Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

adobe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 496 posts

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#41

Post by biccboii »

sourcecodeplz wrote: post #17
rcarmo wrote: post #4

Obviously requires an Adobe account, which hints at it being folded into their subscription pricing. I wonder if this is a customer retention move given the number of third-party plugins to use Dall-E, SD, Midjourney, etc. with Photoshop. (I also wonder who is powering this or if it's an in-house solution -- that should be telling...) Edit: Why, they've trained this on Adobe stock images. OK, this may be very interes…

Actually, when signing up for the waitlist, they don't ask for your Adobe account.

it's only a matter of time i'm sure. I don't think you can use any adobe product today without Adobe Creative Cloud™

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#42

Post by ghaff »

O__________O wrote: post #22

Anyone able to comment on where in their opinion the measure is for current state of copyright law when generative AI is a subset of an image?

Basically, no one knows. But the IP lawyers I know are generally of the opinion that, manufactured possible violations notwithstanding, it's probably OK for the most part.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#43

Post by saiya-jin »

l33tman wrote: post #15
motoxpro wrote: post #8

Interesting that the large company AI products (this, Microsoft copilot, etc) are so much more compelling than any of the startups I’ve seen. Makes me think that we haven’t seen what true innovation looks like in this space. Right now, AI is a feature, not a product. Edit: Not talking about the models themselves (stability, mid journey, GPT-x), talking about what is built on those models.

I would consider both Stable Diffusion and MidJourney to be startups and both are better by far than the established companies like OpenAI, and there are dozens of LLMs soon catching up with GPT3/4. As you say, it will be a very interesting next 6-12 months..

I played around (till free account expired) with MidJourney and what one can produce out of blue is mind-boggling. Indie devs can with a bit of effort generate much of their art via this for peanuts (the only problem may be consistency from what I've seen, basically every image is like from another artist, even in same batch)

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#44

Post by spoiler »

m3kw9 wrote: post #21

This will supercharge artists, it won’t replace them because details matter and when you need to get it just right, you cannot just keep rolling the dice by “prompting better”

Agreed.

I think it will decrease iteration time during an exploration phase for new artists or when you're not quite sure what you want and want to explore your idea space more quickly (and maybe even get new ideas as you iterate).

It's similar with these coding AIs. A lot of the time it's great for the "blank page" phase of a project where you have to do all the "boring" stuff out of the way. Another great example (I think it was a blog post here) where the AI recommended a method the author didn't know about that yielded a crazy performance boost.

I tried to get some help from copilot on writing a shader the other day, and it was really an amazing experience. One still needs to have a pretty deep understanding of what needs to be done to use these tools.

I imagine it's similar for writers. Maybe they want some help to reword a sentence to be more succinct, but the ideas will still come from their heads.

I can't predict if this will one day be so sophisticated that you can have it do both low level and high level "thinking" when exploring ideas, but if that day comes I don't think it will mean an end to jobs, just that some jobs will become more accessible, or that it won't be so much about nitty-gritty work and more about higher level idea-level work (which to me sound good, not bad).

Obviously there's people who enjoy the nitty gritty (as a developer, and amateur painter who does enjoythe process), and I don't think that will fully go away, just become more of a creative/artisan field maybe. Who knows, though? I may be way off, but I don't think it's as bleak as some people fear.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#45

Post by CyanBird »

codetrotter wrote: post #29

Imagine paying for Adobe products. I did that once. Never again. What a shit company. Cancelling the subscription was a total drag. Fuck you Adobe, I hope you go bankrupt sooner rather than later.

What they did to allegorithmic, the substance suite and the on boarding process to even learn the system is a travesty

Substance Designer used to have a platform called substance share where anyone could share and open source knowledge of complex parametric textures for free to anyone with a substance account, obviously the first draft for how Adobe would get the money back from their purchase is to monetize the entire learning processes by shutting down that website and adding pay walls to near every single interaction to even learn the software, it is just so horribly shortsighted and these ideas can only be approved and implemented by sheer rentiers managers

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#46

Post by wongarsu »

dopeboy wrote: post #11

What this reinforces is that unlike with previous big innovations (cloud, iphone, etc), incumbents will not sit on their laurels with the AI wave. They are aggressively integrating it into their products which (1) provides a relatively cheap step function upgrade and (2) keeps the barrier high for startups to use AI as their wedge. I attribute the speed at which incumbents are integrating AI into their products to a…

Another point is that many of the incumbents have seen the trend for far longer than the general public, and had time to gather inhouse talent. For example this isn't Adobe's first stint into generative AI, back in 2016 they announced (and quietly dropped after the backlash) Adobe VoCo, "photoshop for voice".

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#47

Post by nvr219 »

dopeboy wrote: post #11

What this reinforces is that unlike with previous big innovations (cloud, iphone, etc), incumbents will not sit on their laurels with the AI wave. They are aggressively integrating it into their products which (1) provides a relatively cheap step function upgrade and (2) keeps the barrier high for startups to use AI as their wedge. I attribute the speed at which incumbents are integrating AI into their products to a…

> * Whereas AI was a hand-wavey marketing term in the past, it's now the real deal and provides actual value to the end user.

Ehhh.... Sometimes. It's still a hand-wavey marketing term today. Almost every sales call I'm in either the prospect is asking about AI, or more likely the vendor is saying something like "We use our AI module to help you [do some function not at all related to AI]". Also, even when it's "real" AI (in the sense that we're talking about here), it's not always providing actual value to the end user. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#48

Post by Kye »

l33tman wrote: post #15
motoxpro wrote: post #8

Interesting that the large company AI products (this, Microsoft copilot, etc) are so much more compelling than any of the startups I’ve seen. Makes me think that we haven’t seen what true innovation looks like in this space. Right now, AI is a feature, not a product. Edit: Not talking about the models themselves (stability, mid journey, GPT-x), talking about what is built on those models.

I would consider both Stable Diffusion and MidJourney to be startups and both are better by far than the established companies like OpenAI, and there are dozens of LLMs soon catching up with GPT3/4. As you say, it will be a very interesting next 6-12 months..

Stable Diffusion is a thing you can run on your computer for free and train models for. It's from a research university. Is this one of those more expansive definitions of startup?

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#50

Post by lelandfe »

From that page's FAQs:

> trained on a dataset of Adobe Stock, along with openly licensed work and public domain content where copyright has expired

> We do not train on any Creative Cloud subscribers’ personal content. For Adobe Stock contributors, the content is part of the Firefly training dataset, in accordance with Stock Contributor license agreements. The first model did not train on Behance.

Not sure what "first model" means there.

Also interesting: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/firefly-faq-f...

> During the beta phase of Adobe Firefly, any Adobe Firefly generated assets cannot be used for commercial purposes.

> Can I opt [my Adobe Stock content] of the dataset training?

> No, there is no option to opt-out of data set training for content submitted to Stock. However, Adobe is continuing to explore the possibility of an opt-out.

Post reply on HN