Let's face it, all of these techniques work, but are a chore to keep up... and even worse to create if (like many of us) the idea doesn't occur to you when you first start off in this game, and consequently already have a large collection before recognising the issue. Just a couple of observations on suggestions above. I agree with Gebe that using the description field for things like Vue objects and atmospheres is an ideal method of identification. But then again, if the creators welcome credits, perhaps it is in their interests to add this themselves (asm any do) prior to publication. Models in other formats like OBJ, 3DS etc are more of a problem, as also are textures, not least because the latter often come in large collections. Using subfolders to store them can often cause problems in cataloguing them for access from Vue, or in the case of textures from other programs and/or generalised image catalogues like Media Centre, Portfolio, etc. I gues the ideal way here is via notes in a word-processor doc, spreadsheet or field in an image cataloguer - but it is a real chore to keep up. Renaming the files is sometimes a viable possibility, but again can cause some location and recognition problems (as with sufolders) where a texture is pre-linked with a downloaded object. I agree with Yves' comment about the "pain" of renaming a lot of these EXCEPT if you have Paint Shop Pro 8 which has a very flexible batch renaming facility that I have found very useful. Doubtless there are other stand-alone freeware apps that would do a similar job. So personally I rely either on memory or the use the original creators have made of the filename or the description field (where appropriate). Otherwise I tend only to acknowledge that things were downloaded from the web and not created by me. Without wishing to re-open the recent debate on another thread here, that is the important thing in my view: credit is a matter of courtesy tempered by convenience; claiming authorship of something you did not creat is immoral and dishonest. It is also pointless - not least because there are a lot of viewers here, many of whom will visit the same sources and will readily recognise the activities of a cheat who deliberately stoops to such levels.