Adobe Gives Middle Finger To All Their Human Customers with Text to Image Software

[87223797]

Last week at the annual MAX conference, Adobe trumpeted their full embrace of generative AI across all their image-making tools.

The updated software now confront users with aggressive splash-screen promotions of Firefly’s text-to-image capabilities. In so doing, Adobe is actively encouraging every marketing department, every production artist, art director and art buyer around the world to bypass professional illustrators in favor of Adobe’s machine-generated images. This is particularly offensive to illustrators who for years have accepted Adobe’s subscription fees as an operating expense. Do the public relations folks at Adobe simply not comprehend how utterly obnoxious this is? Adobe is like a waiter at a fine restaurant shoving a Taco Bell coupon under the patron's noses.

It is worth pointing out that since the US Copyright office has determined that images created with AI can not be copyrighted, many artists and designers should be aware that trying to resell Adobe's text-to-image junk may leave their clients legally exposed to copyright claims. Discerning art directors will find the results of Adobe's AI offerings unusable. Sadly though Adobe’s machine-generated clip art is a “good-enough” solution for in-house marketing firms, coffee shops and countless small businesses looking for inexpensive vector art putting aspiring illustrators and photographers out of work. 

Originality is my livelihood. As an animator and visual artist I take pride in the fact that my clients expect me to create things they can’t get anywhere else. They seek out unique art not solely for the sake of artistic integrity. Brands rely on original creativity to differentiate themselves from their competition. It’s why the best brands avoid clip art and stock imagery.

We get it Adobe. You despise the human creative professionals who make up your customer base. But here’s a little reminder, if everyone uses crappy robot art, everyone’s art will look the same.

[Personal information removed by Mod]

[@mj]

Hi @87223797 ,

As a fellow artist, I feel you.

Just like when Photoshop or DTP first made it onto the scene, for me, the same is true of Ai.

It will cater to a certain segment of the market, and sure it will put upward pressure on professionals.

I'd say it's here to stay, whether Adobe is in the game or not. Dall-E, MidJourney, Leonardo, the list is endless.

We'll need to adapt and use the tools to our advantage imho.

Let's see where it all lands in a few years.

Happy making

mj

[87223797]

I respectfully disagree.

This is not the same as the advent of Photoshop or desktop publishing. Adobe Firefly was designed specifically to replace human creators. And no, artists do not have to just get with the times and use plagiarism machines in order to stay current. My question to Adobe is how they imagine creators will pay their subscription fees once they have successfuly driven them out of business? I guess they'll get all their business from talent-free hacks who like rearranging stolen clip art. I've been using Adobe products for 30 years and have been through all their various updates. I actually love using their products. That is why Firefly is such a gross betrayal. 

[@mj]

This is an important discussion @87223797 ,

Thank you for initiating it.

I'm not sure this will drive artists out of business. Sure, it will bring in folks with no artistic ability into the fray and allow them to undercut us. No doubt.

I still am of the view that discerning clients understand the value between "talent-free hacks" and artists who dedicate decades to hone their craft.

On the Adobe front, I won't pretend to speak for them, because I don't. They, I guess, will look at where they're going to get growth, give shareholder value and balance that with customer value somehow.

Perhaps I'm wrong altogether @87223797. Then we do have an apocalyptic artistic realm coming our way, and we swivel our offerings to the needs of the day.

The one thing I've learnt in my career is with all things said and done, you and I are the only ones that will take care of you and I.

Best

mj

[87223797]

I appreciate your considered comments @mj 

To my mind the question isn’t so much whether seasoned artists and art directors will be impacted by Firefly but how it will affect emerging talent. Imagine trying to teach a college level Illustration course now that this thing has launched? You can ban DALL-E and Stable Diffusion etc. but what about Adobe? Why would any young person try to learn to draw if they can just push a button? Why listen to their instructor telling them it’s wrong when they have Adobe screaming at them to do it from the splash screens of all their apps?

That’s fine to say everybody is doing it so why not Adobe. Yes, but Adobe didn’t have to jump into generative ai. Other successful companies have chosen the ethical path. Getty Images, The Directory of Illustration, Workbook, and many professional art organizations have all rejected ai art in favor of human creators. There are companies that believe they can be profitable with exclusively human creativity.

As far as I can tell this is a legal quagmire that Adobe has waded into. According to US Copyright Law AI creations cannot be copyrighted. No army of Adobe lawyers can reverse that fact.

Regardless of their Orwellian double-speak, Adobe’s Firefly is neither ethical nor “commercially-safe.” Adobe is sitting on a ticking time bomb of class action litigation.

-M

[@mj]

Hi @87223797 ,

Thank you for your kindness.

This conversation must be had. We as artists need to frame the conversation. I'd argue there is a difference between a maker of software like Adobe and artists. We live for our craft. Companies live for profit. That's the hard truth, right?

You raise many fine points so I'd like to give them the respect by responding to them individually.

Peace

mj

[@mj]

Dear @87223797 ,

To my mind the question isn’t so much whether seasoned artists and art directors will be impacted by Firefly but how it will affect emerging talent. Imagine trying to teach a college level Illustration course now that this thing has launched? You can ban DALL-E and Stable Diffusion etc. but what about Adobe? Why would any young person try to learn to draw if they can just push a button? Why listen to their instructor telling them it’s wrong when they have Adobe screaming at them to do it from the splash screens of all their apps?

I practice and facilitate a senior design programme at a university on a part-time basis. I can tell you it's a hot topic. Look from my perspective, I don't believe mastering every switch in Ps or Ai is going to make you a great designer. It might make you a proficient techsigner, and there's a place for those types of skills in industry.  So no iPad or any other tool has gotten close to the immediacy and hand-eye-brain connection that a 6B or pen to paper. I use Ai in practice and expose my students to it, but, when it comes to the artistic expression, process and deep-level problem solving, it has a way to go yet. WRT Adobe pushing it on their splashcreens, I see it as a revenue opp for them.

This was announced Sept 13: https://helpx.adobe.com/ca/firefly/using/generative-credits-faq.html

Best

mj

[@mj]

hi @87223797 ,

Me again 😊

That’s fine to say everybody is doing it so why not Adobe. Yes, but Adobe didn’t have to jump into generative ai. Other successful companies have chosen the ethical path. Getty Images, The Directory of Illustration, Workbook, and many professional art organizations have all rejected ai art in favor of human creators. There are companies that believe they can be profitable with exclusively human creativity.

Let me explain my position. I don't think they had a choice. What Adobe has as a USPis integrating it into the creative tools. We know it, they know it, and they have been leveraging that. I see this as a massive revenue opp for them. Case in point is Adobe Express and the fact that Firefly is being rolled out against a credits model. So everybody pays when their credits run out.

Look, when it comes to our creative practice and classrooms, I think we should explore Ai and contextualize it's potential harm/value. That said, when we talk to the raw process of creativity, at least for now, there does not seem to be any Ai that embeds strong design methodology and process, conceptualisation, iteration and execution that has been scrutinised by the seasoned artistic eye by any of these tools. Nothing trumps an alpha brain state, a 6B pencil/pen, and a sketchpad. No matter how many layers of virgin aluminium or glossy pixels one wraps around it.

Getty is in on the game: https://www.gettyimages.com/ai/generation/about

DIA and Workbook offer different services to Adobe wouldn't you say?

In closing, on a personal note, like many other creatives, I used to be a fanboy for this brand or that. Got burnt, so will never do that again. We explore the full palette of tools at our disposal, whilst ensuring we have identified any potential risk.

Hope that makes sense.

mj

[@mj]

Hi @87223797 ,

Thanks again for the robust convo.

As far as I can tell this is a legal quagmire that Adobe has waded into. According to US Copyright Law AI creations cannot be copyrighted. No army of Adobe lawyers can reverse that fact.

Regardless of their Orwellian double-speak, Adobe’s Firefly is neither ethical nor “commercially-safe.” Adobe is sitting on a ticking time bomb of class action litigation.

When it comes to these matters, I defer to my legal colleagues and legally knowledgeable folks.. 

Happy making

mj

[Mariam Hovhannesyan]

As an Illustrator I understand what are you saying, but you marked it right ai's art will look the same, and human made art will be different, and much more expensive than now, like when digital programs invented like photoshop and illustrator painters thought that it's the end for them, but no, who likes painting will pay to painter, and the client who likes human made illustration and willing to pay the price will tell illustrator, not someone who's making fast and cheap with ai tools. I think everything will be much much hopeful than we think.

[@mj]

Exactly right @Mariam Hovhannesyan ,

We've all had the pain-in-the-rear client who wants it on the cheap, never pays on time, and is difficult to satisfy. Ai might be the right fit for them.

Happy making

mj

[Mariam Hovhannesyan]

And by the way if you don't want adobe have your work for analysis for ai you can just turn it off https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pH2LDENz8RY&ab_channel=CrownePrince

[@mj]

Hi,

Here's an interesting read that I thought you would appreciate @87223797 

https://www.creativebloq.com/news/nightshade-ai-image-generator-poison

Best

mj

[beedgie]

Not to mention that seemingly overnight Adobe's stock image library has been inundated with poor quality AI images that I have to PAY to license!! WTF?! 

[Monika Gause]

You do not have to even look at them. Just exclude them from your search.