Adobe, Firefly Video, disappointment

[m224065175kpy]

I'm disappointed by Adobe yet again. Recently, they've faced backlash for their questionable subscription tactics, charging for cancellations, removing perpetual licenses for software, frequently changing pricing structures, and making certain essential features only accessible through higher-tier plans.

If you have a plan that includes all apps and Firefly is an Adobe application, wouldn’t it make sense that you have access to it? Unfortunately, no. Adobe demands extra money to use this particular app, allowing only two video generations in their “beta.”

So, you pay Adobe a subscription fee to access all their apps, but then to use one of those apps, Adobe asks for even more money. And if you decide to cancel your plan, guess what? Adobe requests even more money.

I understand that video generations are costlier than image generations. Smaller companies like Pika, Luma, and Halulio, which aren't massive billion-dollar corporations, can offer a genuine beta experience with a certain number of free videos per day at a slower processing rate versus a paid tier. Yet Adobe, for some reason, cannot achieve the same thing for its community. Instead, they ask for more money at every turn.

AI started as an open-source technology meant for everyone to be creative. These smaller companies that allow their community to actually test their products for free (with limitations) clearly have a better grasp of AI's history compared to a capitalist company like Adobe, which constantly demands more money from its community. 

I'm truly disappointed by Adobe once more. I've been looking forward to trying their video generation, but any avid AI user knows two generations are never enough to "try it." I'm sorry, but you must have people on your team who haven't been using AI for years. If you did, they would understand that each AI generator is not the same. If you're used to prompting in Midjourney, that same prompt may not produce similar results in DALL-E. If you're used to prompting in Pika, that same prompt may not yield something similar in Luma. The technology might be the same, but the data can be vastly different, meaning the languages will also differ. Two videos are not enough to "talk" with your video model, to grasp the prompt style, motion, camera movement, weird aspect ratios, starting key frame, ending key frame, etc. It takes time to understand a new AI tool's unique features and quirks. You need to experiment with different prompts and settings to get a feel for how it works. Experienced AI users often compare multiple tools to find the best one for their needs, and with only two videos, it's challenging to make an informed comparison. The creative process involves a lot of trial and error- testing different ideas, refining prompts, and iterating on results are crucial steps that require more than just two attempts. Providing meaningful feedback to Adobe would require a more substantial experience with the tool. Users can't provide accurate feedback on its strengths and weaknesses based on only two generations.

While Adobe has been a leader in creative software, their current approach with Firefly feels more like a money grab than an effort to foster creativity and innovation. It's disappointing to see a company with such vast resources and influence prioritize profits over providing genuine value to its community. As an avid AI user, I believe that true innovation comes from accessibility and user feedback, not from creating unnecessary financial barriers. I hope Adobe reconsiders its strategy and aligns more closely with the spirit of the AI community, where creativity and accessibility go hand in hand.

[m224065175kpy]

Honestly, the videos this model produces are laughably bad—think bargain-bin quality at best. There are free alternatives out there that run circles around it. It’s genuinely sad (and a bit hilarious) that they think this mess is worth even $2. Save your money and your time; you deserve better as well as all Adobe community.

[Studio Producer]

2 free pro video generations is inadequate to assess the viability of this product, especially when using an unfamiliar platform for the first time. There are many options to explore in order to create a desired output that cannot be assessed in any meaningful way with such a limited teial. For this reason, I would not recommend this trial product and I am unwilling to pay for the product.

[Oh.N8]

Hey @Studio Producer 

Your input is appreciated. 
There are monthly options that you can sign up for and later cancel.

Cheers

O.Nate

[Estelle23178626j4io]

This is not exactly technical, BUT the other categories are not right either!

I was only give one try on the FireFly video and voice translation. That is NOT engough to see if I like it.

I am an annual FULL licencse user for Adobe products. 

Also, if I buy the upgraded license, the number of credits hardly cover the "mistakes" and "experimnents" with firefly video, much less try to get a "real" result that with which I am satisfied. Why can't the "credits" only apply to the downloaded good results, and not all the mistakes and bad renderings???

Estelle

bnegill@aol.com

[Alexandre_Assis Corre7298]

duas cenas por mês, vocês estão de brincadeira?

[kensyo-0926]

<body>
the number of videos you can create per month is too low, which is a fatal problem, in my opinion.<br>
It is by no means cheap as a set of contracts to include CC, Stock, and Firefly.<br>
Despite this, the current number of videos you can create greatly diminishes the appeal of the service, I think.<br>
In my opinion, it should be at least 10 times the current number, or made unlimited for CC subscribers.<br>

<end>

[kensyo-0926]

<body>
the number of videos you can create per month is too low, which is a fatal problem, in my opinion.<br>
It is by no means cheap as a set of contracts to include CC, Stock, and Firefly.<br>
Despite this, the current number of videos you can create greatly diminishes the appeal of the service, I think.<br>
In my opinion, it should be at least 10 times the current number, or made unlimited for CC subscribers.<br>

<end>

[BQSH]

My organization pays a ton of money for access to CC, and I would never advocate illicit acquisition of Adobe products. But I kinda get why it happens when they pull moves like this. People are frustrated.

What I will advocate for in my org is to start looking at alternatives. A $295 one-time fee versus this war crime of a pricing model is pretty tempting.

[francoestrubia]

You can make a banner that pops up on user interaction, to inform that generative functions are discriminated by different kind of credits. If you pay for a specific plan, after two clicks you need to buy another one, and then an extra plan to use those credits, etc, etc..
All this can be low lettering with a mandatory and visible [Inappropriate language removed by moderator].

Thank you.

[TAROTTI]

You're a thousand percent right on every single level. My experience is identical to all of the others here. The other ABSURD, archaic and BAD-LAME-ULTRA-STUPID idea is these moronic generative "CREDITS." Just think "E-Tickets," and how stupid those were.

Back when Disneyland (Anaheim California) opened their doors, you paid admission and receive a booklet of 'so many ride tickets.' If you went on this ride, you handed them one of your prized tickets out of your ticket book. This meant you could only ride each ride a very limited time. That's where Adobe just went with this nonsensical, confusing, 'vintage' idea of using credits.

A few other phone apps use the same ridiculous, contraindicative junky nonsense. I bought a $5.99 per week subscription for an image enhancer. It came with 200 credits. I wanted to add some missing back teeth to someone's photo. That was not only 50 credits, but these exceptionally ungifted developers added an additional layer of stupid-ala-extreme by making you wait 45-mins to 2 hours for the action to be completed and continued to relay a prompt asking for 25 more credits if you want to speed the process up. These are ideas coming out of people with a 4th grade businesss mentality. The second I had to wait an hour for the app to add a few back teeth to the photo, while torturing me with advertisement after advertisement for their other apps to buy, I got the teeth completed and canceled the subscription.

I went to write a bad review (which I so rarely ever do) and the app would not allow reviews to be written any longer, only 1-5 stars could be left. There were hundreds of furious, screaming, angry consumers leaving scathing replies, describing the above. 

Adobe is extending a huge disservice to their own company business model and their customers by making the Firefly app a math problem, "So if I buy X credits, how many credits will I have left if I use X credits on Y project... bla bla bla. 

If you want to charge for the video portion, GIVE IT A fair monthly price and leave it there. 

[OnlyCloud]

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks this

[pnwfox]

This is beyond disappointing. Talk about clueless pricing models. My entire in-house team was very excited about the Firefly text-to-video feature and the ability to create truly tailored custom b-roll clips for video production. However, after this new pricing structure, we've been forced to abandon the tool entirely. It takes way too many iterations to create a production-ready clip, and we can't justify the added monthly cost on top of our existing Enterprise license agreement. 

Our preference has been to use Adobe's AI tools over models trained on questionable sources. However, at these costs, we may be forced to reconsider our moral reluctance and explore other Gen AI services for our needs. Wake up, Adobe.

[adrian_von_epic]

For what it's worth, I can 100% assure you that these costs are 100% CORPORATE GREED. I wish i could say otherwise, but that's just not the case.  IF that was true, then I would suppose a company like Pirate Diffusion, would have an awful lot of trouble, offering memberships at 30$ and 50$ where, 30$ gets you fully unlimited image generation, through their telegram based or web based interfaces, of all popular flux, sd2,3,3.5 and xl models.  over 8000 loras. etc.  and 50$ gets you unlimited generation of their video models as well.   Yet, if you want SLOW GENERATION with unlimited videos from firefly only.. it's 200$ a month.  

Clearly, rather than foster any kind of good user relationships into the future, someone over at adobe corporate, saw that (cl)O(sed)pen AI was charging 200$ for sora, and said.. Screw it. I like our users less than I like new cars.  Lets do it.  Same price. 

It is what it is, but. yeah.   Check out pirate diffusion if you don't wanna get bent over.  Google it. I'm not even gonna send you a referal code, cuz, they deserve the money they do get as it all goes back into hardware for the users.  🙂 Oh, did i mention, 100% uncensored too? Anyways.   I'm just here for the all apps program. Figured I'd check out the gen ai stuff, but i figured it wold be sorely lacking behind the guys working exclusively on that.  

Still, as far as a user friendly, fully featured media and design platform, you really cant go wrong with adobe.  Hopefully though, common sense prevails at some point, and they start charging less or freee for their subscribers, so as to hopefully secure a user base in the future with their firefly product.  Cuz, right now, charging for it, and having it not be the best available... Good thing they have other products.. LOL

[okasin]

Creative Cloud会員でさえ、動画生成を月に2回だけしかお試しできないというのは、逆にアドビのマイナスブランディングだと思います。

たったこれだけの回数しか生成できないのは、授業で生徒に試してもらうことができませんし。
私の周りのクリエイターを見てみても、ほとんどFireflyの動画生成は使っていません。すぐに制限が掛かってしまうので、全然使えないって感じです。

せめて、「ダウンロード回数」を2回に制限して、お試し生成は制限無しでできるようにするなどしたほうが、「面白いから有料プランで使ってみようかな」ってユーザーは増えると思います。

Substance 3DがCreative Cloudとは別プランになってしまったことで、使ってみようかなって思っていたユーザーが諦めてしまったのと同じで。本来ならもっとユーザーが増えるのにって思ってしまいます。

ぜひ、ご検討ください。

[md_shahan_9892]

• fach rimob

•  

[reliable_Lionheart5FB3]

I signed up for the $50, 7000 credit subscription. It was a lession in how to waste $50. Every failed attempt to produce a 5 sec video sequence resulted in 500 credits being deducted. Numerous variations of text to video prompts would not produce the desired result.  Even in their perfect world, I would only get 14 video clips for my 7000 credits. That is $3.57 per 5 secs of video. And because it takes several attempts to get a satisfactory result (if you are lucky) it is more like $14 for a 5 sec video. Any of the other text to video AI sites are better than this one.

[I Am Eddie]

This is crazy,Soon maybe im going to find an alternative,Adobe are seriously greedy nowadays!