Yes and no.

Differentiate. There are engineering and architectural tasks with a certain degree of artistic freedom. And there are many tasks which should be done by the book.

Nobody wants plumbing and electric wiring done by an artist. Painting work? Maybe.

LLMs are a tool, if a tool is useful people will use it. Programmers already were fine with using each others code when it fits the job, why would using a machine's code be any different?

Just like pollution, everyone always tries to fault individuals for not donating to open source, when massive companies profit off of it without contributing anything, or very little

We already HAVE open source Photoshop clones. Quite a lot of them, actually. Have had them for decades.

There's two types of people who use Photoshop. A: the ones who pay for it because they WANT to, because it gets them things like enterprise support. B: pirates who don't give a shit about all the valid open source alternatives that ALREADY exist. Neither are going to start using this, even if it WASN'T defective slop.

Lipstick on a pig

And did anyone here try it? What's it like for whatever photo editing you do?

Soo, basically sandboxie?

I think it's worth being skeptical of anything Microsoft produces nowadays.

probably copilot?

People on Reddit reportedly tried it and it doesn't work properly it seems

They did, but they are all buggy garbage. Darktable ftw.

how is an open source project on an opensource community downvoted

how can you describe it as a clean room implementation when it was made with LLMs?

jfc is that a thing now, people just ignoring the enormous theft that's wrapped up in LLMs and calling it clean?

I despise adobe, and considering their pivot to ai slop this is ironic - but not something I'd ever install.

Hehe, vipe code.

My opinion: this is pointless

LLMs are stochastic regurgitators, but software can already be copy/pasted without cost.

Why should we be interested in an LLM clone of photoshop when there are already clones of photoshop (e.g. https://photopea.com/)?

If I want to use photoshop (or something like it), then I'll use photoshop (or something like it: i.e. photopea).

There's literally no point in favour of using the LLM copy, it's going to have less support and less security (since its training data will have also included prompt injection attacks).

It's just more of the same, but worse. Even for the sake of argument: if it wasn't worse, it'd still be more of the same.

I'm not interested in more of the same, I'm interested in things made by people that push the boundaries of what's possible: (e.g. graphite).

There's enough photoshop clones (e.g. photopea) and tutorials written out there that the LLMs would have been trained on.

There's no actual need for an agent to have any interaction with photoshop itself.

No idea how this works, sounds insane

I would personally prefer getting the few extra additions like automatic object detection into GIMP, or better PDF editing support for Libreoffice draw etc and use that

I wonder though if they just told agents to literally reverse engineer Photoshop. As in, they were given access to Photoshop and able to interact with the UI and figure out every minute behavior. With a good testing strategy, I could see agents producing a decent quality product. That's basically strip mining years of effort put in by humans.

i hate adobe, but also color science is hard. Can we say whether this would affect the actual color values recorded on sensors or film, even in subtle ways? what if the color matters for historical or scientific or medical purposes?

Cool, now do Lightroom too.

This kind of feels like Nintendo vs. Pocketpair all over again... It's a "written from scratch" situation so Adobe might struggle to get them there but they also have a ton of patents covering every inch of their catalogue. I think this one is going to get really messy because unlike Nintendo this is potentially existential for Adobe.

AI slop that’s been developed in a mere 4 days (?)

I have been working on a project, with AI, for 4 months. When I see something done in 4 days that is supposed to be a large package, even more complex than what I am working on, I tend to be very wary about the quality.

Time for Adobe to start telling everyone that open source isn't safe from hacking, but their closed source is scanned multiple times a day for vulnerabilities.

At a minumum it terrifies monopolies like Adobe.

Whatever kills Adobe...