That is the stock ticker for Adobe.
Adobes future credit charges
- Thread starter sh1209
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
They have a 14 day free demo. You should probably take a look at that. I’ve heard it described by Thom Hogan as a print manager.
Anthony
Well-known member
If I am wrong please tell me, but my understanding is that generative AI uses a lot of resources and therefore has a cost attached. Adobe could incorporate that cost into its normal subscriptions, but that would mean that those who do not use generative AI would be subsidising those who do not. So it does not seem unfair to charge those who create the resource load.
This is different from charging for normal functions of PS which do not take up a lot of Adobe resources whenever they are used.
This is different from charging for normal functions of PS which do not take up a lot of Adobe resources whenever they are used.
David Berry
🇦🇺 Australia 🦘
I pay the equivalent of US$110 per year (includes 10% tax) for Adobe’s Photography Plan.
That’s extraordinarily good value!
I’d have no complaints paying double that to include AI features.
That’s extraordinarily good value!
I’d have no complaints paying double that to include AI features.
Last edited:
An example where the AI shines. Not wildlife but applicable. See dog example at 7:40. Also why Adobe is still a good deal imo.
viper699
Well-known member
His videos are great for this. I often wonder how many of these AI features from the vendors could just be built for local use. Will never know but makes me wonder…
Black Magic (DaVinci Resolve) is toying with the idea of going to a subscription model. This is the first year that I heard about it, but I imagine it's right around the corner.... Think about it, LR was free when it first came out. Once they got enough people hooked they started charging. Every business needs to make a profit, but Adobe takes this to a new level with their obscene greediness.
Since implementing the subscription plan many years ago Adobe has added MANY significant new features without increasing the price (at least to those of us that were on it before the price change and who pay on an annual, no monthly, basis). The generative AI is amazing, and it uses a LOT of computing resources. That they have continued to make that part of the same subscription without additional cost, albeit with a token system to keep the computer usage reasonable, is amazing. I normally don't use it but when I do I love it. If you don't want to pay extra, don't use it. But if Hooligan's Imagery is right, I'm not sure what the beef is.
Not A Speck Of Cereal
Well-known member
You're hitting up their servers. How much do you want for only $10 a month? And it's not a 'revenue stream' until you've used up free credits.
You do not have to use the Generative remove tool — there are still Content Aware tools, which still work find in many cases (sometimes with better results).
Hyperbole—you know very well that moving your mouse isn't going to use any Adobe resources.
I am not a man of means, but I find the Photographer's Plan to be an excellent value.
Chris
Call me out of touch, but I never knew a thing about these Credits. I checked my account, and I currently have 86/100 left, and they "renew" I guess go back to 100 on May 22nd. That said, I have tried "Remove" in Lightroom Classic, and yes the generative AI box was checked. I unchecked it and gave it a try, just to remove a small white spot of something on the ground, and the results were sadly lacking. I imported the photo over to Photoshop and found that my setting there said "Auto" for generative AI. So I changed it to w/o AI and tried to remove the same white spot. Photoshop without generative AI did a much more stellar job removing it than Lightroom w/o AI did.
Again, I agree. You pay for a subscription and then are told you need to pay more (earn credits) to use certain parts of that software. It seems everyone just wants more money.
Again, I agree. You pay for a subscription and then are told you need to pay more (earn credits) to use certain parts of that software. It seems everyone just wants more money.
O
Well-known member
Over all with editing software in the main..............
The only thing that is clear is that we will progressively pay and pay and pay, if you want the product or need the product you pay, take it or leave it.
The internet is a means for the likes of software companies to harvest over time more revenue in one way or another, ok that's business.
First we are given something of fun and excitement, slowly we become dependent on using it, once we are hooked good and proper along comes the Bill.
Subscription gives people the affordability to pay each month as many can’t afford to pay in one lump sum, its also considered a means of enabling consumer acceptance and market penetration.
Rewards points, with credit back discounts. Diluted product line method, Flyer points and the list goes on and on but one thing for certain is if you want something you just have to pay eventually more and more.
Credits not used by end of month are lost and is a classic method Telcos used here on OZ.
As videography grows phasing out still images the editing software needs to be suitable, and more powerful and creative that's Understood.
The younger newer generation are have no real resistance to spend and are happy to pay as they are already all heavily dependent on the way of life is being addicted digital cocaine.
Any work around are short lived or just teasers that lead to addiction - dependency anyway.
It seems the end game is if you need the product then pay, you don’t have a lot of alternative choice in many cases.
Only an opinion
Last edited:
I agree 100%
Not A Speck Of Cereal
Well-known member
Statement: Adobe is not going to build and run these very expensive server farms for AI Generation tool use, and then just give it to us free, unlimited, forever.
You are free to not use those features, meaning that this in NO WAY limits the way you used Ps/Lr up to now, and you can continue to use it that way for the foreseeable future.
I pay my regular ~$10 a month for the regular Photographer's Plan. I do the occasional AI Generation (remove / extend) and have never run out of credits. If I one day reach that limit, it means I was depending on their server operations more than allotted and I will then decided of there is a reason for me to pay for more credits.
They are NOT gouging us for more money. They recently offered us to keep the ~$10 monthly cost (the same pricing since 2015) if we moved from paying monthly to paying yearly (sticking to monthly meant the price would go up, but you could keep 2015 prices if you paid yearly). That doesn't sound like something a scamming company would do.
This has nothing to do with young vs. old. I'm 68yo and am not shaking a grumpy fist at the clouds yet.
PS: I knew about the credits from day one, when they first rolled out this feature to release (we used it without a credit system when it was pre-release / experimental). Some of you are not reading the fine print, then blaming Adobe for that.
Chris
You are free to not use those features, meaning that this in NO WAY limits the way you used Ps/Lr up to now, and you can continue to use it that way for the foreseeable future.
I pay my regular ~$10 a month for the regular Photographer's Plan. I do the occasional AI Generation (remove / extend) and have never run out of credits. If I one day reach that limit, it means I was depending on their server operations more than allotted and I will then decided of there is a reason for me to pay for more credits.
They are NOT gouging us for more money. They recently offered us to keep the ~$10 monthly cost (the same pricing since 2015) if we moved from paying monthly to paying yearly (sticking to monthly meant the price would go up, but you could keep 2015 prices if you paid yearly). That doesn't sound like something a scamming company would do.
This has nothing to do with young vs. old. I'm 68yo and am not shaking a grumpy fist at the clouds yet.
PS: I knew about the credits from day one, when they first rolled out this feature to release (we used it without a credit system when it was pre-release / experimental). Some of you are not reading the fine print, then blaming Adobe for that.
Chris
I read their licensing agreement. Nothing in there about credits that I could see. After searching around, I finally found it mentioned in subscription terms. They never once, when I got my subscription many years ago, and when they sent me program updates did they mention this. I just got update notices, with a description what was in the update, on my computer never once guessing they wanted to set up a "charge" system for anything in any updates, even in the description of the update. In any case, I don't much use the AI thing, and as long as they don't start charging "credits" for noise reduction I'm ok. If they do, I'll be shopping for new software.
viper699
Well-known member
I think free credits is only temporary personally; they don't even roll over the credits either
Of course it's hyperbole. However, in that specific sentence I meant exactly what I wrote.
Excellent is a subjective term.
Not A Speck Of Cereal
Well-known member
I bet you're right. But it's also different business model than standard sustained software feature development (design new feature, build, test, ship, done except for support) given that there's the added cost of running those server farms.
Chris
Maybe for "certain" wildlife. But so many times when you try to change the background for birds, for example, I have found the results to look fake. Not because the masking is bad, but backgrounds may not fit even with BIF in the sky. So many times with wildlife, it's hard to change a background, IMHO. It's not just changing a solid color or making it look like a wall of some type, but you have so many variances with trees and leaves and even grass if your subject is near the ground. But, to each his own. The main times I've used masking is either to lighten/brighten up just the subject or darken or brighten up just the background, and in most of those cases, a slight off on the masking doesn't matter so much if the changes being made are not drastic. I've found if your basic shot off the camera is pretty good, then you don't need to do drastic changes. Since I don't do a lot of "artistic" photography a lot of this might be overkill for me. I'd rather see a better background blur option instead.
I didn’t intend it for those drastic changes for wildlife. For subtle things like blur and exposure was my intent. It just makes masking much easier now.
O
Well-known member
Very interesting Video and example of where PS Adobe and AI has taken us to, great tools especially if you need them or are into graphic design and full creativity work or even art.
It can certainly clean up your photography and i am certain other Adobe AI products will work on your video work as well.
I noticed its becoming in some cases where you don't even need to take photos, you just type or ask into the cloud for what you want then if you wish add you twist. Excellent for production advertising graphic design.
In the video link above Creating is the authors moto, Adobe has certainly come a long way and that's a good thing as there is a need a fit and efficiency in what they produce.
It seems the Adobe concept of doing more powerful things just in the cloud seems logical or different at first and intriguing, you certainly aren't burning up down or up loading space or energy till the finished product is created.
As to where and how the AI future is shaping up will be interesting, Musk once was asked about AI, my understanding was he loved it and welcomed it for all the amazing things it can do or become, at the same time he feared it if it wasn't used for the right thing or controlled safely, well that was to the best of my recollection.
I have also noticed many devices we use just have enough HD storage for an operating system and little storage and therefor rely on everything being in the cloud with your multi device access. So what used to be on your desk top and backed up hard drives now is out there in the cloud. HMMM in one way great let’s not worry and move on in another losing control or access security could be frightening. My assumption is the new hard drives now are built directly into the motherbaord circute.
It’s going to be an amazing future..................to see things play out, i wonder where genuine photography as we classicly know it to be differs to AI creative art or does it even matter anymore.
Ony an opinion
Not A Speck Of Cereal
Well-known member
Not to worry, it's not as you fear. Storage (various hard drive options) is larger and cheaper than ever, and there are many ways you can have large amounts of it with any desktop or laptop system.
As far as I know, no motherboards have storage built into them. Computers can ship with varied amounts of storage configurations and many SSDs are now NVMe sticks, which to the uninitiated look like a chip compared to a classic spinning 5.25" HHD.
But even that is just another storage option. You can get them large. If the computer you bought has a too-small one, you can pull it out and replace it with one of higher capacity.
Yes, many owners of data warehouses and server farms (Amazon, Adobe, Microsoft) would like to sell you cloud storage (rental of space on their own hard drives). It's a optional business model.
But local storage is not anywhere near going away. Back to your first statement:
You can buy that bargain laptop with a small 128-256GB boot drive (and no other storage in it), then you might think that when you fill it up, your only next option is to pay for cloud storage, but that's not the case
Don't buy that bargain laptop. Here are some options:
- Get a laptop with a much larger drive.
- If you look for a new computer (desktop or laptop) that has a 2nd hard drive (which can be several TBs of storage) in addition to the boot drive, you will find it.
- If the computer you fell in love with doesn't come with a 2nd hard drive, you can get one put in (either order it that way special or get pay a tech to do it).
- If you buy a new computer with ports (USB, etc.), you can always plug in a new external drive. Cheap and easy (though there are faster storage options).
Chris
O
Well-known member
Very much appreciated, the information you have provided is excellent, thank you
A few more thoughts about this...look at the recent issues that have arisen with the recent advent of AI NR for stills. A large percentage of users have found that the AI processoring requirements for AI DeNoise functionality are far beyond the capabilities of their current computer systems in terms of reasonable processing times. Unless you have nVidia 30 series GPU or newer, preferably in the x070 range or higher, processing times with Adobe or DXO were in the 10's of minutes per image. I suspect the processing requirements for the more sophisticated operations in terms of generative fill and object removal/replacement are even more demanding. Trying to deploy software with cutting edge capabilities in AI that will run acceptably on the wide variety systems out in the wild is sure to cause a great deal of aggravation that neither the software companies or the users should have to endure. Until the hardware available to end users to handle these tasks become commonplace and affordable, best make it a web service, as Adobe and others are likely to do.
I think it's totally justifiable to ask users to pay a per use fee for specialized features that offer a tangible benefit and eliminate the need for the end user to incur an otherwise unneeded hardware upgrade. At the same time, I would expect Adobe to offer the option (at a price) to run the processes locally, if a business is willing to put in the hardware infrastructure to run the AI locally in situations where IP and security issues might prevent identifiable content being sent out for cloud processing.
I think it's totally justifiable to ask users to pay a per use fee for specialized features that offer a tangible benefit and eliminate the need for the end user to incur an otherwise unneeded hardware upgrade. At the same time, I would expect Adobe to offer the option (at a price) to run the processes locally, if a business is willing to put in the hardware infrastructure to run the AI locally in situations where IP and security issues might prevent identifiable content being sent out for cloud processing.
I do definitely agree with most of what you’re saying. However, for someone that uses this feature minimally, and I’m talking about scope and size of the areas I remove, to me that should be included in the subscription. Now if I were to venture out and start doing large composites or adding objects to images or things of that nature then yes I could see an extra cost incurred. Like I said earlier in the thread, I’m gonna be more aware of how I have that configured and try to do most things content aware or use the old remove tool or just clone step tool. There does need to be some changes on Adobe‘s end as well. The first of which needs to be showing just how many credits you have used and not just saying you’ve exhausted X amount of X amount. I don’t know if I’ve used 251 or 2000 at this point. I do completely understand that it takes more processing power on their end, especially for larger areas or multi layered composite. However, I hardly think removing a 1 inch twig from a birds Chest feathers is going to require much processing power.
Steve,
I understand your point and I think that's something that Adobe is trying to figure out as they go through this rollout period, refine the tools and get a handle on the usage patterns for these new tools...and the impact on their infrastructure to handle it.
While you can very easily check your balance from within an App, one or two clicks, depending on the App. At some point soon, I'm sure the current balance will be shown directly in Apps and updated with every use.
While I haven't really used any of the AI features until the last few days, I can tell you that when using the AI remove feature, credits are deducted for every individual object you select for removal, not how often you press the "Remove" button...I just tried that and that's the granularity of it. Remove your one twig (one contiguous mask area) and that's one credit, remove 10 twigs in different areas of an image (10 individual masks), but only one press of "Remove" and that eats 10 credits, same as if you'd done each individually. While I'm sure they could reduce the granularity of their credit value, but monitoring the processing time of each task and accumulating that value for every user would seem to have it's own overhead compared to just tracking individual processing requests and doing a "flat rate" that averages out...in Adobe's favor, of course.
The tiered pricing structure they've set up, at least for the outset seems reasonable, especially since you get some storage with that and the "Standard" features are allowed unlimited usage, though exactly what qualifies as Standard features seems not yet clearly defined...or at least I couldn't find that info in my cursory search of their site.
Give it some time and have no doubt that Adobe will clarify all this by the time the current "no charge" period ends.
Cheers!
I understand your point and I think that's something that Adobe is trying to figure out as they go through this rollout period, refine the tools and get a handle on the usage patterns for these new tools...and the impact on their infrastructure to handle it.
While you can very easily check your balance from within an App, one or two clicks, depending on the App. At some point soon, I'm sure the current balance will be shown directly in Apps and updated with every use.
While I haven't really used any of the AI features until the last few days, I can tell you that when using the AI remove feature, credits are deducted for every individual object you select for removal, not how often you press the "Remove" button...I just tried that and that's the granularity of it. Remove your one twig (one contiguous mask area) and that's one credit, remove 10 twigs in different areas of an image (10 individual masks), but only one press of "Remove" and that eats 10 credits, same as if you'd done each individually. While I'm sure they could reduce the granularity of their credit value, but monitoring the processing time of each task and accumulating that value for every user would seem to have it's own overhead compared to just tracking individual processing requests and doing a "flat rate" that averages out...in Adobe's favor, of course.
The tiered pricing structure they've set up, at least for the outset seems reasonable, especially since you get some storage with that and the "Standard" features are allowed unlimited usage, though exactly what qualifies as Standard features seems not yet clearly defined...or at least I couldn't find that info in my cursory search of their site.
Give it some time and have no doubt that Adobe will clarify all this by the time the current "no charge" period ends.
Cheers!