Author Topic: Announcing Adobe Firefly – A new family of creative generative AI models (Read 26266 times)

trek · « **Reply #100 on:** June 09, 2023, 10:24 »

I understand Firefly Beta is not for commercial use. What about Photoshop Beta's new generative fill tool. Can we use it now to expand or alter our existing photos to create commercially uploadable (Adobestock) content? Or do we need to wait?

This tutorial shows the technique I'm referring to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvUZIm083P8

Thanks

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #102 on:** June 09, 2023, 10:59 »

More Firefly announcements yesterday - it's still in beta, but the emphasis on Adobe's rights to the content on which Firefly was trained, and the legal protection Adobe will offer customers, continue to be front and center of their marketing messages

https://www.reuters.com/technology/adobe-pushes-firefly-ai-into-big-business-with-financial-cover-2023-06-08/

https://www.fastcompany.com/90906560/adobe-feels-so-confident-its-firefly-generative-ai-wont-breach-copyright-itll-cover-your-legal-bills

"Adobe Firefly, the software giant’s AI-powered image generation and expansion tool, is being rolled out to businesses today. At its flagship Adobe Summit event, the company is unveiling an expansion of Firefly for enterprise users that will include “full indemnification for the content created through these features,”"

"The Firefly model is trained on stock images for which Adobe already holds the rights..."

" “Adobe claim that Firefly has been trained on entirely legal inputs, mostly from their own extensive image libraries,” says Andres Guadamuz, an intellectual property law researcher at the University of Sussex. “This is an indication that they have conducted a thorough investigation of their training sources and are happy that they will not get sued.” Guadamuz adds that Adobe’s promise shouldn’t be taken lightly: “They must have some very strong assurances from their legal team that they’re in the clear,” he says. “I can’t imagine that they would do this if there was some doubt that they would get sued out of existence.”"

https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/8/23753564/adobe-firefly-enterprise-generative-ai-express-commercial

"Adobe created Firefly to be safe for commercial use by training it on Adobe Stock images, openly licensed content, and content without copyright restrictions within the public domain."

https://techcrunch.com/2023/06/08/adobe-brings-firefly-to-the-enterprise/

"The major advantage that Adobe has been banking on since the launch of Firefly is that it produces commercially safe images. It’s training the model on images from its stock imagery marketplace (in addition to openly licensed images and public domain content), which means it has the rights to all of these images and doesn’t have to scrape the web to gather them, with all of the copyright issues that entails. "

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rashishrivastava/2023/06/08/adobe-brings-its-generative-ai-tool-firefly-to-businesses/?sh=48313750582b

"Firefly is trained on more than 100 million images including Adobe’s stock images, licensed images and public images whose copyrights have expired. The company relies on its treasure trove of high-quality stock images sourced from contributors who typically get 33% of royalties when their images are sold or used."

"Multiple Adobe Stock contributors have expressed concerns over the use of AI-generated images to train their consumer-facing AI tool, Firefly, and that contributors can’t opt out of their work being used to train and create tools like Firefly. Fu confirmed that they are not able to opt out because contributors have signed licensing agreements stating that their images may be used for AI training purposes. But the company says it plans to compensate them in the future when Firefly comes out of beta (Fu declined to say how much it plans to pay the company’s contributors)."

Contributors DID NOT sign any agreement that our work could be use for AI training purposes - that's misleading at best. References to "its treasure trove of high-quality stock images" really irk - Adobe does not own our work. It has the right to issue licenses to customers. Contributors agree to have the images manipulated to operate the site (size and watermarks, for example). The term about using to develop new products is what is purportedly giving Adobe the right to train AI - but that's just Adobe's interpretation of a very vague statement.

Edited to add a link to an article on a boost in Adobe's stock price on the above news, noting they're reporting their earnings next week, on June 15th.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/firefly-ai-sends-adobes-stock-toward-highest-price-in-more-than-a-year-a92a4709

"Firefly “presents a much needed next act for Adobe” and is a natural extension of the company’s entrenched position within digital media, Turrin said." (Turin is a Wells Fargo analyst)

And yet another article that refers to Firefly training on "Adobe-owned imagery" - that would be our content. Adobe needs its spokespeople to do better in correcting these sorts of mistakes - I know they don't write the articles, but they're trying so hard to pitch the safety of the training data (which I think is much less a slam dunk than they & their lawyers do) that they're not being clear enough that they do not own the content on which Firefly was/is being trained.

https://www.thewrap.com/adobe-firefly-ai-lawsuit-reimbursement-protection/

Edited Jun 12 to add a link to this article highlighting Adobe's genAI strategy

https://www.barrons.com/articles/adobe-stock-ai-rally-wall-street-ea36f8d2?siteid=yhoof2

"Over the last few months, Adobe has made a series of announcements regarding its growing portfolio of generative-AI software. Until now, Adobe has been giving away its new tools on a website called Firefly, where users can experiment with new photo-editing tools, along with a service that can create images from a simple text command, similar to the Dall-e app from ChatGPT creator OpenAI. But last week Adobe made it clear that Firefly is more than simply a set of digital experiments—Adobe thinks generative AI is going to accelerate its growth rate."

The article said an analyst "...notes Adobe shares in recent weeks have shifted from investors’ AI loser list to the roster of perceived AI winners."

trek · « **Reply #103 on:** June 10, 2023, 10:26 »

What if.. data set usage amounts to something.. someday? If so, what would the AI machine like for breakfast? Are there needed niches that may result in future income?

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #104 on:** June 15, 2023, 16:46 »

Adobe announced their Q2 results late Thursday and the stock jumped (over $510 in after-hours trading) on the good revenue & earnings growth.

AI was a big element in the positive reaction:

"Analysts have increasingly championed the company since March, when Adobe launched Firefly, a new family of generative AI tools it claims helps transform the emerging technology into something that more design professionals can use, instead of dread."

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ai-puts-more-buzz-in-adobe-earnings-pushing-shares-over-500-9e8cebb5

The first part of the video is an interview with an analyst who talks about the jury being out on the long-term issues facing Adobe - that if there are fewer creatives because AI does most of the work, who will buy Adobe's creative products - but that in the short term all their AI moves had pleased investors. The analyst also mentioned competition from Canva at the "low end" of the market and getting their Figma acquisition closed (he says they overpaid for it)

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/adobe-scared-bears-away-short-211528215.html

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230615449849/en/Adobe-Reports-Record-Revenue-in-Q2-Fiscal-2023

https://www.proactiveinvestors.com/companies/news/1018057/adobe-posts-record-2q-revenue-on-strong-cloud-demand-1018057.html

cobalt · « **Reply #105 on:** June 15, 2023, 17:21 »

Good for them. The stock was clearly undervalued. Adobe is one of the best tech companies that will benefit immensely from the new ai trend.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #106 on:** July 12, 2023, 12:57 »

https://www.investors.com/news/technology/adbe-stock-adobe-expands-generative-ai-tool-to-over-100-languages/

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230712104690/en/Adobe-Firefly-Expands-Globally-Supports-Prompts-in-Over-100-Languages

https://techcrunch.com/2023/07/12/adobe-says-firefly-has-now-generated-1b-images-takes-it-global/

https://www.thurrott.com/cloud/285563/adobe-firefly-now-supports-over-100-languages

Firefly can now be used with more languages, not just English

"In addition to supporting text prompts in scores of new languages, Adobe is adapting the Firefly user interface to over 20 languages. Starting today, it is offering versions of Firefly in French, German, Japanese, Spanish and Portuguese."

"Unlike other players in this field, Adobe can ensure that the images businesses create with Firefly are commercially safe because it’s trained on a corpus of images that are part of Adobe’s stock imagery service. The company even goes as far as indemnifying its enterprise users."

It is increasingly frustrating, to me, that all these expansions of the "beta" of Firefly and the generative fill in Photoshop continue, many months after the announcement in March, and there is nothing - not even a date for a date - on when contributors will have a compensation model for this wholesale use of our content.

Adobe's stock is at $507.58 this afternoon - it closed at $362.88 on March 21st when Firefly was announced. Adobe continues to derive benefit from messages about how their generative AI will be safe for commercial use (because of the training on Adobe Stock content). That's the major reason their stock has risen so much of late.

Edited to add: ADBE closed at $517.28 Jul 13th.

Edited to add: ADBE closed at $532.23 July 18th!

cobalt · « **Reply #107 on:** July 12, 2023, 13:58 »

Well, if the stock is so high, they can certainly afford to pay out a generous " base training fee" to us all...We are also doing our best to bring them good work to make the Adobe collection more interesting.

Win win for everyone including the producers who are happy Adobe shareholders

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #108 on:** August 26, 2023, 12:10 »

I'm staying waaaay away from all this AI nonsense, but what's the latest on us being compensated for our work being used by Adobe Generative AI tools?

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #109 on:** August 26, 2023, 13:51 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on August 26, 2023, 12:10

I'm staying waaaay away from all this AI nonsense, but what's the latest on us being compensated for our work being used by Adobe Generative AI tools?

I had fussed about that with the Adobe Express announcement earlier this month. Nothing but crickets from San Jose. I believe the subtlety of Firefly beta being rolled out with Adobe Express - as opposed to Firefly being out of beta - got lost by headline writers. The original promise was that we'd hear about compensation when Firefly was out of beta...

So I think the direct answer to your question is that we know no more than back in March when Adobe announced Firefly.

If I consult my (admittedly broken) crystal ball, I'd say that based on progress so far, Firefly will be in beta for years. Making guesses about Adobe's goals with this announcement, I think it's all about getting the AI buzz wound up for the company as a whole, primarily related to getting the stock price up, and that we (contributors to Adobe Stock) were just the necessary CYA for the messages about Adobe's AI stuff being safe for commercial use. So Firefly could never come to market as a product and Adobe would still be able to win.

There was never anything explicit said about compensation for generative fill in Photoshop even though what I read said to me that it was based on the same training.

Additionally, if you consider that all Adobe's genAI competitors (Midjourney, Dall-E, Stable Diffusion...) are producing the 14+ million genAI collection at Adobe Stock - the stuff that Adobe was contrasting itself with and was painted as questionable for commercial use - the fundamental illogic seems glaring to me. Investors appear not to be paying attention to small details like that.

So my based-on-nothing-but-my-own-flawed-analysis guess is that you shouldn't book a vacation paid for by your Firefly compensation any time soon

spike · « **Reply #110 on:** August 26, 2023, 15:37 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on August 26, 2023, 13:51

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on August 26, 2023, 12:10
I'm staying waaaay away from all this AI nonsense, but what's the latest on us being compensated for our work being used by Adobe Generative AI tools?

I had fussed about that with the Adobe Express announcement earlier this month. Nothing but crickets from San Jose. I believe the subtlety of Firefly beta being rolled out with Adobe Express - as opposed to Firefly being out of beta - got lost by headline writers. The original promise was that we'd hear about compensation when Firefly was out of beta...

So I think the direct answer to your question is that we know no more than back in March when Adobe announced Firefly.

If I consult my (admittedly broken) crystal ball, I'd say that based on progress so far, Firefly will be in beta for years. Making guesses about Adobe's goals with this announcement, I think it's all about getting the AI buzz wound up for the company as a whole, primarily related to getting the stock price up, and that we (contributors to Adobe Stock) were just the necessary CYA for the messages about Adobe's AI stuff being safe for commercial use. So Firefly could never come to market as a product and Adobe would still be able to win.

There was never anything explicit said about compensation for generative fill in Photoshop even though what I read said to me that it was based on the same training.

Additionally, if you consider that all Adobe's genAI competitors (Midjourney, Dall-E, Stable Diffusion...) are producing the 14+ million genAI collection at Adobe Stock - the stuff that Adobe was contrasting itself with and was painted as questionable for commercial use - the fundamental illogic seems glaring to me. Investors appear not to be paying attention to small details like that.

So my based-on-nothing-but-my-own-flawed-analysis guess is that you shouldn't book a vacation paid for by your Firefly compensation any time soon

And yet people are still using this "beta" feature for commercial purposes. But I guess nobody else but me cares.

blvdone · « **Reply #111 on:** August 28, 2023, 09:23 »

I just tried it now, but it's so bad. It's not like Midjourney. It's not usable for AI stock photo generation imo yet.

gnirtS · « **Reply #112 on:** August 31, 2023, 01:02 »

We've had a few nights now over a beer and trying to get Firefly to generate anything remotely accurate or lifelike to improve an image. And failed.
Every single thing is unusable from a realism or accuracy point of view.

In one example i selected a group of people i wanted removed from the scene, generative fill selected (no prompts), it removed the people and replaced the background pattern nicely BUT for no clear reason also added a large dog sized mutant pigeon on the pavement.
At no point did i ask for the pigeon version of Godzilla.

As a tangent - the "Remove Tool" in beta. Is that firefly based (i assume not as it actually works)? Or can it be legitimately used instead of content aware to remove items in our own images.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #113 on:** September 13, 2023, 09:36 »

Adobe has now announced pricing for Firefly (which is out of beta)

https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/13/adobes-firefly-generative-ai-models-are-now-generally-available-get-pricing-plans/

"Basically, every time you click ‘generate’ to create a Firefly image, you’ll consume one credit (and the company retooled the Firefly web app, for example, so that it doesn’t automatically start generating images before you’ve made all of the tweaks you wanted to make)."

1,000 credits come with the All Apps plan, 500 with a single App subscription. If you run out of credits, things run, but much more slowly.

Press release: https://s23.q4cdn.com/979560357/files/091323AdobeCommercialFirefly.pdf

I understand all the words in this statement, but not what it really means:

"Adobe is introducing Adobe GenStudio, a new solution that combines the best of content ideation, creation, production and activation to revolutionize the Enterprise content supply chain with the power of generative AI. Adobe GenStudio is a comprehensive, integrated solution for any Enterprise to supercharge and simplify their creation-to-activation process with generative AI capabilities and intelligent automation. "

I don't see anything that addresses the AI fueled Photoshop features and the credit system. I assume that means you don't consume credits when you use them, but it'd be nice to understand that better.

More coverage:

https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/13/23871537/adobe-firefly-generative-ai-model-general-availability-launch-date-price
https://www.fastcompany.com/90951954/as-firefly-leaves-beta-adobe-promises-bonuses-to-creators-who-trained-its-ai
https://www.zdnet.com/article/adobe-firefly-now-out-of-beta-boasts-fix-for-dall-es-drawbacks/
https://www.engadget.com/adobes-firefly-ai-is-now-commercially-available-on-photoshop-illustrator-and-express-130049419.html
https://www.adobe.com/sensei/generative-ai/firefly.html

I haven't seen anything yet about what the rules will be for Adobe Stock contributors who use the AI-fueled Photoshop features to edit a photo they took - does that then become content that must be marked as genAI? With the exception of editorial (which Adobe Stock doesn't except beyond the odd illustrative editorial), one doesn't have to mark photos that have been edited as such. And in general you'd never sell much if you didn't edit what came out of the camera. All these considerations get a lot murkier once there are AI tools to modify a photo of something that actually exists (existed) in the real world.

This is mostly, IMO, a concern about giving the buyer an accurate description of what they're licensing.

Lina · « **Reply #115 on:** September 13, 2023, 10:04 »

And you are raising CC software prices which were already high, that's really not nice Adobe. $:-\$

"Starting November 2023, Adobe plans for users to be able to purchase additional Generative Credits through a new subscription plan, starting at $4.99/month for 100 Credits." So will we get paid whenever someone uses our image and know which one is it, like we are paid for normal, paid images? It should be similar, why not? I like bonus I got, but I don't like to be paid in bulk, not knowing how many of my images were used and at which price.

All info is from Adobe blog https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2023/09/13/ai-creative-cloud-release-pricing-update?sdid=VG52KCB7&mv=social&mv2=paid-owned&fbclid=IwAR0W4AIxqg-zKvR8XNEQT3r80dW5NGWwxFZgn4DnAjUARChtw_3OLRibYEI.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #117 on:** September 13, 2023, 11:18 »

Quote from: MatHayward on September 13, 2023, 09:39

...Examples when to label your image as generative AI:
...-Making significant adjustments or changes to a human subject in an image

This article has two images at the beginning which show Photoshop work with generative fill. Would the changes to the human's clothing shown count as "significant"? I realize the decisions will be subjective, but given the recent account blockings, I think you can understand contributors' nervousness.

https://gizmodo.com/adobe-firefly-ai-photoshop-illustrator-free-ai-art-1850833489

I've done a lot of Photoshop editing and re-coloring over the years. If I continue to do it the "old fashioned" way and submit it without tagging as AI, I'd be worried that I'd get flagged as having used AI but not tagged my content as such. Can that dialog with edit history help here?

I've just updated Photoshop to v25 and will experiment a bit.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #118 on:** September 13, 2023, 12:19 »

Quote

And just a suspicion that agencies want AI images marked, so they won't be used to train AI.

lol - that is "exactly" one of the reasons why they are marked as such... not the only reason, but one of them

cobalt · « **Reply #119 on:** September 13, 2023, 12:37 »

5 dollars gives you 100 credits and 400 images...but unless you have a lot of experience the results will probably be less useful than browsing the adobe stock archive.

This is actually well priced, for most customers a normal stock plan will be a better option and only the more experienced designers will add ai for special cases.

One of the big worries is that ai generation will replace normal stock downloads. But with this price level and the fact you still need a lot of practical experience to prompt well, I am not worried about losing sales.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #120 on:** September 13, 2023, 16:28 »

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #121 on:** September 13, 2023, 19:10 »

ravens · « **Reply #122 on:** September 13, 2023, 21:19 »

Mat,

we need an OPT OUT.

Kenneth_17 · « **Reply #123 on:** September 15, 2023, 02:03 »

What I still don't fully understand is the following. Adobe is marketing Firefly as the safe option to avoid copyright hassles. They even guarantee invincibility. But how does a buyer know on Adobe Stock that they are purchasing an image generated by Firefly and not an image created by, for example, Midjourney?

Will there be a separate category for images created by Firefly? Because if that's the case, the sales of the approximately 15 million GenAI images currently in the database (which are not created by Firefly) may dwindle. Because why would a buyer purchase those, if Adobe implicitly suggests there may be some risk associated with them?

synthetick · « **Reply #124 on:** September 15, 2023, 04:03 »

Quote from: Kenneth_17 on September 15, 2023, 02:03

What I still don't fully understand is the following. Adobe is marketing Firefly as the safe option to avoid copyright hassles. They even guarantee invincibility. But how does a buyer know on Adobe Stock that they are purchasing an image generated by Firefly and not an image created by, for example, Midjourney?

Will there be a separate category for images created by Firefly? Because if that's the case, the sales of the approximately 15 million GenAI images currently in the database (which are not created by Firefly) may dwindle. Because why would a buyer purchase those, if Adobe implicitly suggests there may be some risk associated with them?

Because Adobe has been promoting Firefly as an "ethical" AI, I was quite surprised when I discovered that Adobe has trained Firefly on other "non-ethical" AI images. So I asked about this on the Discord server and got this response from an Adobe staff member: "Adobe accepts Generative AI images on Stock, and Generative AI images from the Adobe Stock collection are a small part of the Firefly training dataset. Contributors who submit these images must agree to our Contributor Additional Terms of Use, which include the representation that the contributor has the necessary rights to the images, that the images comply with all of the terms, and that these images will meet our guidelines around the use of generative AI tools. . All Stock images come with a representation that they do not infringe the IP of others and generative images are received the same way. If content is provided that violates those representations, we take that content down upon notice."

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Announcing Adobe Firefly – A new family of creative generative AI models (Read 26266 times)

trek

MatHayward

Jo Ann Snover

trek

Jo Ann Snover

cobalt

Jo Ann Snover

cobalt

Sean Locke Photography

Jo Ann Snover

spike

blvdone

gnirtS

Jo Ann Snover

MatHayward

Lina

MatHayward

Jo Ann Snover

SuperPhoto

cobalt

Jo Ann Snover

Jo Ann Snover

ravens

Kenneth_17

synthetick

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors