What are some reasons behind the current categorization?

As the library grows, the current categorization will hopefully be replaced by something more efficient. Personally, I think the categories should be abandoned in favor of a more flexible system using tags with levels of generalization or 'depth'.

For example, my 'Lounge Lizards' filter (currently in the 'Misc' category) could have several tags to categorize it, like 'Building > Interior > Furniture > Chair/Sofa', with each level going into more 'depth'. It could also be tagged as 'Building > Interior > Wall > Fabric' or 'Nature > Organics > Skin > Leather', depending on which preset your looking at and what usage you have in mind. When I chose the category for this filter, I was torn between 'Building' (because it's furniture/interior themed), 'Techno' and 'Organics'. It ended up in 'Misc' because it was basically a bit of everything of the above. Had I been able to choose tags instead of fixed categories, the whole thing probably would have been categorized much better.

We could have clusters of super-tags, tags and sub-tags designed to allow for broad and fine categorization. 'building' for example would be a super-tag that includes derivative sub-tags like exterior, interior, which in turn include wall, floor, etc. So, by choosing to look for all 'interior' tagged filters, the user would get filters for walls, floors, furniture, decorative items, carpets, wallpaper patterns, plants, cushion designs, etc., which - under the current system - would be scattered across several categories. He could then further refine his search by choosing a tag from a 'deeper' level or by excluding certain sub-tags. Say he doesn't want his 'interior' tag search ruined by those millions of abstract wallpaper patterns and just excluded filters with those tags. There are lots of possibilities in there...

I agree with everything that has been said.

The only strict categories (mutually exclusive) should be the textures (no ext. image) and effects (with ext. image).

*As a side note I'm not sure those are necessarily the best names. You can certainly make a texture filter with images which is confusing.

Quote
(I know how subjective this is, just thinking out loud!)

it is for exactly that reason that i'm currently argueing for a simple 'downloaded filters' category and that's it. nothing more. but, the user then has to have access to his own folder making capability so that he can sort out where he wants to put all of his filters he just downloaded and the ones he/she makes.

if you want to also add tags and search to the 'downloaded filters', that's fine, but to me, i'd like to sort and pick and delete and such on my own terms. the user has already added keywords to his filter. so a search on keywords and author names shld be sufficient with the system i want.

just give me the ability to make and organize my own filter file tree and i'm happy (dont look at this, vlad. i know i've requested this in the past )

ok, so the counter arguement to this has to be, most folks arent going to do that. they just want to be able to find a filter quickly and use it and forget it or add it to 'my favorites'. and that's fine. keep the current categories and just add the ability to make and handle a file tree in my filters or my favorites or both and again, i'm happy