I’ve reached my breaking point with Adobe’s behavior, and I believe it’s time to boycott their photography products, especially PhotoShop.
Adobe, once a cornerstone for photographers and creative professionals, is now at a crossroads. Their aggressive push toward generative AI tools has raised serious concerns.
It’s time to have an open discussion about Adobe’s current trajectory and what it means for creative professionals worldwide.
Adobe’s AI Push: Who Is It Really For?
Over the past few months, Adobe has aggressively marketed its generative AI features like Photoshop’s Generative Fill and Firefly AI Image Generator. Adobe claims these tools revolutionize creativity, taking it to the “next level” with just a click of the “Generate” button.
While this sounds dreamy on paper, it begs the question: Who are these tools actually for?
From their advertisements, it’s clear Adobe is pitching these features not for us, the photographers and creatives, but rather for the clients who once relied on our expertise.
“Skip The Photoshoot”: A Slap In The Face To Photographers
Adobe’s controversial slogan, “Skip the Photoshoot,” encapsulates their intent. Imagine being one of the countless photographers whose work helped train Adobe’s AI models, only to see a campaign suggesting you are now irrelevant.
The message is clear: why pay photographers when a few lines of text and a “Generate” button can create “good enough” results at a fraction of the cost?
This isn’t just an isolated incident. Many photographers like me felt betrayed by this move. Adobe seems to be sidelining the very community that helped build its empire.
A Bigger Problem Across Creative Fields
The issue isn’t limited to photography. As a blogger since 2012, I’ve seen similar patterns in my field.
Google’s Gemini AI now dominates search results, pushing original blogs lower in rankings. This AI learned from millions of blogs like mine, yet it now overshadows the very creators who shaped its training.
Adobe’s AI push feels eerily similar. They’ve leveraged our work to train their models, only to position AI as a cheaper, quicker alternative to our services.
The Rise of AI-Created Content
Coca-Cola recently recreated their iconic 1995 festive ad using AI. While the results weren’t perfect, they were good enough to save the company significant costs.
According to Coca-Cola’s Chief Marketing Officer, the process cut down production expenses drastically.
This trend raises an unsettling question: Is our role as creatives now limited to polishing AI’s sloppy outputs?
Last year, Adobe Stock sold AI-generated images of the Gaza conflict, which reputable media outlets purchased and published before Adobe eventually removed them.
While the images were eventually taken down, the damage was already done.
This incident highlights the ethical gray areas of AI-generated content and how it can perpetuate misinformation.
Canceling My PhotoShop Subscription
I’ve officially canceled my Photoshop subscription and am actively exploring alternatives. While I can’t force anyone else to cancel, I urge creatives to reconsider where their money is going.
The most effective way to push back against AI’s aggressive implementation is to stop funding companies that prioritize AI over the artists they rely on.
It’s not about saving a few bucks a month. It’s about sending a clear message: we stand with creative professionals – photographers, designers, and filmmakers – whose livelihoods are being disrupted by these AI advancements.
What are your thoughts on Adobe’s approach to AI? Are you considering alternatives too? Let me know in the comments, and let’s continue this important conversation.