use the scanner function of my printer, I also have dozens of reasons why I don't use the fax function of my printer.  On top of that, these all-in-one printers are so inexpensive today that many people do in fact own scanners.  They would rather just go online and look up the album artwork instead of taking the 5 minutes to find the CD cover, scan it, properly size it, clean it up, and then add it to their music collection.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #41
I found out the hard way that iTunes uses these abnormally large pictures by using a program that looked through iTunes and automatically embedded the artwork it was using.  All of the sudden my 160kbps VBR mp3 files went from taking up 4.5MB (for a 3:20 song) to nearly 6MB.


kornchild2002, my reply was more focused on the program you were mentioning that caused you trouble with greatly increased file sizes. I was saying it was not the proper way to embed artwork using iTunes because the programmer should have known iTunes had uncompressed images. Talking about iTunes itself, yes I agree, uncompressed artwork is an overkill.

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #42

I found out the hard way that iTunes uses these abnormally large pictures by using a program that looked through iTunes and automatically embedded the artwork it was using.  All of the sudden my 160kbps VBR mp3 files went from taking up 4.5MB (for a 3:20 song) to nearly 6MB.


kornchild2002, my reply was more focused on the program you were mentioning that caused you trouble with greatly increased file sizes. I was saying it was not the proper way to embed artwork using iTunes because the programmer should have known iTunes had uncompressed images. Talking about iTunes itself, yes I agree, uncompressed artwork is an overkill.


I understand.  I just thought that I would point out that iTunes never fully operate the way I/we want it to.  I want to embed 500X500 (or 600X600) jpeg images while other people like having uncompressed images assigned (not embedded) to each track.  That and I don't like those automatic embedding programs that rely on iTunes as they are using uncompressed album art that will drastically (I consider 1.5MB to be drastic) increase the file size.  So I was just trying to poke more fun at what I think is a flawed system (iTunes and those other programs).

Say NO to embedded art?

Reply #43
Out of curiosity, what program was this kornchild2002?

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019