Unmanageable library

hi buccaneer,

yes, a good search function within the program is a must. but even more than that, i want user defined, unlimited folders for 'my filters' and 'favorites'. there is a reason the library has fixed folders, but i can see no reason for not allowing users to make any number of their own folders, like you can in windows with windows explorer.

there is actually no good reason that filters couldnt be accessed from a cd or dvd drive too... or at least no good reason i can see. and of course, the problem there is that i cant see

and, i think i can help you with at least one part of your post. that mysterious line you refer to is the line between 'texture' filters and 'effect' filters. texture filters are above that line and are filter with no imported image being used to render the final product. effect filters are those that do use any part of an imported image in the render of the final image. that's the difference.

so, if you are looking for an art filter to help you change another image, you wont find it in that top group of texture filters. and on the other hand, if you're looking for something like a leather or rock texture that isnt going to use any part of an imported image in the rendering, then you'd look in the top group. it's pretty simple once you get used to it. it's not enough, but at least that part is pretty simple.

When I designed the UI for Filter Forge, I totally underestimated the number of filters people will be creating and submitting. For example, I estimated the number of filters submitted to the library as 70-100 filters per year (and now we have over 5000 in 2 years or so), and the number of filters in My Filters as 10-30 filters.

What we have in mind is a Vista-like instant search across the entire local filter storage, and some way of having multiple folders for saving user-made filters. All this is considered for FF 2.0.

ah, vladimir, that is music to my ears! 10-30 filters in My Filters? hehe, i have that many versions of one filter in My Filters

Quote
StevieJ wrote: How about a "closed", fully-customizable file management system in "My Filters".....where we can create and name as many folders and sub-folders as we want?

+482 (the number of files in my "My Filters") - and it would be very very useful if deleted filters from the lib are put in a folder called "Deleted Filters" and not "My Filters".. I once made a script (ffcmd) that downloaded all filters from the online lib.. that was a very bad idea, as every deleted filter now ends up in My Filters and Filter Forge takes like 3 mins to start up...

Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote: multiple folders for saving user-made filters

excellent and a necessity

Quote
Constantin Malkov wrote: [...] who never left a comment on your filters?

For a start, that sounds like a reasonable criteria!

Quote
Crapadilla wrote: Quote Constantin Malkov wrote: filters, downloaded from the FF Library but then deleted from the FF site are going to "My Filters" directory. I would like to see a report message showing which filters was removed. +1 Good idea.

+2

I agree: I'm starting to amass a very difficult to use library. I wish I could, for my own filters, at least be able to create my own subdirectories. (Submitted should be it's own standard directory.)

Quote
but it sounds like they are going to just provide a certain number of hardwired folders that you only have the ability to rename.....

not sure where you got that from, steve. all vlad said was:

Quote
and some way of having multiple folders for saving user-made filters. All this is considered for FF 2.0.

.. so, not sure where you're getting that surmise.

ah, ok. i read it the other way, but i see what you're seeing. ok.

anything would be an improvement

I would think that some kind of closed file system that allows users/authors the ability to create and name as many folders as they want inside of "My Filters" wouldn't be too difficult to do.....

Hi SpaceRay,

I applaud the insistent and grudging tone of your post. I hadn't realized that it had been three years since I first opened this can of worms. I don't think that library management is as poor in 3.0 as it was in earlier versions, however it's still way short of what it should be.

BTW, if you think library management is bad, just try migrating this beast to a Windows 7 system from an earlier XP installation. In fairness, I think that the blame lies with Microsoft. Their idea of an evolved UI is one that gets in the way of knowledgeable users at almost every turn.

Screw waiting for FF4 for such an option, that means we need to wait a whole year AND pay good money for something that was promissed 2 versions ago.

The way I see it, this should be done as an update to FF3. And if for whatever reason it's too complex for an upgrade, how about writing a little tool that lives outside the main FF window?
All that's needed is just an XML file that holds filter names, keywords, user remarks and stuff like that. All the rest is already there in the library.
Hell, if it's still too complex, make it take the previews from the online library.

I guess I should have backed up my subjective opinion with a stopwatch, but I didn't.

My reference to improved library management was based entirely on my perception that FF 3.0 seems to produce faster search results.

In the absence of the library manager that so many of us have requested, one of my admittedly flawed workarounds is searching by author or keyword - far from perfect, but better than nothing. There's no way in hell I could possibly remember hundreds of filter names, yet I have a pretty good idea of which contributors have submitted the most interesting ones. If I have some idea of what the filter might be named, keyword searches can yield quick results. In my experience, single keywords such as 'HDR' or 'stone' produce small and easily perusable lists. Typically, it takes me no more than one or two searches to zero in on a particular filter out of the roughly 1600 I have downloaded.

I forgive a lot of what's missing from 3.0 because of improvements to the rendering engine.

Quote
buccaneer wrote: There's no way in hell I could possibly remember hundreds of filter names, yet I have a pretty good idea of which contributors have submitted the most interesting ones.

Excellent and very well said, I think is impossible to remember so many names and be able to use them, and is a pain to search for them using the categories that are not very descriptive, as for example, some filters that are in "misc" should really be really in another category, and also with some of "creative"

Quote
]buccaneer wrote: If I have some idea of what the filter might be named, keyword searches can yield quick results. In my experience, single keywords such as 'HDR' or 'stone' produce small and easily perusable lists.

ADDING OUR OWN KEYWORDS IN A EASY WAY WOULD HELP MUCH TOO

the results from the library can be easy if you know something about the filter, but if you do not remember it much more difficult.

It would be really useful and much better that we could add our OWN keywords in a easy and fast way (without having to modify the XML file) and so we could put our own recognizable words into the filter, and remember them better.

Spaceray, I tried this both in FF2 and FF3...
Maybe I have too many filters with the word "bronz" in them I can only see 6?
Is there a limit on the number of results shown when you search for a keyword?

Quote
Morgantao wrote: Spaceray, I tried this both in FF2 and FF3... Maybe I have too many filters with the word "bronz" in them I can only see 6?

Morgantao, I have seen something curious, when looking for the Inujima´s balls, I write

orn,
orna,
ornam,
orname,
ornamen AND nothing is FOUND !!!

Is ONLY when I write ornament that FF know what I am searching for

BUT if instead of using the plain word and I use the * wildcard is MUCH BETTER.

Just writing or* founds fast already the ornamented balls, and if I write orn* the results appears in the first place.

So the recommendation is to use the * wildcard, so in your case please use bro* or bron* or even bronz* if you like better.

Quote

Morgantao wrote: Screw waiting for FF4 for such an option, that means we need to wait a whole year AND pay good money for something that was promissed 2 versions ago. The way I see it, this should be done as an update to FF3. And if for whatever reason it's too complex for an upgrade, how about writing a little tool that lives outside the main FF window? All that's needed is just an XML file that holds filter names, keywords, user remarks and stuff like that. All the rest is already there in the library. Hell, if it's still too complex, make it take the previews from the online library.

Well, instead of waiting for FF to do something, you have already decides to do it yourself with the great (or most) help of your brother-in-law and we will be able to solve this VERY BIG Unmanageable library problem.

I am very happy to tell that thanks to Morgantao we will be able to have some kind of alternative solution to this problem

Please see the thread I have put about in this link here below

Morgantao´s New tool for custom organizing and managing FF library!!!!