similar to: Album art - requirements

>> So, a possible way to encode album art would be: >> >> - a Skeleton stream with appropriate header messages >> - one Kate stream per image, carrying a PNG image >> (alternatively, use Ogg/MNG, if someone brings it from the dead) >> [...] Silvia wrote: >Interesting proposal. Not sure it won't over-complicate album art though... Well yes, of course

You said "With the exception of where to put a picture file, VorbisComments in a Vorbis stream are the same as VorbisComments in a FLAC stream." In METADATA_BLOCK_PICTURE case they would not be the same. Up to now we could exchange the complete block of VorbisComments. But with the addiction of METADATA_BLOCK_PICTURE doesn't happen this way. In Ogg files the METADATA_BLOCK_PICTURE

"Santiago Jimeno" wrote: > Flac files, as us knows, follows the Vorbis Tags system included in block 4 > Recently Vorbis has established the possibility to include picture files by > means of 2 Tags: COVERARTMIME AND COVERART. > To work therewith is quite easy. No. this in incorrect. The VorbisComment "COVERART" was only ever unofficial, and has been deprecated

OK Martin. Thank you for the explanations and for your time. I am writing a program that reads and writes all existent Tags types. It lacks only to end the edition (rewriting) of "Native" Flac and Matroska. Both cases for the same problem: the separation of Tags and Picture in different blocks. In Flac I resolved it, but now I have to add METADATA_BLOCK_PICTURE. Reading Vorbis

> is coverart a header-type content or a time-aligned type content? > > Well, it's collection-level metadata, so it doesn't belong in files at all. :) Well right, but the problem is that external coverart files are unhandy (broken links!!, streaming...) Users therefore want to embed them most times, as you can tell from other audio file formats: the majority of cover art is

>I don't mind (and approve of) the idea of reusing as much of proven >standards as we can. But putting it in a Vorbis comment will in fact >piss off people who then can't play the file. It's not as much a >qestion of displaying the tag as text (although that is a concern) >it's that most hardware players that only have 10-20kB available for >stream buffering

Hello to the people reading this list! I am developing tagging support for ogg vorbis in Nero products and we are currently thinking of supporting cover art in ogg files. What is the current state of proposal for cover art in ogg files? Is this http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/VorbisComment#Cover_art still the latest information? Regards, Goran -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

I think we have to discuss a fundamental question about coverart first: is coverart a header-type content or a time-aligned type content? It was my impression that it is mostly header-type content, i.e. concerns the full file rather than segments of it. Therefore, embedding it into any of the time-aligned streams (Kate, CMML, OggMNG) doesn't make much sense to me. It should be in a header.

On 13-Oct-08, at 2:10 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > is coverart a header-type content or a time-aligned type content? Well, it's collection-level metadata, so it doesn't belong in files at all. :) > It was my impression that it is mostly header-type content, i.e. > concerns the full file rather than segments of it. It makes sense to reference it per-chain-segment in an Ogg

Hi, there was a thread a few months ago about album art, and how to embed it in an Ogg stream. The outcome was unconclusive, and kind of settled on the existing practice of adding a uuencoded image in a Vorbis comment, or similar. A better solution would be to embed those images as a separate stream, including hints as to what image represents (front cover, back cover, etc). The obvious

>I have more than once said I'm in favor of the vorbiscomment solution. >It's ugly, it will break this and that one other player, but these >people want the feature that bad so they won't mind about any of those >issues. Plus it means little or no work for a feature the people who >actually do code care little about, and it certainly helps that >there's already

I have more than once said I'm in favor of the vorbiscomment solution. It's ugly, it will break this and that one other player, but these people want the feature that bad so they won't mind about any of those issues. Plus it means little or no work for a feature the people who actually do code care little about, and it certainly helps that there's already at least one

On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 1:05 AM, lvqcl <lvqcl.mail at gmail.com> wrote: > I cannot find anything about the size of METADATA_BLOCK_PICTURE block > in <http://xiph.org/flac/format.html>. Where did you read this? > METADATA_BLOCK_HEADER has a 24-bit field to encode the length of METADATA_BLOCK_DATA ; hence the limitation (which not only applies to METADATA_BLOCK_PICTURE but all

Hi, I think we can start by defining an official field name at www.xiph.org/vorbis/doc/v-comment.html which is used as a file system link to an existing image file. I suggest the field name to be "PICTURE". What is ogg MNG? Is it a container format for PNG files which should be embedded in OGG files? If I understand correctly, the picture would be placed in a different logical stream

Oops, meant to add, there's absolutely no restrictions on the format of any picture block, either, and opusenc will already just add whatever gets passed in without even trying to verify anything about the file format. That's up to tagging and playback software to support; foobar2000, for instance, only supports formats that are part of Windows' GDIplus library. On Fri, Jun 21, 2019

Ogg files can have multiple COVERART or METADATA_BLOCK_PICTURE tags without a problem, though. METADATA_BLOCK_PICTURE is part of the FLAC spec, not OGG (and definitely not Opus), and you can have as many METADATA_BLOCK_PICTURE blocks as you want, so even if each can only store a single picture I'm very unclear about what the problem is? Opus isn't related to its containers, though, those

" Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves " <justivo at gmail.com> wrote: ... > To be fair, only the Vorbis users requested albumart. FLAC users > should in theory be able to use the tag too if they want, but this > wouldn't be something we'd see in other codecs like Speex and Theora. This is a minor point, but FLAC users can already do this using METADATA_BLOCK_PICTURE (which

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 7:24 PM, Martin Leese<martin.leese at stanfordalumni.org> wrote: > Erik de Castro Lopo <mle+la at mega-nerd.com> wrote: > >> Martin Leese wrote: >>> Anyway, calling alloc()s with no corresponding >>> free()s is a memory leak. Not good code. >> >> The alloca() function allocates space on the stack and >> that

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 6:40 AM, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo at gmail.com> wrote: > A good proposal, except for the fact most album art is JPEG. Not > forgetting either that, semantically, it's pretty bizarre to have > album art in a text format. I *desperately* want to provide the cover art for my own album in PDF format. Presently I provide JPG in the MP3s; at 72 DPI it

On 10/13/08, ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com <ogg.k.ogg.k at googlemail.com> wrote: > The outcome was unconclusive, and kind > of settled on the existing practice of adding a uuencoded image > in a Vorbis comment, or similar. COVERART's the name. There's at least one known software to be using it. > Kate streams can include PNG images, so are another possibility, >