5 ms·

I think you're being a bit too generous with Adobe here :-). I shared this before, but it's worth resharing [1]. It covers the experience of a professional arti

I think you're being a bit too generous with Adobe here :-). I shared this before, but it's worth resharing [1]. It covers the experience of a professional artist using Adobe tools. The gist is that once a company has a captive audience with no alternatives, investors come first. Flashy (no pun intended :-p), cool features to impress investors become more important than the everyday user experience—and this feature does look super cool! -- 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lthVYUB8JLs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lthVYUB8JLs

mesh 2y ago
You can have both! Cool features that excite users (and that they ultimately end of using), and that get investors excited. (i.e. Adobe mentioned in the day 1 keynote that Generative Fill, released last year and powered by Adobe Firefly is not one of the top 5 used features in Photoshop). The features we make, and how we use gen ai is based on a lot of discussions and back and forth with the community (both public and private) I guess Adobe could make features that look cool, but no one wants to use, but that doesn't seem to really make any sense. (I work for Adobe)
- derefr 2y ago
  > is not one of the top 5 used features in Photoshop I mean, is there any Photoshop feature that’s come to dominate people’s workflows so quickly? People (e.g. photographers) who use Photoshop “in anger” for professional use-cases, and who already know how to fix a flaw in an image region without generative fill, aren’t necessarily going to adopt it right out of the gate. They’re going to tinker with it a bit, but time-box that tinkering, otherwise sticking with what they can guarantee from experience will get a “satisfactory” result, even if it takes longer and might not have as high a ceiling for how perfectly the image is altered. And that’d just people who repair flaws in images. Which I’m guessing aren’t even the majority of Photoshop users. Is the clone brush even in the top 5 Photoshop features by usage?
  - bythreads 2y ago
    You're super wrong. Pro here working with this stuff for decades. There was a brief moment in time where freehand was just a better and faster drawing tool than illustrator (which is whats is shown here) but from there on psp, ill & indesign have pretty much killed all competition out there. The formats they use are sigularly stupid and arcane for legacy reasons, they are all mem hogs and inefficient to the extreme - but nothing beats that unholy trifecta and it is used it or die. Now to get the point: generative fill is one of the absolute killer features of psp - in an instant it does what could take multiple hours to do previously with 5-10 sec of watching a loader. There are many mor gamechangers and this really looks like another
    - supermatt 2y ago
      > psp, ill & indesign paint shop pro?
- mesh 2y ago
  That should read "is NOW one of the top 5 used features in Photoshop".
latexr 2y ago
I don’t think those ideas are mutually exclusive. I heavily dislike Adobe and think they’re a rotten company with predatory practices. I also think “AI art” can be harmful to artists and more often than not produces uninteresting flawed garbage at an unacceptable energy cost. Still, when I first heard of Adobe Firefly, my initial reaction was “smart business move, by exclusively using images they have the rights to”. Now seeing Turntable my reaction is “interesting tool which could be truly useful to many illustrators”. Adobe can be a bad and opportunistic company in general but still do genuinely interesting things. As much as they deserve the criticism, the way in which they’re using AI does seem to be thought out and meant to address real user needs while minimising harm to artists.¹ I see Apple’s approach with Apple Intelligence a bit in the same vein, starting with the user experience and working backwards to the technology, as it should be.² Worth noting that I fortunately have distanced myself from Adobe for many years now, so my view may be outdated. ¹ Which I don’t believe for a second is out of the goodness of their hearts, it just makes business sense. ² However, in that case the results seem to be subpar and I don’t think I’d use it even if I could.
- HappMacDonald 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - latexr 2y ago
    What’s the goal of your comment? You’re making a straw man argument which in no way relates to my point and ridicules the opinions of people not on this thread. That makes for uninteresting and needlessly divisive conversation. The HN guidelines rightfully urge us to make substantive comments that advance the discussion and avoid shallow dismissals. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - bee_rider 2y ago
      I think they are actually agreeing with you. Just, in a somewhat unpleasant and sarcastic manner. They aren’t strawmanning your argument, right? They are strawmanning the argument against it.
WillAdams 2y ago
Moreover, when one looks at the chronology with which features were rolled out, all the computationally hard things which would save sufficient time/effort that folks would be willing to pay for them (and which competitors were unlikely to be able to implement) were held back until Adobe rolled out its subscription pricing model --- then and only then did the _really_ good stuff start trickling out, at a pace to ensure that companies kept up their monthly payments.
Ikatza 2y ago
Is there no alternative to Photoshop? Affinity or Pixelator don't cut it?
- geon 2y ago
  pixelMator
- emmanueloga_ 2y ago
  Gimp? Although the UX feels so outdated. https://github.com/KenneyNL/Adobe-Alternatives#photoshop https://github.com/KenneyNL/Adobe-Alternatives#photoshop
  - t0bia_s 2y ago
    If you ever worked professionally with PS, you are getting tired of recommendations of tool that is capable like 20% of PS.
    - emmanueloga_ 2y ago
      Interesting! What are some unique features not typically found in other apps? (don't say generative fill lol) Creating a specification for minimum viable features of a raster editor able to replace Photoshop would be fantastic. Could serve as a roadmap for alternatives and for bragging rights: "Painter2900: implements 99% of the Rasterflames Liberation Standard, and more!".
      - t0bia_s 2y ago
        Mask precision, plugin compatibility, scripts and actions, color profiles management, brush options, camera raw compatibility, liquify tool, 3D, font options... I just named a few that I use regularly. Beside functions, Gimp's UI looks outdated.
        therein 2y ago
        Besides the UI, GIMP's UX is what breaks my heart.

mesh 2y ago

You can have both! Cool features that excite users (and that they ultimately end of using), and that get investors excited. (i.e. Adobe mentioned in the day 1 keynote that Generative Fill, released last year and powered by Adobe Firefly is not one of the top 5 used features in Photoshop). The features we make, and how we use gen ai is based on a lot of discussions and back and forth with the community (both public and private) I guess Adobe could make features that look cool, but no one wants to use, but that doesn't seem to really make any sense. (I work for Adobe)

derefr 2y ago
> is not one of the top 5 used features in Photoshop I mean, is there any Photoshop feature that’s come to dominate people’s workflows so quickly? People (e.g. photographers) who use Photoshop “in anger” for professional use-cases, and who already know how to fix a flaw in an image region without generative fill, aren’t necessarily going to adopt it right out of the gate. They’re going to tinker with it a bit, but time-box that tinkering, otherwise sticking with what they can guarantee from experience will get a “satisfactory” result, even if it takes longer and might not have as high a ceiling for how perfectly the image is altered. And that’d just people who repair flaws in images. Which I’m guessing aren’t even the majority of Photoshop users. Is the clone brush even in the top 5 Photoshop features by usage?
- bythreads 2y ago
  You're super wrong. Pro here working with this stuff for decades. There was a brief moment in time where freehand was just a better and faster drawing tool than illustrator (which is whats is shown here) but from there on psp, ill & indesign have pretty much killed all competition out there. The formats they use are sigularly stupid and arcane for legacy reasons, they are all mem hogs and inefficient to the extreme - but nothing beats that unholy trifecta and it is used it or die. Now to get the point: generative fill is one of the absolute killer features of psp - in an instant it does what could take multiple hours to do previously with 5-10 sec of watching a loader. There are many mor gamechangers and this really looks like another
  - supermatt 2y ago
    > psp, ill & indesign paint shop pro?
mesh 2y ago
That should read "is NOW one of the top 5 used features in Photoshop".

latexr 2y ago

I don’t think those ideas are mutually exclusive. I heavily dislike Adobe and think they’re a rotten company with predatory practices. I also think “AI art” can be harmful to artists and more often than not produces uninteresting flawed garbage at an unacceptable energy cost. Still, when I first heard of Adobe Firefly, my initial reaction was “smart business move, by exclusively using images they have the rights to”. Now seeing Turntable my reaction is “interesting tool which could be truly useful to many illustrators”. Adobe can be a bad and opportunistic company in general but still do genuinely interesting things. As much as they deserve the criticism, the way in which they’re using AI does seem to be thought out and meant to address real user needs while minimising harm to artists.¹ I see Apple’s approach with Apple Intelligence a bit in the same vein, starting with the user experience and working backwards to the technology, as it should be.² Worth noting that I fortunately have distanced myself from Adobe for many years now, so my view may be outdated. ¹ Which I don’t believe for a second is out of the goodness of their hearts, it just makes business sense. ² However, in that case the results seem to be subpar and I don’t think I’d use it even if I could.

HappMacDonald 2y ago
[flagged]
- latexr 2y ago
  What’s the goal of your comment? You’re making a straw man argument which in no way relates to my point and ridicules the opinions of people not on this thread. That makes for uninteresting and needlessly divisive conversation. The HN guidelines rightfully urge us to make substantive comments that advance the discussion and avoid shallow dismissals. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - bee_rider 2y ago
    I think they are actually agreeing with you. Just, in a somewhat unpleasant and sarcastic manner. They aren’t strawmanning your argument, right? They are strawmanning the argument against it.

WillAdams 2y ago

Moreover, when one looks at the chronology with which features were rolled out, all the computationally hard things which would save sufficient time/effort that folks would be willing to pay for them (and which competitors were unlikely to be able to implement) were held back until Adobe rolled out its subscription pricing model --- then and only then did the _really_ good stuff start trickling out, at a pace to ensure that companies kept up their monthly payments.

Ikatza 2y ago

Is there no alternative to Photoshop? Affinity or Pixelator don't cut it?

geon 2y ago
pixelMator
emmanueloga_ 2y ago
Gimp? Although the UX feels so outdated. https://github.com/KenneyNL/Adobe-Alternatives#photoshop https://github.com/KenneyNL/Adobe-Alternatives#photoshop
- t0bia_s 2y ago
  If you ever worked professionally with PS, you are getting tired of recommendations of tool that is capable like 20% of PS.
  - emmanueloga_ 2y ago
    Interesting! What are some unique features not typically found in other apps? (don't say generative fill lol) Creating a specification for minimum viable features of a raster editor able to replace Photoshop would be fantastic. Could serve as a roadmap for alternatives and for bragging rights: "Painter2900: implements 99% of the Rasterflames Liberation Standard, and more!".
    - t0bia_s 2y ago
      Mask precision, plugin compatibility, scripts and actions, color profiles management, brush options, camera raw compatibility, liquify tool, 3D, font options... I just named a few that I use regularly. Beside functions, Gimp's UI looks outdated.
      - therein 2y ago
        Besides the UI, GIMP's UX is what breaks my heart.