Feedback on Generative Fill Success Rates and Credit System in Adobe Firefly

Dear Monika Gause,

Thank you for highlighting the significant operational costs associated with processing each request on Adobe’s servers, an aspect critical to understanding the financial model behind AI services. It’s clear that managing these costs is essential for Adobe’s sustainability in offering generative AI features like those in Firefly.

However, I propose considering a balanced approach that could address both Adobe’s financial sustainability and user engagement:

1. Efficient Usage Encouragement: Implementing a model where users are charged for outputs they choose to keep could encourage more efficient and deliberate use of the service. While it’s true that each request incurs costs, focusing on user satisfaction and value could lead to higher overall engagement and longer-term customer loyalty.
2. Hybrid Credit Models: Adobe could explore hybrid models where users receive a certain number of ‘free keep’ generations per month, beyond which a fee is applied. This method could help cover costs while still allowing users freedom to explore and create without fear of wastage.
3. Cost-Benefit Analysis: While no AI company may currently be profiting significantly from these services, the investment in user trust and satisfaction could result in long-term gains through subscription renewals, upsells, and word-of-mouth recommendations.
4. Incremental Charging Mechanism: Introduce a tiered system where initial explorations are free or cheaper, but as usage increases, so does the cost. This could balance out heavy users consuming more resources while allowing casual users to explore without heavy costs.
5. Community Feedback and Iteration: Adobe could continuously engage with its user base to understand their needs and adjust credit systems accordingly. This would not only help in aligning the product closer to user expectations but also in fostering a community of loyal users.

Understanding the challenges Adobe faces in managing operational costs, it’s crucial to find a middle ground that supports Adobe’s financial health while empowering creators. Your points bring necessary attention to the economic realities of providing such advanced services, and it’s in the spirit of constructive feedback that I suggest these alternatives.

Dear Jill C.,

I appreciate your concerns regarding the potential for system clogging if Adobe Firefly only charges credits for kept generations. However, I’d like to present some counterpoints based on Adobe’s current credit system and general trends in creative software usage:

1. Credit Allocation and Control: Adobe allocates a fixed number of generative credits monthly based on the user’s subscription type, which does not roll over to the next month. This inherently limits the amount of free usage, preventing system abuse while allowing genuine exploration and learning. Users are aware of their credit limitations and tend to use resources judiciously to avoid running out before the month’s end .
2. Incentive for Quality, not Quantity: Charging for desired outputs could encourage users to think more critically about their inputs, leading to more meaningful usage of the service rather than frivolous experimentation. This aligns with Adobe’s aim for Firefly to enhance creativity, providing tools for serious creation rather than mere play .
3. Impact on System Resources: The computational cost tied to generative AI tasks like those in Firefly is significant. By associating a cost with final products, Adobe can balance server load and manage resources effectively, ensuring a smooth experience for all users .
4. Market Trends and Consumer Behavior: Other platforms with similar usage-based billing have not reported significant issues with system clogging. Users tend to self-regulate based on the value they receive from the service. Additionally, creative professionals value their time and are likely to download only those results that meet their specific needs.
5. Potential Solutions: To address your concerns, Adobe could implement additional safeguards, such as daily or weekly usage caps, to prevent system abuse without hindering genuine exploration and creativity.

In conclusion, a model where users are charged only for results they wish to keep could enhance user satisfaction and the quality of feedback for Adobe, all while maintaining system integrity through existing credit limits and potential additional safeguards.

Thank you for considering this perspective.