I've downloaded so many graphics packages that now I couldn't find a single grapic I wanted if I had to. How do I organize all these graphics from all the packages I've gotten? Help?
You can arrange your graphics using a simple excel sheet. For example you write category, your own description and the path to a file. Its the easiest way. This method is not as easy as excel but very fast to search and locate the files. If you know vb.net or c#.net you can create a small desktop application with a preview.
well you could get a mac or run linux and have instant system-wise searches, and also have excellent file previews in your file browsing program. Yeah, anybody who pays more for windows, and then has trouble trying to use it professionally sure doesn't have my sympathy. The professional environment designed for development is available cheaper (os x) or freely (linux) and the only thing stopping you from taking advantage of their features and power is you. I personally just toss all my images and odds and ends into a couple of folders in my ~/Pictures folder and then make sure they're named descriptively, then I either browse or search when I need them. Works for me, and I've got thousands upon thousands.
I do the same as innovati but with out the Mac/Linux bias I just use Microsoft Desktop Search, or Google Desktop Search (Personally I prefer the Microsoft ones as it allows me to search code easier). The only thing you have to make sure you do is ensure its indexing everything (Something it doesn't do by default). Jen
You can download Google Picasa or Windows Live Gallery. Then set folders, where you've stored your graphics and use features such as tagging.
Well, yes, although there are 3rd party search tools available for windows, they are cumbersome by design. What OS X and Linux have that Microsoft has never managed to have is a Journaling File System. See, in a Journaling FS all of the files are placed on the hard drive, and an index is kept updated internally. This means you don't get fragmentation (because files aren't being split and reassembled) and you also have a searchable index that can instantly list off all of the filenames in your search as fast as your computer can display them. With windows you need to build that index, maintain that index, and then search that index and even with the best tools, you're limited by the faulty designed filesystem it runs on top of. Did you know, NTFS (what you're likely running Windows on) was first brought out by Microsoft before Windows '95. They wrote the spec for it (and it wasn't terribly advanced, even for it's time) but after 14 years they still don't have a single product that embraces all of the features in their OWN filesystem? That's right, not even Microsoft fully supports their own filesystem, and they rejecting using other existing better-designed and cross-platform standard filesystems to do it too. Windows only supports a handful of filesystems, and most of them are Microsoft-designed, where although OS X uses HFS+ by default, it still has the capability to read and write to many unix standard filesystems without installing drivers. It comes down to the tools you're using. Some cars weren't built for racing, some operating systems weren't built for development. Would it be easier to hack, modify, extend and pay more just to try to turn a poorly designed operating system into something you can almost develop on, or would it be easier to just use the right tool from the beginning?