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

421–430 of 496 posts

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#421

Post by random_cynic »

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…

> They are aggressively integrating it into their products

And no reason to suspect that it won't spectacularly backfire. Not that they're integrating (or more correctly slapping it on with some hot glue) transformative technology they barely understand into legacy products which are themselves likely to go defunct. Why even use a spreadsheet when you can get GPT-4 to write a whole data analysis pipeline and summarize everything? Or why bother with word documents when GPT-4 can generate, spell/grammar check, translate (if necessary), format and output into any format you want?

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#422

Post by danShumway »

O__________O wrote: post #377
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a prompt is somehow a recipe and not a novel expression that merits copyright Is it not? Does typing in 'cat' in SD, as millions of people will, count as novel expression?

Millions of people have taken photos of Mona Lisa, none are novel, all are very much protected by copyright.

No, this is highly misleading, if not outright wrong.

First, a picture taken of the Mona Lisa is only covered by copyright if it contains additional human creativity. Now, the bar for that is very low, and in practice many people don't challenge that copyright very often. But a perfect recreation of the Mona Lisa with a camera is not covered by copyright. You need human creativity as part of the process, and merely taking a picture is not enough on its own. There's actual case-law on the books about this[0].

Second, the additional creativity protects the photo, not the original picture itself. So in the most recent case with AI images used in a book, that additional creativity protected the book and the arrangement of those images, but it did not protect the images themselves -- in other words, entirely consistent with a photograph of the Mona Lisa.

To analogize that to AI art, it would absolutely be the case that doing additional modifications on an AI image would make the resulting image eligible for copyright. It would not make the base image spit out by the AI eligible for copyright, only the derivative work.

Where prompts are concerned, the US has argued that some prompts would be eligible for some kind of IP protection on their own. But a prompt that doesn't meet copyright muster on its own would not be eligible, and the same rules apply to photography.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel....

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#423

Post by Auracle »

wouldbecouldbe wrote: post #325
ShamelessC wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is effectively DALLE-2 (apparently retrained on different data) with a native frontend designed by experienced designers. You don't see the value in effectively not needing any art/design skills to make aesthetically pleasing logos/mockups/memes? Even just for "playing around" - I bet there's a large market of people who want to add "fun edits" to their existing personal photo library. Focus less on landing page…

I've tried to use DALL-E for practical purposes such as generating icons, art etc. for commercial products but most of it is unusable.

Dall-e is far behind Midjourney and Stable Diffusion.

As we speak I’m generating images of my dog as every Pokémon type (for fun) that are frankly quite a bit better than the art of most Pokémon cards.

I’ve also used it for a photo composite: https://youtu.be/c_1mRWthhek

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#424

Post by fardo »

random_cynic wrote: post #421
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…

> They are aggressively integrating it into their products And no reason to suspect that it won't spectacularly backfire. Not that they're integrating (or more correctly slapping it on with some hot glue) transformative technology they barely understand into legacy products which are themselves likely to go defunct. Why even use a spreadsheet when you can get GPT-4 to write a whole data analysis pipeline and summariz…

From a practical perspective, because of inertia and all managers seemingly being "burned once, twice shy" on re-designs.

If my company already uses spreadsheets and teams of people skilled at manipulating them, it might not be very hard to convince my manager that good AI use cases (quick formatting, intelligent auto-completes, intention detection from sheet structure) could probably speed us up by 20% - but convincing management of the value of a full system re-design by comparison would likely be a very tough sell, if not viewed as an insult or sign that I'm not a team player.

Just because the future may prove these methods antiquated doesn't mean management is liable or likely to change their tune today.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#425

Post by shostack »

joe_the_user wrote: post #321
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing a fundamental reason: adding AI functionality into products is simply easier. That is, these companies are largely not doing the hard part, which is creating and training these models in the first place. The examples you gave of of cloud and iPhone have both huge capital barriers to entry, and in iPhones case other phone companies just didn't have the unique design talent combination of Jobs an…

That is, these companies are largely not doing the hard part, which is creating and training these models in the first place. No, there is no real "hard part" to AI current. Training is simply "the expensive part". It seems "the bitter lesson" has gone from reflection to paradigm[1] and with that as paradigm, the primary barrier to entering AI is cash for cpu cycles, other things matter but recipes is relatively simp…

Which checks the box for great timing. All these companies with billions in the bank needing a new thing to prove they still warrant their growth valuation will dump obscene sums into this and cause things to evolve at a staggering pace, much like we've seen with AR and VR.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#426

Post by Auracle »

jdc0589 wrote: post #185
Filligree wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the great aspects of open-source stable diffusion (civitai.com et al.) is there's a model for every purpose. Does your inpainting model work with every style? Or is it going to have trouble matching the content for e.g. specific fanart?

is civitai.com literally just 90% japanese porn?

You can hide NSFW stuff, and apparently they’re going to implement a way to hide anime.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#427

Post by wokwokwok »

airstrike wrote: post #172
open-paren wrote: post #81

Adobe employee, not in Creative Cloud. We got access to this in beta a week ago and it was an instant hit across the whole company. This is just the tip of the iceberg and there is a lot of really cool, in-house products around generative AI. The team is going to great lengths to make this ethical and fair (try and generate a photo of a copyrighted character like Hello Kitty or Darth Vader). I'm excited to see the fi…

> The team is going to great lengths to make this ethical and fair (try and generate a photo of a copyrighted character like Hello Kitty or Darth Vader) are you saying it won't work? if that's the case, that seems really silly. actually, it goes against everything I believe in (as well as my understanding of even the kindest meaning of the word "hacker"). it drives me up the wall, it makes my blood boil who is going…

O_o If you wanna draw hello kitty go for it.

You just have to, you know, draw it.

“How dare you not let me copy your stuff for free woth zero effort!”

… entitled much?

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#428

Post by csomar »

NaN1352 wrote: post #253

What’s interesting to me is how this only works because of prior art. BUT, when prior art will be AI-assisted if not 99% generated art, from a pool of prior human art ever so slowly diminishing… where is this going? For one, "art" can only lessen in value. Perhaps physical art will grow in value as digital art’s "made by without AI" tag becomes unprovable and meaningless. I think it’s bad. Whomever provides these too…

Think about manual art, as the part that kick starts the compiler. Rust can compile itself, but you had to build the first compiler with C.

Art was done with Pencils, or Adobe Photoshop. Now, it's done with an AI. It's all random bits but to the humans visualizing them.

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#429

Post by Bob2077 »

Adobe Firefly sounds promising, especially in terms of enhancing creativity and productivity. However, I wonder about the learning curve for users who are not familiar with AI-powered tools. Will there be tutorials or resources available to help users get the most out of Firefly's capabilities? Additionally, I'm curious about the ethical implications of using generative AI models in creative work. How can we ensure that AI-generated content maintains originality and doesn't infringe on intellectual property rights?

Re: Adobe Firefly: AI Art Generator

#430

Post by cronix »

krisoft wrote: post #201
egypturnash wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am definitely glad to see attention being paid to ethical sourcing of training images but I am curious: did the people who made all those stock images get paid for their work being used for training? Did they check a box that explicitly said "Adobe can train an AI on my work"? Or is there a little clause lurking in the Adobe Stock agreement that says this can be done without even a single purchase happening?

I'm not a lawyer and I don't work for Adobe. :) The contributor agreement linked from here[1] is this: [2] "You grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, fully-paid, and royalty-free license to use, reproduce, publicly display, publicly perform, distribute, index, translate, and modify the Work for the purposes of operating the Website; presenting, distributing, marketing, promoting, and licensing the Work to u…

That is basically the same boiler plate legal release for photography/videography/audio works in general. You sell me this thing, and I can do whatever I want with it.

From the popular Getty Images, used by media worldwide: > When a customer uses one of your files, it may appear in advertising, marketing, apps, websites, social media, TV and film, presentations, newspapers, magazines, books, or product packaging, among many other uses.

https://www.gettyimages.com/workwithus

Post reply on HN