Participant

Question

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

Forum|Forum|2 years ago
October 17, 2023
5 replies
2876 views

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]

This topic has been closed for replies.

B

beedgie

Participant

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

Community Expert

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

@mj

Community Expert

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

M

Mariam Hovhannesyan

Community Expert

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

M

Mariam Hovhannesyan

Community Expert

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

Community Expert

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

@mj

Community Expert

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

87223797Author

Participant

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.

87223797Author

Participant

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

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

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded