4 ms·

Sure, if you view this as an isolated incident. But I think of it more as the latest example of the larger trend of how the industry has gone mad actively maki

by slg 2y ago

Sure, if you view this as an isolated incident. But I think of it more as the latest example of the larger trend of how the industry has gone mad actively making their products worse with half-baked AI features. That is a more interesting story.

thegeomaster 2y ago
Is it actively worse, though? My impression is that all of the other, classical-based in-painting methods are still alive and well in Adobe products. And I think their in-painting works well, when it does work. To me, this honestly sounds like an improvement, especially in a creative tool like Lightroom or Photoshop --- the artist has more options to achieve their vision; it's usually understood to be up to the artist to use the tools appropriately.
- ryandrake 2y ago
  I'm not an artist or an Adobe customer, but when I see products adding half-baked or defective features, it tarnishes their brand and would definitely make me re-consider trusting their product. Especially for professional use, and regardless of whether the rest of the product still works fine. It's a general indicator of carelessness and tolerance of quality problems.
- DrewADesign 2y ago
  Unfortunately, the Adobe ecosystem on a whole is like OS-level complex, and they're pretty much ignoring anything that isn't directly related to generative AI, and that stuff is only consistently good for the lowest-level use cases. Miles more useful than Comfy, etc. for most artists and designers, but not close for people that need to do more skillful work. The value of Adobe as an ecosystem was their constant upgrading and keeping up with the times, and now, if it's not some cockamamie generative AI feature, it's going nowhere. They're even worse with bug fixes than they were before.
DrewADesign 2y ago
And this is the closest thing the professional imaging world has to a broadly-available tool designed for high-end professional use cases. It's barely consistently good enough for throwaway blog headers in its current state for large edits, and for small edits it's exactly 0 percent better than the removal tools they added 20 years ago. Adobe better start giving some love to its professional users because the alternatives are getting better, and their ecosystem is getting worse. It's like they're trying to put themselves in a position where they're competing with Canva and Instagram rather than Affinity, Procreate, Rebelle, etc. If it's not clear to them yet that they're not right-around-the-corner from having their AI tools be a drop-in replacement for their regular stuff, they're gonna have a bad time.

by slg 2y ago

thegeomaster 2y ago

Is it actively worse, though? My impression is that all of the other, classical-based in-painting methods are still alive and well in Adobe products. And I think their in-painting works well, when it does work. To me, this honestly sounds like an improvement, especially in a creative tool like Lightroom or Photoshop --- the artist has more options to achieve their vision; it's usually understood to be up to the artist to use the tools appropriately.

ryandrake 2y ago
I'm not an artist or an Adobe customer, but when I see products adding half-baked or defective features, it tarnishes their brand and would definitely make me re-consider trusting their product. Especially for professional use, and regardless of whether the rest of the product still works fine. It's a general indicator of carelessness and tolerance of quality problems.
DrewADesign 2y ago
Unfortunately, the Adobe ecosystem on a whole is like OS-level complex, and they're pretty much ignoring anything that isn't directly related to generative AI, and that stuff is only consistently good for the lowest-level use cases. Miles more useful than Comfy, etc. for most artists and designers, but not close for people that need to do more skillful work. The value of Adobe as an ecosystem was their constant upgrading and keeping up with the times, and now, if it's not some cockamamie generative AI feature, it's going nowhere. They're even worse with bug fixes than they were before.

DrewADesign 2y ago

And this is the closest thing the professional imaging world has to a broadly-available tool designed for high-end professional use cases. It's barely consistently good enough for throwaway blog headers in its current state for large edits, and for small edits it's exactly 0 percent better than the removal tools they added 20 years ago. Adobe better start giving some love to its professional users because the alternatives are getting better, and their ecosystem is getting worse. It's like they're trying to put themselves in a position where they're competing with Canva and Instagram rather than Affinity, Procreate, Rebelle, etc. If it's not clear to them yet that they're not right-around-the-corner from having their AI tools be a drop-in replacement for their regular stuff, they're gonna have a bad time.