gdanmitchell
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Adobe is dying a slow painful death. | |
MMP wrote:
ilkka_nissila wrote:
If you don't have the knowledge, skills, and experience to reproduce what is available via automated means manually then you won't be able to do it when the automated solution fails, which quite often is the case. If the automated solution does work, then all the value is produced by the company who owns that technology and that's where all the money will go, since if anyone can do it with the help of this model, then they can always be replaced by someone who will do it for no pay or for half the pay that you were doing it, and so society will collapse with this model since those who were previously skilled worked have nothing to contribute and thus they will not be able to afford even the subscription fee of the model let alone buy food or other necessities in life. It's really useful to have a complete understanding of the whole process and being able to do everything oneself, if one is to add value to the chain.
Automated solutions fail quite often? Can you be more specific? I've dealt with technology outages like everyone else, but have never experienced any catastrophic, long-lasting effects. Failures are usually resolved in minutes to hours.
The collapse of society is a quite dramatic take. We can't view AI and automation as if humans are going to remain stationary while technology evolves. History proves that is absolutely not what happens. Traditional jobs will be lost, and new jobs will be created, just as we've seen over the last century. The first example that comes to mind is the Milkman who was put out of business with the invention of the household refrigerator. If we had the ability to rewrite history, I'm confident everyone besides the milkman would still choose the refrigerator. The refrigerators do fail (seemingly every 5-7yrs now), but that is a miniscule inconvenience compared to the advantages of being able to keep cold/frozen foods.
Circling back to Adobe and manual editing; you are absolutely correct in that the value is produced by the company holding the technology, but the software companies hold the value whether it is a "manual" or automated process. We don't really know how to manipulate the pixels of our images, we just know how to use the tools in the software to brighten faces, darken skies, reduce noise, etc, etc. You are referring to this as a "manual" process, but in reality, that too is automated. You don't actually have a complete understanding of what is going on behind the scenes at the code level, you just know how to use the sliders, which automate the effect, to achieve the result you want. I don't see that being much different than being able to type a prompt that says "brighten the face, darken the sky, and get rid of the sensor noise".
At the risk of ruffling some feathers, I think we are headed towards a transition similar to the film-to-digital transition. With that, I think many photographers are secretly worried about losing an edge over the everyday person carrying a phone or entry level camera. We've spent many years learning how to do things one way, and now a much quicker, easier, and arguably more effective method is emerging. The skillset doesn't disappear, it just requires a shift on the users' behalf to modify the input parameters to create a result that novices can't consistently replicate.
Especially regarding the “collapse of society” notion, I really encourage you to put aside 10-15 minutes to read the article at the link I shared above.
|
