The ethics of Adobe (as ironic as that sentence is) makes it the main reason why I use firefly. I don't have to worry about the sourcing of training data, which is a valuable advantage.
Plus adobe financially compensated their stock photographers when firefly first came out for being able to train firefly on their images. The compensation structure was very convoluted and complicated, but I always feel that I should support a company that supports its creatives.
I've been playing around with Stable Diffusion (ComfyUI) for random stuff and learning how it all works, but always kick back to Photoshop with the generative fill for serious stuff. It's incredible for photo restoration where portions of photos may be ripped out or scraped off. Managed to do most of my grandpa's communion photo from the 1920s - "crumble in my hands" old and a good 15-20% of the photo missing - with unprompted generative infill. Feels weird hyping Adobe but from what I've seen Firefly is really a perfect counterpoint to most of the anti-AI arguments I've seen.
Great stuff thanks so much as I had been unsure about the whole rights thing - doing personal work, testing ideas, concepting and ideation I use whichever tool I think does a fabulous job but for commercial work ive always been a bit worried putting stuff out there so it was really cool to see your video today on this topic as whilst I heard before Adobe had come at the AI generation with a sensible rights allowed angle, hearing this again from you has made a difference to my approach going forward. And whilst Adobe stock trained AI will mean some less range of image creation compared to say LEonardo, Dalle3, Midjourney, being able to tell a client that the images are all commercially viable is a big plus!
I just played with it. What I think is great is it’s a great tool to at very least stimulate my imagination for my paintings. I want to see how it can help me improve my initial covert sketches , clear my creative block and inspire compositions for my paintings on panel. Playing with firefly today just to experiment is already helping think about how I want to evolve my art concept . My hope is it will also help me create paintings in less time and reduce frustrations that occur with my process . I’m excited I can upload my own sketches .going to play more and see what happens . I’ve kept some of the experiments I did just with my crazy prompts more as inspiration.
The credit system is a disgrace. We already pay a subscription and they don't make the credit system clear until you click click click and discover it.....
I have a noob question about Firefly, and apologies if this is not the right platform to ask on - if you create a character image, say for an illustration in a book, can you generate subsequent images from that image to show various expressions like fear, joy etc, and from differing points of view. I have noticed with Firefly, that even though you input same prompts the images, although similar, can vary a great deal from your reference image. Is there a way to control this? thx
It's just Stable Diffusion retrained (worse than SD imo). Some controlnet features, though a bunch of stuff is missing. Watermarks, metadata, credentials can all be changed... I don't see why any of that is important. Legally Firefly adds nothing, it's all wishful thinking, at the moment.
If I wanted to generate photos and sell them on adobe stock..is there an advantage of using the firefly or do other like ideogram or Stable Diffusion cut it
how do you create a larger than 2 meg image in Firefly or do you have to transfer the AI generated image to firefly . . . ps thanks for the great explanation video
Thank you for this informative video. I, too, have avoided using the other pirate happy AI models - sooner or later an enterprising lawyer is going to figure out exactly how to drive a stake into the hearts of the latter-day robber barons and there will be hell to pay. The fact they actually think they have a right to steal other people's work tells us all we need to know about their business model and ethics (or rather lack thereof) and why they should be avoided like the plague.
but now i can't have the generative fill interact with MY IMAGE by going the quick mask, filling with a percent of gray, leaving quick, put in my prompt and watch the generative fill INTERACT with MY IMAGE. I SHURE HOPE ADOBE DOES NOT TAKE AWAY THIS FEATURE as they have with the Beta version
Do you know how to get Firefly to make a composition that is not symmetrical? I’ve tried giving it instructions in the prompt like asymmetrical, not symmetrical, not centered, etc, and it never works. Thanks.
You could upload an outline sketch of the image they way you wan it compositionally and use it as a stricture reference in it. I just saw a video come up on you tube with someone showing how . Very cool .
It produces terrible results for me and whenever I try to edit people images, the censorship steps in and removes 80% of my tries without any logical reason. I get a lot better results with stable diffusion.
It's too expensive, adobe is more for business users, not for hobby, and for fun, so it's completely useless. I have nothing against them, I tried the first beta, and it's great, but when someone is more for money, than to enable a wider audience with a smaller budget who want pictures for entertainment, social networks and so on, then ADOBE is the last tool that people should use use. Thank God there are similar tools, which are practically free, that's why I say that Adobe PS belongs to the useless group.
If you're so unhappy about the price, you can learn how to pirate safe versions my friend, I've never paid for any piece of software, look in the r/piracy megathread
Elements of Adobe’s Firefly are found in Photoshop Beta 2024. This is free to use, but restricted small composition sizes to generate images. Given this you may need to use a third party app’ to upscale generated images. For the full Adobe Firefly suite of apps, or tools, the consumer pays a monthly fee that includes hundreds of credits. These credits equal the number of images generated. Some say it is only a matter of time before Adobe release Firefly for After Effects. AE’s Content Aware Fill is a hint of what is to come.
Dude people love LowJourney but it’s a poop interaction/ui still using Discord, even if you’re a paying member, but most important is how schizophrenic these AI generators are. Even if I copy the exact same prompt as an example; Panda on orange couch, etc… shit will come up with a hippo doing yoga at a rock concert or something. NEVER remotely close. Firefly you can actually work with an image!!!! and the MOST IMPORTANT is the UI. It’s like watching 8k vs 80s Betamax. 😂
For people who work with artistic nudes and sensual shoots, I don't recommend Photoshop and its acclaimed Generative Fill. As much as I don't want to photoshop anyone's clothes, it can't understand that and blocks most of my requests. This makes me extremely angry. Adobe Artificial Intelligence still has a lot to learn. He's still very dumb.
Firefly generates horrible images. I tried "Venus emerging from the sea" hoping to get something with a classical look. The Firefly images were garish. Picsart nailed it, generating images that were stunningly creative and beautiful. Firefly has so many restrictions so as not to offend that it generates anodyne images and won't generate many images that it finds violative for some unknown reason.
(the Only AI Image Generator You Should Use??) Adobe is so very afraid of generating an offensive image..... FF3 is nice but too many other generators blow them out of the water... and don't have the kindergarten restrictions
Why should I use a crippled censored AI? No thanks. Adobe always took great features from other software and copied it, even from tools like gimp and now from Stable Diffusion. Stable Diffusion had inpainting, Outpainting and similar features and is a lot more specialized with all the cool LoRa and models than Firefly will ever be. So again... why should I cripple my creativity using Adobe? Obviously you are not the right person to talk about these things when you are not indepth on the topic here.
This is what happens when someone talks about something, and has no idea what they're actually talking about. The sheer, crazy amount of purposeful misinformation in this video is bewildering and it's borderline unethical to spread the types of lies this is pushing around.
