WMP12 win7 7100, Stop WMP12 from touching folder.jpg files


Recommended Posts

If you get rid of the reserved system file 'albumartsmall.jpg' for whatever reason, then at any later point when small thumbnails are shown (shell, Media Center, Windows Media Player) you may trigger the album art extractor which will refresh the folder.jpg/albumartsmall.jpg pair.

There's no reason to just make a "folder.jpg" file unless you are deliberately trying to cause this. :)

How can I try to trigger the extractor? I been playing around in WMP and MCE and myFolder.jpg files are ok and have not been resized.

  • 2 weeks later...

Honestly, I am really tired of this problem.

Why can't someone just add a "Don't screw with my album art under any circumstance whatsoever because I have a larger brain than you, dear computer" checkbox, or make it a registry change if you don't want to expose it to the masses...

So if I am understanding this correctly, the way to prevent this from happening is to remove or in most cases, not create the folder.jpg files and make sure the high-res art work is embedded in the music files. I really HATE WMP12. Version 11 was good, but this problem with album artwork has to change. This isn't 2001 with 15" monitors. Even iTunes downloads it's artwork in 600X600 resolution.

I am thinking of removing WMP and going to Media Monkey for ripping and organization and WMC for playing music files. MS has dumbed down WMP way to much for my liking.

Yes, you should probably consider "folder.jpg" and "albumartsmall.jpg" reserved file names that would be a horrible plan to touch. Inserting the art into the files would be the correct plan.

This should generally have been consistent since day one... more people are enjoying album art these days so it's more noticeable.

Do yourself a favor and remove WMP and install Winamp 552 Pro. It is far superior than WMP, just about anything is. :rolleyes:

Do yourself a favour, and don't troll threads where it isn't warranted, this is about WMP within the Windows 7 Beta, not a debate about the relative merits of WMP and Winamp.

As for the topic, someone needs to pop into the WMP design team, and tell them that 800x600 went out of fashion 10 years ago. Low res album art looks awful on high resolution displays, and why Microsoft feel that there is some need for it to fiddle with your album art anyway, lord only knows.

  • 1 month later...

Any news here? Just did a new scan with MP11 on VISTA and MP replaced many folder.jpgs. Then after that started my xbox360, opend MediaCenter and after selecting the folder where all my mp3s are MediaCenter did even a better job nearly all .jpgs are now replaced...

I hope this will be not the case in the Windows 7 final...

Christian

  • 2 weeks later...
Yes, you should probably consider "folder.jpg" and "albumartsmall.jpg" reserved file names that would be a horrible plan to touch. Inserting the art into the files would be the correct plan.

This should generally have been consistent since day one... more people are enjoying album art these days so it's more noticeable.

This topic is insane. How hard is it to understand that it's a horrible policy to allow WMP12 to degrade a user's pre-existing album art?!? I don't mind WMP12 filling in the gaps for me where I don't already have album art but ruining all of your high resolution art just by running the program is ridiculous!

And Zach, I have to say, you've been rather unhelpful in this thread. The OP has stated how this happens, other people have confirmed it, and still more complain about the problem on a simple Google search. There's nothing to debate here, WMP is doing something it shouldn't be doing and this needs to be changed.

Microsoft wants people to use WMP, right? WMP is consistently hated by a lot of people, right? Well maybe MS should just shut up and listen to people who want to use it but can't because it does something wrong.

This topic is insane. How hard is it to understand that it's a horrible policy to allow WMP12 to degrade a user's pre-existing album art?!? I don't mind WMP12 filling in the gaps for me where I don't already have album art but ruining all of your high resolution art just by running the program is ridiculous!.
You know there is an option in WMP to fill in missing gaps only, right?
This topic is insane. How hard is it to understand that it's a horrible policy to allow WMP12 to degrade a user's pre-existing album art?!? I don't mind WMP12 filling in the gaps for me where I don't already have album art but ruining all of your high resolution art just by running the program is ridiculous!
The biggest culprit should generally be folder.jpg without a matching albumartsmall.jpg .
And Zach, I have to say, you've been rather unhelpful in this thread. The OP has stated how this happens, other people have confirmed it, and still more complain about the problem on a simple Google search. There's nothing to debate here, WMP is doing something it shouldn't be doing and this needs to be changed.
I apologize for any misperceptions. I believe my earlier comments about folder.jpg evidently being a reserved file name is probably the most interesting point to note.

I apologize if my attempts to help people understand this concern a little more clearly are in any fashion misconstrued. folder.jpg is a reserved file name according to everything you and I are seeing here. My comments might be illuminative or might not be, but it seems like you should:

* only update the art within the file directly

* not count on folder.jpg being 'your' file

The biggest culprit should generally be folder.jpg without a matching albumartsmall.jpg .

I apologize for any misperceptions. I believe my earlier comments about folder.jpg evidently being a reserved file name is probably the most interesting point to note.

I apologize if my attempts to help people understand this concern a little more clearly are in any fashion misconstrued. folder.jpg is a reserved file name according to everything you and I are seeing here. My comments might be illuminative or might not be, but it seems like you should:

* only update the art within the file directly

* not count on folder.jpg being 'your' file

I understand that's what people should do to avoid this problem, and it's good to know that and have it documented so thank you, but at the end of the day this is still a problem.

And, yes, there is supposedly an option to only fill in the gaps but others are reporting it's not working so I'm not even going to let WMP access the internet or touch my files.

The settings in question do not affect the reserved file name 'folder.jpg', hence my comments.

Your comments are interesting and important, but that's not the way the player works and there is pretty much no mechanism to do so. It's a good suggestion... but it doesn't work that way. :( This is why my two points:

* only update the art within the file directly

* not count on folder.jpg being 'your' file

are probably highly relevant.

Plus if you update the art within the file, it's more portable. :)

  • 2 months later...
A simple Process Monitor review of the player shows

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\MediaPlayer\Preferences]

"LargeAlbumArtSize"=dword:00000320

"SmallAlbumArtSize"=dword:00000190

might be interesting. They will not affect everything. They max out at 800(x800). Use at your own risk.

i need to bump this thread as i have run into the folder.jpg issue in this thread and think i may have a solution.

if you add the below values it appears that WMP will NOT generate new folder.jpg OR AlbumArtSmall.jpg files. IF folder.jpg (or AlbumArtSmall) already exist(s), it does not resize it but mearly sets the HIDDEN and SYSTEM attributes. so if you have a folder.jpg and/or an albumartsmall.jpg file at 1500x1500, it will leave them alone (except for hiding them...).

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\MediaPlayer\Preferences]

"LargeAlbumArtSize"=dword:ffffffff

"SmallAlbumArtSize"=dword:ffffffff

can anyone out there verify this? i tired with a brand new database and a few albums. a quick outside verification would be great. thanks.

  • 2 years later...

i need to bump this thread as i have run into the folder.jpg issue in this thread and think i may have a solution.

if you add the below values it appears that WMP will NOT generate new folder.jpg OR AlbumArtSmall.jpg files. IF folder.jpg (or AlbumArtSmall) already exist(s), it does not resize it but mearly sets the HIDDEN and SYSTEM attributes. so if you have a folder.jpg and/or an albumartsmall.jpg file at 1500x1500, it will leave them alone (except for hiding them...).

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\MediaPlayer\Preferences]

"LargeAlbumArtSize"=dword:ffffffff

"SmallAlbumArtSize"=dword:ffffffff

can anyone out there verify this? i tired with a brand new database and a few albums. a quick outside verification would be great. thanks.

I know this thread is old but I just had to say that this registry setting works!! I've been looking for years for a way to correct the whole shrinking album art issue and for anyone who cares, this is it!! Thanks!!

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Yup, that's a doozy right there 😄
    • It's a bundle of tools created by a variety of people, so things can go wrong sometimes. It's a great addition to Windows, and I use a lot of the tools on a daily basis. Also, it's still a 0.**** release so quick updates are to be expected 😉
    • Oh, I did. And it's even worse than I was hoping! Besides a lot of techno-babble jargon (yes I understand 100% of it but it's still all just techno-babble) there's 2 key points that make me super-weary about even considering testing this out. -- By default, after installation, a relay is automatically set up, so you do not need to care about that. * Non-chatmail apps use email servers as a long-term message archive while chatmail clients use email servers for ephemeral instant message relay. * Supporting the full variety of classic email setups would require considerable development and maintenance efforts, and complicate making chatmail-based messaging more resilient, reliable and fast. -- Basically, the end-user device is the 'server' (relay) so there is NO ARCHIVING whatsoever because every message is necessarily ephemeral. Great for techno-paranoia (and for illicit activities preferring no tracks to cover) but terrible for everybody else. It's also ironically contradictory to engineering principles of redundancies besides the transport layers due to the explicit absence of any persistent storage. Instead of 'classic email address' retaining multi-GB messaging archives on its server, now every device must retain 100% of those storage demands. (Email messages were originally meant to be short correspondences, not the multi-MB attachments boondoggle that now exists with unlimited spam engines flooding every potential recipient.) Any device swap or reset (or loss) makes the entire message history go bye-bye forever... lest there's an off-device auto-archival "relay" mechanism that's really a separate server that holds onto all transported messages (an email server) that utilizes 'chatmail email address' identities (like an email server) and its own persistent storage archive (like an email server). But... this solution is hoping to exist alongside real-world email address identities (based on the email server relay pathway) but simply render messages in chat thread format in an ephemeral manner (with contents being encrypted, and messages auto-expiring) ... In the end, it's a chat app/experience for the Web3/P2P-at-all-costs zealots. (I have accts on all sorts of federated web3 services so I understand the technical and non-technical alike.) For any practical users, however, it's just another service to download/install, register, cross-share id cards/qr codes, but know that there's no history/archive whatsoever (by design) so no account/message recovery whatsoever... update the device, install a bummed update patch, or dare upgrade your device... all history, poof, gone. Ya gotta start everything over again like they're a brand new person.
    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!