I inherited this set when I was hired on as a graphic designer at my shop. It's huge, yes, but the old adage about quantity over quality rings true. And this monster is cumbersome to use. The print manual is more hefty than a large-print annotated Bible, and is all but useless to find images-- you first have to find your object in the index, and then flip to the page to squint at tiny, grainy little thumbnails in black and white, then go to the disc itself, hunt it down again, and then pray that once it's up on the screen it's not completely hideous and unworkable.
The vector images are roughly 75% utter junk. Most of it looks outdated, there are no bézier curves to be had at all, and the quality of the art itself? I'd have never made it out of high school art class (let alone college) if it had been my work. Sloppy, ugly, amateurish. (A notable WTF: there's a single image of a cheery man inside a giant condom. I can't think of any reasonable use for it that doesn't induce crippling laughter.)
The raster and photograph sections suffer from about the same ratio of crap-to-notcrap. I leave the rasters alone by and large because I work mostly in vector, but on the few occasions I've had use of them, the rasters are low-resolution, look poorly scanned, and wholly unsuitable to print. Website use, maybe, but I don't spend a lot of time there. The photographs are a mess-- not categorized, it's impossible to find anything specific; Need an elephant photo? Hope you like looking through 300 photos of African wildlife. I'd say about half of the photos are poorly taken, as if someone raided their co-workers' families' vacation photo albums.
To be absolutely fair, I do rely on this collection when I want something simple or iconic. However I do end up changing or modifying almost everything about it in the end to suit my needs. But in the end, it's more trouble than it's worth to go hunting for the few diamonds in the rough.Get more detail about Art Explosion 600,000 Images.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น