Author Topic: Open Letter to Adobe from ASMP "Skip the Photoshoot" (Read 1675 times)

wordplanet · « **on:** May 24, 2024, 10:45 »

I wanted to share this open letter from ASMP (American Society of Media Professionals) to Adobe responding to their latest advertising:

An Open Letter to Adobe

Adobe, you might imagine that asking your users to “skip the photoshoot” as you did in a recent set of ads would be a clever way to promote your new tools in Photoshop, but instead, this campaign indicated a shocking dismissal of photography and the photographers who have dedicated their lives to creating it.
As one of the largest professional associations representing photographers and all visual creators, and as our 6,500 members well know, creating a career in photography is harder than ever, with the average photographer having to navigate stolen images, copyright infringement, broken business promises, and now, the specter of wholesale replacement of their art and craft by AI platforms.

But while fighting these battles on these multiple fronts, photographers would not have expected to have to defend themselves from attack by the company whose products are inseparable from the current and past toolbox of the professional photographer. Put simply, why, Adobe, would you dismiss and discount all that your most fervent and loyal customers aspire to?
And this was an attack; an attack on the creativity of the photographer, on the skill and nuance they bring to the photoshoot, and the countless hours they spend preparing for, and working after the photoshoot you are so cavalier to simply throw away.

Great photography is born in the vision of the photographer first, and then brought to life by the artisans who have focused their creative energy for years and decades to make the final image. It is not mechanical; it is not replaceable by a button or an algorithm. Despite your intimation, great photography is more than pixels – it is passion.

While you may change your campaign, soften your language, or otherwise blunt this anger you find currently pointed in your direction, we hope that this is not a stopgap measure. Adobe should take a hard look at how it describes photography and photographers and determine if you support this industry or wish to aid in its destruction.

For the legions of photographers who have used your products, both ASMP Members and non-members alike, we ask you to do better. To stand with us to strengthen all that photography is and can be. To engage in good faith to find technological solutions that professionals can be proud to use.

Do better Adobe.

Gabriella Marks
Chair, American Society of Media Photographers

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #1 on:** May 24, 2024, 14:01 »

Some press on this topic:

https://www.fastcompany.com/91125044/technology-that-saves-animals

"If that sounds like an extreme response to what arguably amounts to sloppy word choice, consider the context: Creatives of all stripes have been feeling threats that AI may pose to their livelihood—and have noticed that tech giants and startups alike seem all too eager to prioritize their own business motives. "

Adobe's stock is down today, in spite of their recent announcements about Adobe Express for Enterprise, probably because of Canva's announcement about enterprise offerings:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/canva-goes-adobe-users-tools-163000328.html

Of course reddit has comments all over the map

https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/1cy0xpj/asmp_calls_out_adobe_for_its_shocking_dismissal/

f8 · « **Reply #2 on:** May 24, 2024, 18:02 »

Adobe is a corporation. Never forget this, ever. Adobe has never had your best interests in mind. To think otherwise is foolish. Adobe has their eyes locked on to the future and sadly photographers are not really part of the plan, or designers for that matter. I see more and more imagery that is AI in both advertising and editorial. Photography as a career is at the Check Mate stage of the industry. It's a bitter pill to swallow, but it is the truth. If you want to make money in photography, sell you equipment and put the money into Adobe stock. Maybe if you ask nice enough they will give you a share for $5.

zeljkok · « **Reply #3 on:** May 24, 2024, 20:37 »

AI imagery is just a subset of general direction human race is taking in 21st century. It is completely wrong in my opinion; environment on which very existence depends on is crumbling, but focus is somewhere else, spearheaded by Tech companies with profit, or rather fear of not getting left behind, as main motivation. Adobe itself can not be particularly blamed; they are just riding the wave everyone else does.

Her Ugliness · « **Reply #4 on:** May 25, 2024, 05:37 »

Quote from: wordplanet on May 24, 2024, 10:45

why, Adobe, would you dismiss and discount all that your most fervent and loyal customers aspire to?

There is a simple answer to that: Because they aim at replacing us with new customers. The customers who don't need any real skills and talent and just click a few buttons to have Adobe produce some AI "photo" for them.
Everyone can do that, so a much bigger potential customer base to make money from.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #5 on:** May 25, 2024, 06:49 »

That particular letter is poorly written and very ineffective. It doesn't really serve any purpose at all. Sounds like 6 or 7 year old female child wrote it.

It is a waste of time, essentially a pouty letter, saying "hmm! we are mad. Bleah! So THERE!".

Also - if the author, acting on behalf of that organization is "mad" at adobe - because they 'perceive' it to be an 'attack' - how about the ACTUAL corporations like midjourney which are OPENLY STEALING and attacking photographers? Midjourney's "business model" is based pretty much ENTIRELY OFF OF THEFT. That is how the images are "created" - STOLEN images. Other google funded services (i.e., some of the vidgen stuff) is also 100% based off of THEFT... Go after THOSE companies. The ones ACTUALLY STEALING AND "attacking" photographers and videographers.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #6 on:** May 25, 2024, 06:53 »

Quote from: Her Ugliness on May 25, 2024, 05:37

Quote from: wordplanet on May 24, 2024, 10:45
why, Adobe, would you dismiss and discount all that your most fervent and loyal customers aspire to?

There is a simple answer to that: Because they aim at replacing us with new customers. The customers who don't need any real skills and talent and just click a few buttons to have Adobe produce some AI "photo" for them.
Everyone can do that, so a much bigger potential customer base to make money from.

More specifically - it's probably the blackrock/vanguard conglomerate with some moles working at adobe, trying to hurt their public image. (Sometimes the people being used know what they are doing, sometimes they don't know they are being used). Blackrock/vanguard are funding (directly/indirectly) competing services like midjourney/chatGPT/etc - and you don't see them getting the same kind of flack. Partially because blackrock/vanguard (more specifically, many of the people running those corporations which engage in major theft and deception, also in a big part responsible for the nonsensical marching orders to corporations for the evil diapers on people's faces), because if I recall correctly - larry fink (ceo) had sent out a letter to most of the fortunte 500 companies with a veiled threat of 'do this, or else' (which also includes the insanely stupid, but very targeted 'attacks against caucasians' campaign) - they also run the newspapers that promote midjourney/chatGPT and are trying to discredit adobe.

If anyone should be being 'attacked', it should be services like midjourney. Or chatGPT. Services based pretty much ENTIRELY upon theft. But you don't see that, do you? Also - look at who runs midjourney/blackrock/bloomberg/etc - specifically the 'religion' or 'culture' background (whatever you want to call it). Very significant - because that is one of the modus operandi of that culture. Discredit those they don't like in order to attack them, while simulanteously playing the part of a victim. It appears to be a corporate attack.

synthetick · « **Reply #7 on:** May 25, 2024, 08:03 »

Quote from: SuperPhoto on May 25, 2024, 06:49

Sounds like 6 or 7 year old female child wrote it.

Ugh. Why on earth did you feel the need to write female there?

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #8 on:** May 25, 2024, 08:12 »

Quote from: synthetick on May 25, 2024, 08:03

Quote from: SuperPhoto on May 25, 2024, 06:49
Sounds like 6 or 7 year old female child wrote it.

Ugh. Why on earth did you feel the need to write female there?

"ugh." why on earth you did you feel the need to feel offended because that was written there?

(a) because it actually was written by a female. read the signature.
(b) because it sounds like it was written by a female. if it sounded like it was written by a male, I would have said that instead.

the significance of that statement is the age. the letter sounds like it was written by an impetuous female child throwing a temper tantrum, not written by a mature woman with a well thought out letter, detailing specifically exactly how a particular ad campaign actually effects other photographers, and a specific resolution of what she would request by done on behalf of the members to having a more amicable business relationship going forward.

the is very immature letter and sounds like it is written by a female child throwing a temper tantrum because her feelings were hurt, and she wants to take her ball and go home.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #9 on:** May 25, 2024, 10:10 »

Quote from: SuperPhoto on May 25, 2024, 08:12

Quote from: synthetick on May 25, 2024, 08:03
Quote from: SuperPhoto on May 25, 2024, 06:49
Sounds like 6 or 7 year old female child wrote it.

Ugh. Why on earth did you feel the need to write female there?

"ugh." why on earth you did you feel the need to feel offended because that was written there?

(a) because it actually was written by a female. read the signature.
(b) because it sounds like it was written by a female. if it sounded like it was written by a male, I would have said that instead.

the significance of that statement is the age. the letter sounds like it was written by an impetuous female child throwing a temper tantrum, not written by a mature woman with a well thought out letter, detailing specifically exactly how a particular ad campaign actually effects other photographers, and a specific resolution of what she would request by done on behalf of the members to having a more amicable business relationship going forward.

the is very immature letter and sounds like it is written by a female child throwing a temper tantrum because her feelings were hurt, and she wants to take her ball and go home.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #10 on:** May 25, 2024, 19:08 »

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on May 25, 2024, 10:10

Quote from: SuperPhoto on May 25, 2024, 08:12
Quote from: synthetick on May 25, 2024, 08:03
Quote from: SuperPhoto on May 25, 2024, 06:49
Sounds like 6 or 7 year old female child wrote it.

Ugh. Why on earth did you feel the need to write female there?

"ugh." why on earth you did you feel the need to feel offended because that was written there?

(a) because it actually was written by a female. read the signature.
(b) because it sounds like it was written by a female. if it sounded like it was written by a male, I would have said that instead.

the significance of that statement is the age. the letter sounds like it was written by an impetuous female child throwing a temper tantrum, not written by a mature woman with a well thought out letter, detailing specifically exactly how a particular ad campaign actually effects other photographers, and a specific resolution of what she would request by done on behalf of the members to having a more amicable business relationship going forward.

the is very immature letter and sounds like it is written by a female child throwing a temper tantrum because her feelings were hurt, and she wants to take her ball and go home.

haha

Vegan Wars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGsW0yLYao0

Injustice for all · « **Reply #11 on:** May 26, 2024, 04:40 »

I'll try to be brief.

unfortunately that's the way life goes,that's the way things go,things change,continuously and exponentially as time goes by.

AI image generators are the future of photography, especially regarding content of people, lifestyles and concepts.

as I already said,I started photography towards the end of the 80s.

I continued for many years,I spent a lot on equipment,time,resources,I read books on photographic techniques and printing.

and then what?digital photography has arrived.

80% of the invested resources have been lost.

I abandoned photography out of disappointment,and only much later did I rediscover the desire and determination to start again.

what is happening with AI today is exactly the same thing.

now what should Adobe do in this case?

the only thing to do in these cases is to embrace the future,and that's exactly what Adobe is doing.

I agree,there are things that Adobe could and will do better...just as there are things that I should do better too!

as far as promoting their products,they are simply embracing the future and doing what they need to do,and they are trying to do it as best they can.

continuing to highlight problems that we already know is useless,whereas a solution would be very useful.

this letter proposes nothing,it only demonstrates an anger,which even if it is comprensible,is useless.

For all the various problems that this new technology brings,Adobe is trying to do the best it can to help artists,let's give them time.

the important thing is the will to do it,and Adobe has this will,I see it.

don't get hung up on these details "skip the photoshoot".

it's just a promotional slogan,it's not intended to offend or undermine photographers,it's simply what it is,with Firefly you can skip the photoshoot,it's simply reality!

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #12 on:** May 26, 2024, 05:36 »

The future is always the consequence of choices, revisable at any time.
An incredible blindness here, ultimately, proof that you renounce your own organic vision, which you entrust to machines. If photography does not represent reality, then it is no longer a question of photography. Simply using this word is an admitted falsification. Do you attribute humanist intentions to Adobe? no but seriously!...

Some become like machines, others will remain human. Only sheep think that there is only one type of future in which everyone will live in the same way.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #13 on:** May 26, 2024, 06:15 »

Quote from: SuperPhoto on May 25, 2024, 19:08

Vegan Wars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGsW0yLYao0

Deepfakes, or the technological art of confusing minds willing to let themselves be manipulated, have never made me smile or laugh.

Distorting reality is only funny when the maneuver is visible and understandable to everyone. Perverting or polluting it will perhaps dissuade some people from being informed and educated by screens.
The worst is that we will call into question the visual testimony of truth, of reality, of the historical past or of distant events.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #14 on:** May 26, 2024, 07:57 »

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on May 26, 2024, 05:36

The future is always the consequence of choices, revisable at any time.
An incredible blindness here, ultimately, proof that you renounce your own organic vision, which you entrust to machines. If photography does not represent reality, then it is no longer a question of photography. Simply using this word is an admitted falsification. Do you attribute humanist intentions to Adobe? no but seriously!...

Some become like machines, others will remain human. Only sheep think that there is only one type of future in which everyone will live in the same way.

yes,I'm sure that in your head the future is revisable at any time.

the future is predetermined by the character of those who create it,and by more or less fortunate events that are beyond our control.

Accepting changes for better or for worse is part of the process of life,I know this well,since I went from an extremely happy life where I could afford to do whatever I wanted,to this present that I still don't know exactly how to define.

yet here I am,I'm still here,I've discovered that I'm much more resistant and tenacious than I ever thought.

Adobe is trying to do the best it can in the current scenario,as am I.

continuing to row against something that cannot be stopped is useless,rather,it's better to spend our time on something we can change,or that perhaps we can still change.

AI in all its applications cannot be stopped,it is we who must find different solutions to adapt to a completely different present,very different from 10 years ago and completely different from 20 years ago.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #15 on:** May 26, 2024, 08:49 »

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 26, 2024, 04:40

...
don't get hung up on these details "skip the photoshoot".

it's just a promotional slogan,it's not intended to offend or undermine photographers,it's simply what it is,with Firefly you can skip the photoshoot,it's simply reality!

I agree with you. It's making a big issue out of really nothing, some people looking to be offended and feel self righteous about.

Also though - generally speaking it is a 'business tactic' some heads of certain corporations use to attack other corporations - and there is one specific culture that uses it as an actual TACTIC (attempting to discredit competitors to affect stock prices/shares/etc while simultaneously pretending to be a 'victim') - and lol - some people get SUPER "offended" about it if you say what their background is because they've been PROGRAMMED to act that way through schooling (look @ the ppl running midjourney/chatgpt/bloomberg/etc - what do they all have in common?). It's SUPER ODD "nobody" is saying anything about Midjourney (which is based on theft), ChatGPT (which is based on theft)... but "nobody" in the media is complaining about actual theft (hint: the "media" companies owned by the same people running/promoting the chatgpt/midjourney)... but instead whining about "being offended" by a ridiculous thing they shouldn't be "offended" by...

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #16 on:** May 26, 2024, 08:56 »

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on May 26, 2024, 06:15

Quote from: SuperPhoto on May 25, 2024, 19:08
Vegan Wars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGsW0yLYao0

Deepfakes, or the technological art of confusing minds willing to let themselves be manipulated, have never made me smile or laugh.

Distorting reality is only funny when the maneuver is visible and understandable to everyone. Perverting or polluting it will perhaps dissuade some people from being informed and educated by screens.
The worst is that we will call into question the visual testimony of truth, of reality, of the historical past or of distant events.

Last 3-4 years was quite an eye-awaking experience, including the fact that that particular type of manipulation is nothing new... and it's been used by the mass media for quite some time (50+ years)... this is just a new "tool" in their arsenal...

I suspect part of the reason the "general" populace now has access to it is because the consoritorium of oligarchs are REALLY trying hard to push the "digitalID" for your "safety & security", which has absolutely nothing to do with safety, nor security - but rather control (and trying to prevent other people from acquiring wealth and power)... as was pointed out by someone to me recently - the same people (head's of certain companies) pushing for "ai regulation" are the same people that are profiting massively from it...

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #17 on:** May 26, 2024, 18:56 »

Generated two years ago with an already old technology,
"A Deepfake Singularity":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxXpB9pSETo

Injustice for all · « **Reply #18 on:** May 27, 2024, 01:59 »

Quote from: SuperPhoto on May 26, 2024, 08:49

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 26, 2024, 04:40
...
don't get hung up on these details "skip the photoshoot".

it's just a promotional slogan,it's not intended to offend or undermine photographers,it's simply what it is,with Firefly you can skip the photoshoot,it's simply reality!

I agree with you. It's making a big issue out of really nothing, some people looking to be offended and feel self righteous about.

Also though - generally speaking it is a 'business tactic' some heads of certain corporations use to attack other corporations - and there is one specific culture that uses it as an actual TACTIC (attempting to discredit competitors to affect stock prices/shares/etc while simultaneously pretending to be a 'victim') - and lol - some people get SUPER "offended" about it if you say what their background is because they've been PROGRAMMED to act that way through schooling (look @ the ppl running midjourney/chatgpt/bloomberg/etc - what do they all have in common?). It's SUPER ODD "nobody" is saying anything about Midjourney (which is based on theft), ChatGPT (which is based on theft)... but "nobody" in the media is complaining about actual theft (hint: the "media" companies owned by the same people running/promoting the chatgpt/midjourney)... but instead whining about "being offended" by a ridiculous thing they shouldn't be "offended" by...

exactly,in fact I don't understand what anyone could want from Adobe,which remains the best agency of all.

the best royalties,Firefly bonuses,AI training paid missions,free software,free paid collection with the possibility of naming the contents you want,representative also here on Microstockgroup,they are interested when a problem is reported...but what do you want them to pay for your dinner too?

of course in some cases they have had to "sacrifice" some aspects to ensure that things can continue to work as best as possible,such as for example,an opt out was not created for the contents used to train Firefly,because it was a necessary action,as was the change from eur to usd.

some actions were necessary,they always tried to maintain the right balance while also trying to favor the creators.

rather we should complain about Istock which practically "gives away" our work,or SS which pays us 0.10c per image,or in fact we will have to complain about Midjourney who stole everyone's work without spending a cent,and then charges high subscriptions.

this is why I honestly don't understand how anyone can attack Adobe for even the slightest problem,when in fact they have always proven to be in the best possible way,they may not be perfect,but I'm not perfect either!

I would rather say let's try to appreciate the opportunities we have thanks to Adobe,the truth is that today without Adobe Stock,the microstock would already be a dead end.

Mifornia · « **Reply #19 on:** May 27, 2024, 11:02 »

this whole thread is a disappointment

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #20 on:** May 27, 2024, 16:49 »

Quote from: Mifornia on May 27, 2024, 11:02

this whole thread is a disappointment

Right, and many who would have thought the same have gone now.

cruiser · « **Reply #21 on:** May 28, 2024, 01:54 »

Quote from: Injustice for all on May 26, 2024, 07:57

Adobe is trying to do the best it can in the current scenario,as am I.

continuing to row against something that cannot be stopped is useless,rather,it's better to spend our time on something we can change,or that perhaps we can still change.

AI in all its applications cannot be stopped,it is we who must find different solutions to adapt to a completely different present,very different from 10 years ago and completely different from 20 years ago.

And Adobe is flooding the market with these works, selling them and using them for its own purposes.
I don't think this copyright disaster with all its consequences and often poor quality is here to stay, but Adobe seems to like it.

Big Money · « **Reply #22 on:** May 28, 2024, 08:19 »

When I started the microstock business back in 2009 there were many folks earning over $72,000 (USD) thus making an okay living on photography. Now, today I personally don't know of anyone make $72,000 a year--- sure there are a few folks making this kind of money but very few.

I peaked out in 2014 at $36,000 (USD) and have gone backwards to now $12,000 (USD) even with increases to my portfolio and my skills improving---nothing I do seems to work thus I have taken up other interests and rarely touch my 2015 Canon EOS 5DSr 50mp camera. Also I have no intention of upgrading my pro camera only will use my iPhone now if I take a pic or video. Photography has evolved and left me in the dust. Such as life...

gnirtS · « **Reply #23 on:** May 31, 2024, 07:09 »

We need to remember here that Adobe as a business looks out for Adobe.
Agencies with the introduction of AI are moving from being media companies into being data companies. Our content is nothing more than a small pile of bytes in a vast data set. The data set is what they need to train the AI and its the AI they see long term as the thing generating their money.

For all of these there's a time when they hope they wont NEED contributors - they're annoying, resource intensive and need paying. Once they have all the data needed from them they have no further need for them.

Arguably with the vast amounts of AI bloating Adobe's library they're already further down that road than even Shutterstock. A quick look on FB now shows most "contributors" on there are just text spamming AI generators using stolen or corporate accounts to produce thousands of images a day, use AI to upscale these images, AI to keyword and just upload in bulk. There's no actual image creation any more. Its feeding text into an engine. And those are outgrowing actual, user created content maybe 10:1. Its purely a quantity factory that is automated as much as possible to reduce the effort and time required as much as possible.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #24 on:** May 31, 2024, 09:37 »

Quote from: gnirtS on May 31, 2024, 07:09

We need to remember here that Adobe as a business looks out for Adobe.
Agencies with the introduction of AI are moving from being media companies into being data companies. Our content is nothing more than a small pile of bytes in a vast data set. The data set is what they need to train the AI and its the AI they see long term as the thing generating their money.

For all of these there's a time when they hope they wont NEED contributors - they're annoying, resource intensive and need paying. Once they have all the data needed from them they have no further need for them.

Arguably with the vast amounts of AI bloating Adobe's library they're already further down that road than even Shutterstock. A quick look on FB now shows most "contributors" on there are just text spamming AI generators using stolen or corporate accounts to produce thousands of images a day, use AI to upscale these images, AI to keyword and just upload in bulk. There's no actual image creation any more. Its feeding text into an engine. And those are outgrowing actual, user created content maybe 10:1. Its purely a quantity factory that is automated as much as possible to reduce the effort and time required as much as possible.

I,on the other hand,don't think Adobe wants to get rid of contributors,and I think we are always needed.

There is so much real content that AI just can't replace or create.

Real is real,when a customer buys a photo they know it's real,and that's a huge difference,then of course,there are also cases in which it is not necessary to be real.

As for the various issues,of multiple accounts,contributors trying to inflate sales,and all this uncontrolled mass AI uploading,I believe Adobe will resolve and fix everything so that everything continues to work properly,but it takes time,not everything can be solved overnight.

We contributors will always be necessary,real content will always be needed.

I really don't see why Adobe should eliminate us and replace us with AI,we are a key part of Adobe and Adobe Stock.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Open Letter to Adobe from ASMP "Skip the Photoshoot" (Read 1675 times)

wordplanet

Jo Ann Snover

f8

zeljkok

Her Ugliness

SuperPhoto

SuperPhoto

synthetick

SuperPhoto

DiscreetDuck

SuperPhoto

Injustice for all

DiscreetDuck

DiscreetDuck

Injustice for all

SuperPhoto

SuperPhoto

DiscreetDuck

Injustice for all

Mifornia

DiscreetDuck

cruiser

Big Money

gnirtS

Injustice for all

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors