I know some artists don't mind it, but I just can't hear the word "creatives" as anything other than silicon valley speak for the source of the content they sell. It feels dehumanizing.
Particularly in this case, it's Adobe, so you can just call them artists, designers, photographers, etc.
Or, ya know, just users.
In fairness, it’s Wired who called them creatives, while Adobe called them artists.
That's pretty bad. It's like calling people "the talent".
Or calling all kinds of art "content".
Remember when consumers where customers?
So if artists are “creatives”, what does that make them? “Exploiters”?
Stallman was right
I wonder what state FOSS replacements for Adobe software would be in if a significant percentage of Adobe users used their subscription money to donate to FOSS replacements instead.
The ironic thing is that if it weren't for free software, the entire AI industry would likely be a decade behind where it is today, if not more.
That's true for all IT industries. All IT stands on the shoulders of FOSS.
FOSS has won, it's just that some people don't know that yet.
The entire industry is held up by the collective imaginations of rich people pretending that FOSS hasn't won.
There's a very significant open-source AI industry, too. Krita's got a great Stable Diffusion plugin that lets you generate and inpaint right in the editor, using entirely local models.
Because they will. They literally will.
Adobe is one of the most awful, insidious, evil corporations in the software space and they have done absolutely nothing to claw back even a tiny shred of good faith.
This seems to happen every time a technology company grows beyond some threshold of size/market share/revenue. I can’t think of a single exception.
Valve has done a pretty good job. Probably because of their ownership model
Valve is still a private company. If they ever made an IPO then they would be screwed.
The stock market literally forces companies to be evil. Once you do an IPO, you're contractually obliged to be shitty in order to bring higher revenues.
Not just the stock market but i’m pretty sure it’s a legal precedent that companies must prioritize shareholders over anyone else.
Autodesk would like to have a word.
Oracle and Amazon enter the chat
"Lying Shit Heads Say Lies" More Breaking News at 11
Well change your fucking ToS back you rats!
I don't have access to the whole article, but this video says they did.
Hm, okay. I personally still wouldn't trust them with anything, as they're clearly willing to go as far as they possibly can.
I understand that in the corporate world, switching away from Adobe isn't as easy.
Never ever trust a corporation. In case of Adobe, they don't give a shit about your creative work. That's not what they are in business for. They are in business to increase revenue and reduce expense, by any means necessary. Just like all corporations. Their customers are but a product for them that they can manipulate how they see fit. Capitalism demands profit over people. Never trust a corporation.
We won't do that, we promise.
Is this one of those "yeah, we legally gave ourselves permission but trust us we won't use it" cases that also commonly happens in politics?
Wish I could switch to Affinity, Publisher just isn’t quite there yet in a print production environment.
How so? Genuinely curious what’s missing as someone who tried it on a job, and loved it.
I just sent a job to print yesterday and the printer didn’t bat an eye.
Are we talking specific types of printing? Like booklets or runs with specific imposition needs or something else?
I think ultimately it will depend on what one needs printed. It would easily meet most common printing requirements as far as I can tell.
You guessed it with booklets or anything long format really.
As a 20+ year Adobe user, I tried switching about a year ago. Seems like the only way to give it proper go, was to dive in head first and force myself to exclusively use Affinity. Of course there’s a bit of a (frustrating) learning curve but overall it went pretty smooth. I genuinely thought I was going to make it work.
That was until I had to setup a 40 page catalog. Ran into various minor issues, but not insurmountable. IIRC the main issue that ultimately made me go back to InDesign was the handling of support assets and glitches as the catalog got more “heavy” with stuff.
I think I would have stuck with Affinity if I could go back and forth between Publisher/InDesign, but I couldn’t take what I started with and finish in the other app.
Thanks for the reply. Makes sense. I haven’t had any jobs recently that would push us there.
CC is also priced low enough we can sign back up for a month if we need it.
One feature set of CC I’ll miss is the libraries functionality working across all the apps. Someone on the team needs a client asset in any app ? (AE/ID/PS/AI) There it is.
I would be so happy if there was a Linux version!
I’d settle for anything better that GIMP 🤮
Krita
Isn’t that primarily for painting? Like procreate on tablets?
It is, but the interface is actually much closer to Photoshop CS. For basic editing, I'd work with Krita rather than GIMP any day.
Does anyone else find the term "creatives" to be so damn condescending? It'd be like calling executives, "Admins" or "powerpointers"
Trust us bro!
I tried Affinity Publisher 2 the other day and it convinced me to pull the plug on Adobe and switch on the Affinity suite. Everything was straightforward and far more intuitive than InDesign ever was (which itself was far better than Quark Xpress before it).
I bought the Affinity Suite, exported all my Creative Cloud libraries (they’re just zip files with a different extension), copied all my Creative Cloud files to our self-hosted Nextcloud and off we went.
I promptly cancelled creative cloud. As I’ve said before, I’ll miss generative fill in photoshop - it was very good.
It’ll also take a while to figure out / learn Fusion as a replacement for AE but having spent a lot of time with Shake in the past, it’ll be fine.
Would be more interesting if they had a Linux version.
Don't trust capitalists
"We won't train AI on artists' work...this quarter."
~Adobe probably
release your training materials or GTFO
100% the scenario will be this: Adobe will hire a company to provide "licensed training material" to their AI tools then it will be laundered with a contract that says "uphold our code of conduct or something" and then when it comes out it won't even violate the contract it will just be a shocked pikachu face and a stern sounding PR rebuke.
"...for now"
What then will they use to train it?
Adobe kinda burned up any good will it had with...all the shit they pullin'.
I have no issue trusting someone at their word, but not when they spent their trust capital elsewhere. Adobe doesn't have any, because their reputation for decades now has been asinine pricing, M&As, and whatever crap they tried to do with Mixamo before someone told them to stop.
I know some artists don't mind it, but I just can't hear the word "creatives" as anything other than silicon valley speak for the source of the content they sell. It feels dehumanizing.
Particularly in this case, it's Adobe, so you can just call them artists, designers, photographers, etc.
Or, ya know, just users.
In fairness, it’s Wired who called them creatives, while Adobe called them artists.
That's pretty bad. It's like calling people "the talent".
Or calling all kinds of art "content".
Remember when consumers where customers?
So if artists are “creatives”, what does that make them? “Exploiters”?
Stallman was right
I wonder what state FOSS replacements for Adobe software would be in if a significant percentage of Adobe users used their subscription money to donate to FOSS replacements instead.
The ironic thing is that if it weren't for free software, the entire AI industry would likely be a decade behind where it is today, if not more.
That's true for all IT industries. All IT stands on the shoulders of FOSS.
FOSS has won, it's just that some people don't know that yet.
The entire industry is held up by the collective imaginations of rich people pretending that FOSS hasn't won.
There's a very significant open-source AI industry, too. Krita's got a great Stable Diffusion plugin that lets you generate and inpaint right in the editor, using entirely local models.
Because they will. They literally will.
Adobe is one of the most awful, insidious, evil corporations in the software space and they have done absolutely nothing to claw back even a tiny shred of good faith.
This seems to happen every time a technology company grows beyond some threshold of size/market share/revenue. I can’t think of a single exception.
Valve has done a pretty good job. Probably because of their ownership model
Valve is still a private company. If they ever made an IPO then they would be screwed.
The stock market literally forces companies to be evil. Once you do an IPO, you're contractually obliged to be shitty in order to bring higher revenues.
Not just the stock market but i’m pretty sure it’s a legal precedent that companies must prioritize shareholders over anyone else.
Autodesk would like to have a word.
Oracle and Amazon enter the chat
"Lying Shit Heads Say Lies" More Breaking News at 11
Well change your fucking ToS back you rats!
I don't have access to the whole article, but this video says they did.
https://youtu.be/HRzGE1hzefc
Hm, okay. I personally still wouldn't trust them with anything, as they're clearly willing to go as far as they possibly can.
I understand that in the corporate world, switching away from Adobe isn't as easy.
Never ever trust a corporation. In case of Adobe, they don't give a shit about your creative work. That's not what they are in business for. They are in business to increase revenue and reduce expense, by any means necessary. Just like all corporations. Their customers are but a product for them that they can manipulate how they see fit. Capitalism demands profit over people. Never trust a corporation.
We won't do that, we promise.
Is this one of those "yeah, we legally gave ourselves permission but trust us we won't use it" cases that also commonly happens in politics?
Affinity Photo, Affinity Designer, Affinity Publisher
Sorry, no linux versions.
Wish I could switch to Affinity, Publisher just isn’t quite there yet in a print production environment.
How so? Genuinely curious what’s missing as someone who tried it on a job, and loved it.
I just sent a job to print yesterday and the printer didn’t bat an eye.
Are we talking specific types of printing? Like booklets or runs with specific imposition needs or something else?
I think ultimately it will depend on what one needs printed. It would easily meet most common printing requirements as far as I can tell.
You guessed it with booklets or anything long format really.
As a 20+ year Adobe user, I tried switching about a year ago. Seems like the only way to give it proper go, was to dive in head first and force myself to exclusively use Affinity. Of course there’s a bit of a (frustrating) learning curve but overall it went pretty smooth. I genuinely thought I was going to make it work.
That was until I had to setup a 40 page catalog. Ran into various minor issues, but not insurmountable. IIRC the main issue that ultimately made me go back to InDesign was the handling of support assets and glitches as the catalog got more “heavy” with stuff.
I think I would have stuck with Affinity if I could go back and forth between Publisher/InDesign, but I couldn’t take what I started with and finish in the other app.
Thanks for the reply. Makes sense. I haven’t had any jobs recently that would push us there.
CC is also priced low enough we can sign back up for a month if we need it.
One feature set of CC I’ll miss is the libraries functionality working across all the apps. Someone on the team needs a client asset in any app ? (AE/ID/PS/AI) There it is.
I would be so happy if there was a Linux version!
I’d settle for anything better that GIMP 🤮
Krita
Isn’t that primarily for painting? Like procreate on tablets?
It is, but the interface is actually much closer to Photoshop CS. For basic editing, I'd work with Krita rather than GIMP any day.
Does anyone else find the term "creatives" to be so damn condescending? It'd be like calling executives, "Admins" or "powerpointers"
Trust us bro!
I tried Affinity Publisher 2 the other day and it convinced me to pull the plug on Adobe and switch on the Affinity suite. Everything was straightforward and far more intuitive than InDesign ever was (which itself was far better than Quark Xpress before it).
I bought the Affinity Suite, exported all my Creative Cloud libraries (they’re just zip files with a different extension), copied all my Creative Cloud files to our self-hosted Nextcloud and off we went.
I promptly cancelled creative cloud. As I’ve said before, I’ll miss generative fill in photoshop - it was very good.
It’ll also take a while to figure out / learn Fusion as a replacement for AE but having spent a lot of time with Shake in the past, it’ll be fine.
Would be more interesting if they had a Linux version.
Don't trust capitalists
"We won't train AI on artists' work...this quarter."
~Adobe probably
release your training materials or GTFO
100% the scenario will be this: Adobe will hire a company to provide "licensed training material" to their AI tools then it will be laundered with a contract that says "uphold our code of conduct or something" and then when it comes out it won't even violate the contract it will just be a shocked pikachu face and a stern sounding PR rebuke.
"...for now"
What then will they use to train it?
Adobe kinda burned up any good will it had with...all the shit they pullin'.
I have no issue trusting someone at their word, but not when they spent their trust capital elsewhere. Adobe doesn't have any, because their reputation for decades now has been asinine pricing, M&As, and whatever crap they tried to do with Mixamo before someone told them to stop.