Aligning on Quality Request Model (4K requests)

[Flawkee]

Meta Discussion: Aligning on Quality Request Model (Seerr #3060 vs Overseerr #3636)

I’d like to open a discussion to align on the intended product and UX direction before continuing implementation work.

This discussion is based on two different approaches currently proposed:

• Seerr PR feat: Improve 4K content visibility and related user experience #3060 (this PR)
• Overseerr PR #3636 (being ported to Seerr)

Both aim to improve how quality selection and availability are handled, but they represent different underlying models.

The Core Difference

The Overseerr approach (#3636) follows the existing design pattern where:

• 4K is treated as a special case
• Higher quality is effectively an upgrade path from standard quality
• Availability is mostly represented as a single state

The approach in #3060 explores treating quality as a more explicit and independent dimension.

The Key Question

Before discussing implementation details:

Should quality (e.g., 1080p, 4K) be treated as:

1. An upgrade to existing content
   or
2. A first-class, independent user choice?

Real-World Usage

In many real-world setups:

• Users maintain separate Radarr/Sonarr quality profiles (e.g., 1080p vs 4K)
• Storage or bandwidth constraints mean 4K is not always preferred
• Some setups intentionally keep both 1080p and 4K versions
• Different users on the same server may want different qualities

In these cases, quality behaves more like a choice, not just an upgrade.

Limitations Observed in the Upgrade-Based Model (#3636)

• Requesting 4K may depend on the existence of a standard version
• Requesting lower quality when higher quality exists is not always straightforward
• Availability does not clearly communicate which quality is present
• Assumes higher quality is always the desired end state

What #3060 Is Trying to Address

• Allow users to explicitly choose the quality they want (4K or FHD)
• Make it clearer what qualities are already available
• Better reflect real-world multi-quality library setups

Discussion Points

To help align on direction:

1. Should users be able to request 4K independently of standard quality?
2. Should users be able to request lower quality even if higher quality exists?
3. Should availability be tracked and displayed per quality?
4. Do we want to support coexistence of multiple qualities as a first-class concept?
5. How can this be achieved while staying consistent with Seerr’s UI/UX patterns?

I’m happy to adapt the implementation in #3060 based on the outcome of this discussion. The goal here is to align on the correct product direction first, and then implement it in a way that fits Seerr’s design language.

[xp5qkhs7nq-afk]

Personally I think requesting lower quality benefits fewer users. While certainly something that would be a nice to have, I'd argue most hardware is perfectly capable of live transcoding to a lower quality inside todays media servers. Instead I think it would be better to show labels such as SD, HD, FHD, and UHD on the items page. Then allow a user to request a higher resolution.

Much of my plex library is SD and FHD and allowing users to request FHD or UHD versions would be ideal for my use case as well as requesting quality level at the time of making a new request. For example, I could request Re:Zero and have the option of SD, HD, FHD, and UHD from the request modal. Some content will not be available in SD but it could certainly be treated as a minimum quality requested rather than I want this particular quality.

No, as I mentioned above, even the most basic processors these days have hardware encoders so any media server in the last 5+ years should be perfectly capable of transcoding to a lower quality if it's needed.

Yes. if SD and UHD exist, it would be ideal to show both as available.

I think following the example of something like Infuse would allow for a good UI/UX. While I've included a basic example of the standard qualities here, something more akin to Infuse would look better. I'd argue that on movies putting it next to the genre would make it visible without disrupting the flow. For TV shows next to where it says "Available" on the season.

[CultureCurator]

I would really enjoy having pretty much all of the features from this Seerr PR #3060. The 4K badge showing up on the title cards when only a 4K version is available is what I am most looking forward to. But I know from conversations with my users that all of the other features and options in this PR would also improve everyone's UI experience.

[CultureCurator]

Dang, I was hoping this would have gotten some more visibility or positive comments by now. After checking the comments on the PR I hope this PR's changes can be split up so these visibility changes remain moving towards being pulled while still aligning with the devs' vision.

[mikeh]

Thanks for starting this discussion. Hopefully it will get more traction over time.

As far as I'm concerned, the only thing missing for me is some kind of indicator that a 4K movie has been requested. That's it. Whether that's a separate 4K badge, or just the existing icon, I really don't mind. But something.

My fear is that whole feature is now lost in a major refactoring / redesign effort that's been "in the works" for nearly 3 years since the Overseerr PR. I don't fully understand why, when Seerr has native support for separate 4K Radarr and Sonarr instances, that this is so controversial. PR #3060 would appear to address a feature gap I'm sure others would appreciate.

[CultureCurator]

Thanks for the points you're making and you're welcome for keeping the discussion alive. One thing though, PR #3060 is not mine. I am just rooting for all or most of its visibility features to be implemented.

[mikeh]

My bad! I blame the heatwave 🥵

[Flawkee]

Thanks buddy, hopefully they will see it useful as well, as the Overseer PR is outdated and stale for so long.. hope this one won't end the same.