Tag Archives: Adobe Inc.

5 things to know before the stock market opens Friday, December 16

Traders work on the trading floor at the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York City, U.S., December 14, 2022. 

Andrew Kelly | Reuters

Here are the most important news items that investors need to start their trading day:

1. Desperately seeking Santa

Ho ho ho? More like, no no no. It’s been a terrible week for stocks, and hopes of a Santa Claus rally are fading. U.S. equities are on the verge of their second straight losing week. Markets fell steeply Thursday as investors digested Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell’s hawkish remarks and outlook from the day before. Sluggish retail sales heading into the holidays didn’t help, either, even though they indicated a slowing economy, which is what the Fed wants as it tries to beat back inflation. Instead, it’s shaping up to be an environment where the Fed keeps rates higher for a longer period of time, regardless of what happens in the next few months. Read live markets updates here.

2. Twitter targets journalists

STR | Nurphoto | Getty Images

Twitter suspended the accounts of several journalists and commentators who report on the company and its owner, billionaire Tesla CEO Elon Musk. As of Thursday night, the social media platform had suspended the accounts of Ryan Mac of The New York Times, Donie O’Sullivan of CNN, Drew Harwell of The Washington Post, Matt Binder of Mashable, Micah Lee of The Intercept, Steve Herman of Voice of America, as well as independent figures Aaron Rupar, Keith Olbermann and Tony Webster. Musk, who has billed himself as a “free speech absolutist,” suggested on Twitter that the journalist suspensions were in the same vein of discipline against accounts that track flights, including one that followed the CEO’s private jet’s whereabouts.

3. U.S. squeezes Chinese chipmaker

Semiconductor chips are seen on a circuit board of a computer in this illustration picture taken February 25, 2022. 

Florence Lo | Reuters

The Biden administration on Thursday unveiled restrictions against several, mostly Chinese entities, including a chipmaker, over national security concerns. The chip company, Yangtze Memory Technologies Corporation, or YMTC, was already on a U.S. trade blacklist. The action aims to hamper China’s ability to use “artificial intelligence, advanced computing, and other powerful, commercially available technologies for military modernization and human rights abuses,” according to a Commerce Department official. The move also comes as the administration attempts to beef up semiconductor manufacturing on U.S. soil.

4. Adobe delivers

Low-angle view of sign with logo on facade at office of computer software company Adobe in the South of Market (SoMA) neighborhood of San Francisco, California, June 10, 2019.

Smith Collection/gado | Archive Photos | Getty Images

Adobe posted quarterly earnings Thursday that topped analysts’ expectations, while the design software maker stuck with its forecast for the full fiscal year. The stock rose on the positive news, although it’s down more than 40% on the year, much steeper than the decline in the broad S&P 500 index. “We delivered record operating cash flows with a focus on profitability,” Adobe’s CEO, Shantanu Narayen, said on an earnings call. Yet he also warned that a slowing economy could hurt the company, and that Adobe would operate with caution.

5. Flipped off

A not-so-surprising casualty of the rapid cooling in the housing market is the home-flipping segment. Profit from flips, defined as when a house is bought and sold within a 12-month window, fell 18.4% in the third quarter from the second. That’s the biggest quarterly decline in over a decade, according to real estate data provider ATTOM. It’s a double whammy for house flippers: home prices are still high, but they’re quickly easing, while renovation costs have also soared. “With demand from buyers weakening, prices trending down over the past few months, and financing rates significantly higher than they were at the beginning of the year, flippers face a much more difficult environment today, and probably will in 2023 as well,” Rick Sharga, executive vice president of market intelligence at ATTOM, said in a release.

– CNBC’s Alex Harring, Kevin Breuninger, Jordan Novet and Diana Olick contributed to this report.

Follow broader market action like a pro on CNBC Pro.

Read original article here

Adobe Embraces AI-Generated Stock Art, Can Get In The Bin

Adobe used to be known as the company that made Acrobat and PhotoShop. Addobe is increasingly becoming known, however, as one of the great digital grifters of the modern age.

From its shonky subscription models to making people pay for certain colours in PhotoShop (big shout out to Pantone there as well), the company is, like so many others in these tumultuous times, more concerned with growing its bottom line at any cost than it is in taking a moment to consider the needs of its users, or the consequences of its actions.

I’m bringing this up today because, less than a week after forcing people to check they weren’t reading an Onion story when learning about the colours thing, the company has announced that it is embracing AI art, which is not only an enormous grift, but also a serious threat to the livelihoods of artists around the world, big and small.

I’ve made my feelings about AI very clear on this website already—I wrote this feature back in August interviewing a range of video game and entertainment industry artists—and think it sucks not just because it’s a threat to artists, but to art. While people’s jobs are of course important, we’re not just talking about cotton gins here, and how this is in many ways a labour v capital breakdown; we’re talking about a process that is encroaching on a fundamentally human pastime and creative pursuit.

Machines don’t make art. They’re machines! They’re just making an approximated casserole out of human art that has been fed into it, in the vast amount of cases without credit or compensation. As Dan Sheehan says in his fantastic piece Art In The Age Of Optimization, AI art isn’t about art, it’s merely “a technology that clearly exists to remove the human element from the process of artistic expression”.

Anyway! Last week Adobe dropped an announcement saying that AI-generated art was going to be made available as part of the company’s vast library of stock images, going so far as to say the field is “amplifying human creativity”. The company boldly says, repeatedly, stuff like they have “deeply considered these questions and implemented a new submission policy that we believe will ensure our content uses AI technology responsibly by creators and customers alike”, and that “generative AI is a major leap forward for creators, leveraging machine learning’s incredible power to ideate faster by developing imagery using words, sketches, and gestures”.

Creators? Fuck off! These people aren’t creating anything! They’re punching words into a computer that has been fed actual art! And even if Adobe can, as they’re claiming, only release images that have been “properly built, used, and disclosed”, it still sucks! Gah! Attempting to make good on one of AI art’s issues—art theft—doesn’t absolve it from its others, like the fact nothing to do with these images or their creation has anything to do with art!

Reaction among artists has of course been as wildly negative as any other AI art announcement over the past six months, with some criticising the company while others resort to more traditional cries: namely, that artists simply pirate PhotoShop instead of giving this company another cent.



Read original article here

Designers Furious Pantone Charging $15 for Colors in Adobe

Pantone is making designers work with black only if they don’t cough up $15 a month.
Photo: SimoneN (Shutterstock)

Hell hath no fury like an Adobe designer who can’t see the colors they thought they had already paid for.

Designers who use Adobe’s Creative Suite tools, including Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign, are furious over a licensing change that forces them to pay Pantone an extra $15 a month (or $90 a year) to work with its signature colors in Adobe’s apps. In recent weeks, Adobe has removed support for Pantone-owned colors, which are the preferred industry standard, from its apps, leaving countless designers who used Pantone colors with files full of the color black instead and the following message:

“This file has Pantone colors that have been removed and replaced with black due to changes in Pantone’s licensing with Adobe. To resolve, click ‘Learn more,’” the message stated, according to a screenshot shared on Twitter and confirmed as authentic by Adobe, which laid all the blame at Pantone’s feet.

“Pantone actually required the removal, as they want to charge customers directly,” Adobe chief product officer Scott Belsky tweeted in response.

As if that weren’t enough, users who grudgingly accepted to pay Pantone didn’t even get a guaranteed fix. Designers were directed to download the Pantone Connect plugin for Adobe—which is deceptively listed as “free” in the Adobe Exchange store with information about a “premium” subscription listed in the plugin’s description—but some found that the plugin didn’t show up in their Adobe apps or didn’t work.

Others who were able to access the plugin complained about a clunky user interface, with some even calling it “unusable.” According to Pantone Connect’s page on Adobe Exchange, the last time the plugin was updated was in September of 2019, which might explain the glitches and bad UI.

Users took to the plugin’s page to voice their frustrations. Many pointed out that this was an act of greed by Pantone and Adobe, which wanted to squeeze even more out of users who had already paid for apps or bought official Pantone color books.

“Disappointed is an understatement – we buy your books, your ink and now the digital library that we rely on! Well played money guzzlers, someone should definitely be fired!” one user wrote on Oct. 22. “This only benefits YOU Adobe and Pantone! How far will you go? Some designers cannot afford Adobe app subscription as it is. Many are migrating away from what you built, when will it stop??”

Another user fumed and said that they didn’t understand why they suddenly had to pay for features that used to be free.

“Very glitchy, and getting sick of paying extra for features that used to be included in the programs or for online free. Design programs are already expensive as it is, now we have to pay another subscription? Do better to serve your clients!” the user wrote on Oct. 19.

Users also decided to bombard the plugin with one-star reviews. As of publication, 311 of the 386 ratings on Pantone Connect gave it one star, giving the plugin an average score of 1.5 stars.

Notably, the fury might have been contained if Adobe and Pantone had done a better job of communicating the change. Adobe first announced that it was removing Pantone’s color libraries from its apps in December 2021 and stated that the colors would be gone by March 2022. That didn’t happen. Then it said Pantone’s colors would be phased out by August 2022, which, again, didn’t happen.

It’s not surprising that customers stopped believing that Adobe and Pantone would actually go through with their plan and inconvenience a whole lot of people.

Ashley Still, senior vice president of digital media marketing, strategy, and global partnerships at Adobe, told Gizmodo in an email on Wednesday that the company had shared in June that “Pantone decided to change its business model.”

“To access the complete set of Pantone Color Books, Pantone now requires customers to purchase a premium license through Pantone Connect and install a plug-in using Adobe Exchange,” Still explained. “We are currently looking at ways to lessen the impact on our customers. In the meantime, customers also have access to up to 14 extensive color books through Creative Cloud subscriptions.”

Pantone, meanwhile, blamed the controversy on Adobe in an emailed statement to Gizmodo, all the while referring to it as a “trusted partner.” Pantone reiterated that it had agreed to include a curated set of Pantone color libraries in Adobe Creative Cloud, just not all its colors.

“While we do not determine the pricing, features, or user experience of our partners’ solutions, we do collaborate closely with our partners to create the best possible customer experience. Adobe Creative Cloud customers can leverage Pantone Connect to gain access to the full color library system,” the company said. “In keeping with our mission and values, Pantone strives to be a helpful resource for Adobe Creative Cloud users. Pantone continues to work with Adobe as our trusted partner to further improve the add-in extension experience within Creative Cloud.”

Who’s fault is it in the end? It’s hard to say. However, there’s no doubt we can all agree on what they’re fighting over: money.



Read original article here

You’re Gonna Have To Pay To Use Fancy Colors In Photoshop Now

Photo: Pantone

It’s very likely you don’t give a great deal of thought to where the digital colors you use originally came from. Nor, probably, have you wondered who might “own” a particular color, when you picked it when creating something in Photoshop. But a lot of people are about to give this a huge amount of their attention, as their collection of PSD files gets filled with unwanted black, due to a licensing change between Adobe and Pantone.

As of now, widely used Adobe apps like Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign will no longer support Pantone-owned colors for free, and those wishing for those colors to appear in their saved files will need to pay for a separate license. And this is real life.

Pantone has been around since the 1950s, the New Jersey company originally refining printing inks, then later inventing the Pantone Color Matching System, used worldwide by designers to ensure a creation’s color will be exactly as desired, no matter where or how it’s manufactured. So, of course in becoming the industry-standard for color-matching, the company naturally asserts ownership of all its 2,161 hues, defending its intellectual property and preventing its unlicensed use. This extends as far as preventing others from creating “Pantone-compatible” color systems. Or, to put it another way, they claim to own colors.

Last year’s announcement that Adobe would be removing the Pantone “color books” from its software brought consternation in the design world. One industry standard being removed from another was obviously going to create issues, but at the time Adobe said it would be “working on an alternative solution,” while rumors spread that the companies had had a falling out.

Since then, the official reasons given haven’t made a great deal of sense. According to Pantone, the two companies started working together in the 1990s, but “since 2010, the Pantone color libraries within Adobe’s apps have not been updated.” This, apparently, means they’re “significantly out of date and missing hundreds of new Pantone Colors.” (Yes, the company seriously capitalizes “Color”.) This means that, “Pantone and Adobe have together decided to remove the outdated libraries and jointly focus on an improved in-app experience that better serves our users.”

The removal of Pantone’s colors from Adobe’s software was meant to happen March 31 this year, but that date came and went. It was then due for August 16, then August 31. However, this month, people are noticing the effects, reporting issues with creations using Pantone’s spot colors. And the solution? It’s an Adobe plug-in to “minimize workflow disruption and to provide the updated libraries to the Adobe Creative Cloud users.” Which, of course, costs $15 a month. It’s Netflix, but for coloring in!

However, Pantone still states in its out-of-date FAQ that, “This update will have minimal impact on a designer’s workflow. Existing Creative Cloud files and documents containing Pantone Color references will keep those color identities and information.” Yet today, people are reporting that their Photoshop is informing them, “This file has Pantone colors that have been removed and replaced with black due to changes in Pantone’s licensing with Adobe.”

Others have reported that even attaching a Pantone license within Photoshop isn’t fixing the issue, colors still replaced by black, and workarounds sound like a pain.

We’ve reached out to both Pantone and Adobe, and will update should either get back to us.

We, as a species, are in a very interesting time when it comes to so-called “Intellectual Property.” As rules applying to physical objects were poorly imposed on digital items, usually controlled by those with the most money to spend and lose, we’ve seen this sort of nonsense spread from music to movies to digital art, and now the very colors they’re made from themselves. And it always seems to end in our having to pay even more money.

It’s also just becoming more common to have to pay for aspects of services that used to be free. BMW charges some people for heated seats.

There are workarounds to this specific issue, however. Not least freeing yourself from the misery of such closed software, where ridiculous situations are able to breed like rabbits. There’s Free Software like Gimp, and free, open color schemes like Open Color. Of course, there are always introduced difficulties when stepping away from industry standards, but then, if we all did it, those problems would go away pretty fast.

If you need or want to stick to Adobe projects, then there are solutions there too. Free ones. Check out the video below for one.

Graphic Design How To

Another tip suggested by Print Week is to back up your Pantone libraries, then re-importing them when your Adobe software updates to remove them, or if it’s too late, finding a friend who already did. There’s a good chance this’ll work, given Pantone’s colors are stored as .ACB files, just as the rest of Photoshop’s colors.

Or, you know, you could just copy the metadata values of the Pantone range.

 

Read original article here

Adobe jumps on 2023 guidance, strong dollar to hurt revenue growth

Adobe shares rose as much as 4% late on Tuesday after the software maker issued guidance for the next fiscal year that fell short of expectations, but blamed some of the shortfall on a stronger dollar and unfavorable foreign exchange rates.

For the 2023 fiscal year, Adobe called for $15.15 to $15.45 in adjusted earnings per share on $19.1 billion to $19.3 billion in revenue, while reaffirming guidance for the 2022 fiscal year, according to a statement. The forecast excludes impact from its planned $20 billion acquisition of design software startup Figma, which is expected to close in 2023. Analysts polled by Refinitiv had expected adjusted earnings of $15.53 per share on $19.82 billion in revenue.

But foreign-exchange rates, which have battered results in technology and other industries, are expected to pull down Adobe’s revenue growth by 4 percentage points, the company said. The estimate implies 9% revenue growth for the next fiscal year. In the quarter that ended on Sept. 2, revenue grew 12.7%.

The Creative portion of Adobe, which includes Creative Cloud design software subscriptions that account for 59% of total revenue, enjoyed record customer retention, Dan Durn, the company’s finance chief, told analysts last month. In the quarter, 59% of revenue came from the Americas, up from 57% in the year-ago quarter.

Adobe said its estimates do factor in macroeconomic conditions, which have brought longer sales cycles for some other technology companies in the past few months, including Qualtrics and Tenable.

“Adobe’s continued success in this uncertain macroeconomic environment underscores that our solutions are mission-critical to a growing universe of customers,” CEO Shantanu Narayen was quoted as saying in the statement.

Read original article here

Jim Cramer says to avoid stocks in the ‘house of pain’ Nasdaq 100 index

CNBC’s Jim Cramer on Wednesday warned investors to avoid the stocks in the Nasdaq 100 and highlighted the worst-performing stocks during the third quarter.

“These seven biggest losers from the third quarter are simply representative of the House of Pain the index has become. By the way, if you’re living in a house of pain, you should move,” he said.

Cramer acknowledged that there are a few stocks in the index that he believes are still great, but maintained that the index is ultimately filled with “woe and hurt.”

Here are his quick takes on the index’s biggest losers:

1. Okta

Cramer said that the current environment is “brutal” for the company, and he doesn’t believe that’ll change anytime soon.

2. Charter Communications

He said on Tuesday that while the company is profitable, its lack of growth means that its stock is going nowhere.

3. Zoom

Cramer said that the company’s earnings momentum is too low and the company’s market capitalization is too high. “You don’t pay $22 billion for a one-trick pony,” he said.

4. Match

“Those guys suffer from an inability to forecast, a problem that seems to afflict the whole dating industry,” he said.

5. Intel

The company is likely struggling with the slowing personal computer market, he said.

6. Comcast

Cable companies are struggling because the market wants no part in it, Cramer said.

7. Adobe

Cramer said that while he believes Adobe’s a “fantastic” company, the bears have no patience for software firms with slowing growth rates.

Disclosure: CNBC is owned by Comcast’s NBCUniversal. 

Jim Cramer’s Guide to Investing

Click here to download Jim Cramer’s Guide to Investing at no cost to help you build long-term wealth and invest smarter.

Read original article here

Microsoft launches Designer, its answer to highly valued startup Canva

Microsoft is launching a simple graphic design app called Designer that will be available for free and as part of Office productivity software subscriptions, the company said Wednesday.

The software represents an alternative to Canva, a design app boasting more than 100 million monthly active users. Based in Sydney, Canva is one of the world’s most valuable startups, boasting a $40 billion post-money valuation as of last year. But one of the startup’s investors, Blackbird Ventures, reportedly lowered its valuation of the company to $25.6 billion earlier this year as inflation and recession fears caused software stock prices to tumble.

Microsoft has sought to demonstrate the value of Office subscriptions by adding new capabilities, and earlier this year it raised the prices of some bundles aimed at businesses. Office controls the market, and companies are constantly attempting to topple the leader in the category. The closest competitor is Google. On Tuesday Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kurian said Workspace had more than 8 million paying subscribers, up from over 6 million as of April 2020.

Increasingly, Canva is going after core parts of Office. It introduced an alternative to the PowerPoint slide development program in 2021, and in September it brought out a tool to edit documents, challenging Word. Canva says it has 55,000 paid teams using its software including at Amazon, FedEx, PepsiCo, Pfizer and Salesforce.

With its Designer app, Microsoft is initially aiming at consumers, a spokesperson told CNBC in an email. But the application could also prove useful to workers inside of companies, government agencies and schools, where Microsoft has a larger base of users. Microsoft could expand Designer to additional markets, including enterprises, if it perceives sufficient interest, the spokesperson said.

In the current economy, some companies have sought to save money by reducing the number of software providers they count on, and adding Designer to commercial Office subscriptions at some point might help companies cut out payments to Canva, for one.

“No company is better positioned than Microsoft to help organizations deliver on their digital imperative so that they can do more with less,” as Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said on a conference call with analysts in July.

The launch of Designer might also make Microsoft bump up against Adobe, which fields the free Adobe Express tool that features templates and stock images. Canva is “where beginners get started before they come to Adobe,” Jonathan Vaas, Adobe’s vice president of investor relations, said at a Bank of America event in January.

But Microsoft has a close partnership with Adobe, and the two companies have more than 30 product integrations. “Adobe remains our key, at-scale strategic partner and this new consumer design application does not change our engagement with Adobe in any way,” a Microsoft spokesperson told CNBC in an email.

People can draw on templates to come up with social media posts in Designer, Liat Ben-Zur, a Microsoft corporate vice president, wrote in a blog post. Social media is also probably the most popular medium for which people design in Canva, said Cliff Obrecht, the startup’s co-founder and operating chief, in an interview last month. But Obrecht said Canva is “not competing against Microsoft.” Its primary competitor is Adobe, he said.

Designer can automatically come with visual designs when people enter text, thanks to an integration with DALL-E 2 artificial intelligence software from Microsoft-backed startup OpenAI. The two companies don’t want Designer to surface inappropriate content. OpenAI took out the most explicit sexual and violent content from AI training data for the system, while Microsoft recently implemented a change that helps to generate more diverse results, Ben-Zur wrote.

For now, people can join a waiting list for the free preview of Designer online. Once the app becomes generally available, Microsoft will maintain a free tier, along with a premium version for those with Microsoft 365 Personal and Microsoft 365 Family subscriptions, the spokesperson said.

WATCH: Two-minute drill: MSFT, UPS & PXD

Read original article here

Silicon Valley’s next trillion-dollar companies?

Stable Diffusion’s web interface, DreamStudio

Screenshot/Stable Diffusion

Computer programs can now create never-before-seen images in seconds.

Feed one of these programs some words, and it will usually spit out a picture that actually matches the description, no matter how bizarre.

The pictures aren’t perfect. They often feature hands with extra fingers or digits that bend and curve unnaturally. Image generators have issues with text, coming up with nonsensical signs or making up their own alphabet.

But these image-generating programs — which look like toys today — could be the start of a big wave in technology. Technologists call them generative models, or generative AI.

“In the last three months, the words ‘generative AI’ went from, ‘no one even discussed this’ to the buzzword du jour,” said David Beisel, a venture capitalist at NextView Ventures.

In the past year, generative AI has gotten so much better that it’s inspired people to leave their jobs, start new companies and dream about a future where artificial intelligence could power a new generation of tech giants.

The field of artificial intelligence has been having a boom phase for the past half-decade or so, but most of those advancements have been related to making sense of existing data. AI models have quickly grown efficient enough to recognize whether there’s a cat in a photo you just took on your phone and reliable enough to power results from a Google search engine billions of times per day.

But generative AI models can produce something entirely new that wasn’t there before — in other words, they’re creating, not just analyzing.

“The impressive part, even for me, is that it’s able to compose new stuff,” said Boris Dayma, creator of the Craiyon generative AI. “It’s not just creating old images, it’s new things that can be completely different to what it’s seen before.”

Sequoia Capital — historically the most successful venture capital firm in the history of the industry, with early bets on companies like Apple and Google — says in a blog post on its website that “Generative AI has the potential to generate trillions of dollars of economic value.” The VC firm predicts that generative AI could change every industry that requires humans to create original work, from gaming to advertising to law.

In a twist, Sequoia also notes in the post that the message was partially written by GPT-3, a generative AI that produces text.

How generative AI works

Image generation uses techniques from a subset of machine learning called deep learning, which has driven most of the advancements in the field of artificial intelligence since a landmark 2012 paper about image classification ignited renewed interest in the technology.

Deep learning uses models trained on large sets of data until the program understands relationships in that data. Then the model can be used for applications, like identifying if a picture has a dog in it, or translating text.

Image generators work by turning this process on its head. Instead of translating from English to French, for example, they translate an English phrase into an image. They usually have two main parts, one that processes the initial phrase, and the second that turns that data into an image.

The first wave of generative AIs was based on an approach called GAN, which stands for generative adversarial networks. GANs were famously used in a tool that generates photos of people who don’t exist. Essentially, they work by having two AI models compete against each other to better create an image that fits with a goal.

Newer approaches generally use transformers, which were first described in a 2017 Google paper. It’s an emerging technique that can take advantage of bigger datasets that can cost millions of dollars to train.

The first image generator to gain a lot of attention was DALL-E, a program announced in 2021 by OpenAI, a well-funded startup in Silicon Valley. OpenAI released a more powerful version this year.

“With DALL-E 2, that’s really the moment when when sort of we crossed the uncanny valley,” said Christian Cantrell, a developer focusing on generative AI.

Another commonly used AI-based image generator is Craiyon, formerly known as Dall-E Mini, which is available on the web. Users can type in a phrase and see it illustrated in minutes in their browser.

Since launching in July 2021, it’s now generating about 10 million images a day, adding up to 1 billion images that have never existed before, according to Dayma. He’s made Craiyon his full-time job after usage skyrocketed earlier this year. He says he’s focused on using advertising to keep the website free to users because the site’s server costs are high.

A Twitter account dedicated to the weirdest and most creative images on Craiyon has over 1 million followers, and regularly serves up images of increasingly improbable or absurd scenes. For example: An Italian sink with a tap that dispenses marinara sauce or Minions fighting in the Vietnam War.

But the program that has inspired the most tinkering is Stable Diffusion, which was released to the public in August. The code for it is available on GitHub and can be run on computers, not just in the cloud or through a programming interface. That has inspired users to tweak the program’s code for their own purposes, or build on top of it.

For example, Stable Diffusion was integrated into Adobe Photoshop through a plug-in, allowing users to generate backgrounds and other parts of images that they can then directly manipulate inside the application using layers and other Photoshop tools, turning generative AI from something that produces finished images into a tool that can be used by professionals.

“I wanted to meet creative professionals where they were and I wanted to empower them to bring AI into their workflows, not blow up their workflows,” said Cantrell, developer of the plug-in.

Cantrell, who was a 20-year Adobe veteran before leaving his job this year to focus on generative AI, says the plug-in has been downloaded tens of thousands of times. Artists tell him they use it in myriad ways that he couldn’t have anticipated, such as animating Godzilla or creating pictures of Spider-Man in any pose the artist could imagine.

“Usually, you start from inspiration, right? You’re looking at mood boards, those kinds of things,” Cantrell said. “So my initial plan with the first version, let’s get past the blank canvas problem, you type in what you’re thinking, just describe what you’re thinking and then I’ll show you some stuff, right?”

An emerging art to working with generative AIs is how to frame the “prompt,” or string of words that lead to the image. A search engine called Lexica catalogs Stable Diffusion images and the exact string of words that can be used to generate them.

Guides have popped up on Reddit and Discord describing tricks that people have discovered to dial in the kind of picture they want.

Startups, cloud providers, and chip makers could thrive

Image generated by DALL-E with prompt: A cat on sitting on the moon, in the style of Pablo Picasso, detailed, stars

Screenshot/OpenAI

Some investors are looking at generative AI as a potentially transformative platform shift, like the smartphone or the early days of the web. These kinds of shifts greatly expand the total addressable market of people who might be able to use the technology, moving from a few dedicated nerds to business professionals — and eventually everyone else.

“It’s not as though AI hadn’t been around before this — and it wasn’t like we hadn’t had mobile before 2007,” said Beisel, the seed investor. “But it’s like this moment where it just kind of all comes together. That real people, like end-user consumers, can experiment and see something that’s different than it was before.”

Cantrell sees generative machine learning as akin to an even more foundational technology: the database. Originally pioneered by companies like Oracle in the 1970s as a way to store and organize discrete bits of information in clearly delineated rows and columns — think of an enormous Excel spreadsheet, databases have been re-envisioned to store every type of data for every conceivable type of computing application from the web to mobile.

“Machine learning is kind of like databases, where databases were a huge unlock for web apps. Almost every app you or I have ever used in our lives is on top of a database,” Cantrell said. “Nobody cares how the database works, they just know how to use it.”

Michael Dempsey, managing partner at Compound VC, says moments where technologies previously limited to labs break into the mainstream are “very rare” and attract a lot of attention from venture investors, who like to make bets on fields that could be huge. Still, he warns that this moment in generative AI might end up being a “curiosity phase” closer to the peak of a hype cycle. And companies founded during this era could fail because they don’t focus on specific uses that businesses or consumers would pay for.

Others in the field believe that startups pioneering these technologies today could eventually challenge the software giants that currently dominate the artificial intelligence space, including Google, Facebook parent Meta and Microsoft, paving the way for the next generation of tech giants.

“There’s going to be a bunch of trillion-dollar companies — a whole generation of startups who are going to build on this new way of doing technologies,” said Clement Delangue, the CEO of Hugging Face, a developer platform like GitHub that hosts pre-trained models, including those for Craiyon and Stable Diffusion. Its goal is to make AI technology easier for programmers to build on.

Some of these firms are already sporting significant investment.

Hugging Face was valued at $2 billion after raising money earlier this year from investors including Lux Capital and Sequoia; and OpenAI, the most prominent startup in the field, has received over $1 billion in funding from Microsoft and Khosla Ventures.

Meanwhile, Stability AI, the maker of Stable Diffusion, is in talks to raise venture funding at a valuation of as much as $1 billion, according to Forbes. A representative for Stability AI declined to comment.

Cloud providers like Amazon, Microsoft and Google could also benefit because generative AI can be very computationally intensive.

Meta and Google have hired some of the most prominent talent in the field in hopes that advances might be able to be integrated into company products. In September, Meta announced an AI program called “Make-A-Video” that takes the technology one step farther by generating videos, not just images.

“This is pretty amazing progress,” Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a post on his Facebook page. “It’s much harder to generate video than photos because beyond correctly generating each pixel, the system also has to predict how they’ll change over time.”

On Wednesday, Google matched Meta and announced and released code for a program called Phenaki that also does text to video, and can generate minutes of footage.

The boom could also bolster chipmakers like Nvidia, AMD and Intel, which make the kind of advanced graphics processors that are ideal for training and deploying AI models.

At a conference last week, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang highlighted generative AI as a key use for the company’s newest chips, saying these kind of programs could soon “revolutionize communications.”

Profitable end uses for Generative AI are currently rare. A lot of today’s excitement revolves around free or low-cost experimentation. For example, some writers have been experimented with using image generators to make images for articles.

One example of Nvidia’s work is the use of a model to generate new 3D images of people, animals, vehicles or furniture that can populate a virtual game world.

Ethical issues

Prompt: “A cat sitting on the moon, in the style of picasso, detailed”

Screenshot/Craiyon

Ultimately, everyone developing generative AI will have to grapple with some of the ethical issues that come up from image generators.

First, there’s the jobs question. Even though many programs require a powerful graphics processor, computer-generated content is still going to be far less expensive than the work of a professional illustrator, which can cost hundreds of dollars per hour.

That could spell trouble for artists, video producers and other people whose job it is to generate creative work. For example, a person whose job is choosing images for a pitch deck or creating marketing materials could be replaced by a computer program very shortly.

“It turns out, machine-learning models are probably going to start being orders of magnitude better and faster and cheaper than that person,” said Compound VC’s Dempsey.

There are also complicated questions around originality and ownership.

Generative AIs are trained on huge amounts of images, and it’s still being debated in the field and in courts whether the creators of the original images have any copyright claims on images generated to be in the original creator’s style.

One artist won an art competition in Colorado using an image largely created by a generative AI called MidJourney, although he said in interviews after he won that he processed the image after choosing it from one of hundreds he generated and then tweaking it in Photoshop.

Some images generated by Stable Diffusion seem to have watermarks, suggesting that a part of the original datasets were copyrighted. Some prompt guides recommend using specific living artists’ names in prompts in order to get better results that mimic the style of that artist.

Last month, Getty Images banned users from uploading generative AI images into its stock image database, because it was concerned about legal challenges around copyright.

Image generators can also be used to create new images of trademarked characters or objects, such as the Minions, Marvel characters or the throne from Game of Thrones.

As image-generating software gets better, it also has the potential to be able to fool users into believing false information or to display images or videos of events that never happened.

Developers also have to grapple with the possibility that models trained on large amounts of data may have biases related to gender, race or culture included in the data, which can lead to the model displaying that bias in its output. For its part, Hugging Face, the model-sharing website, publishes materials such as an ethics newsletter and holds talks about responsible development in the AI field.

“What we’re seeing with these models is one of the short-term and existing challenges is that because they’re probabilistic models, trained on large datasets, they tend to encode a lot of biases,” Delangue said, offering an example of a generative AI drawing a picture of a “software engineer” as a white man.



Read original article here

Opinion: Adobe’s stock got slammed for spending $20 billion on Figma. But it now owns a rare company.

Adobe beat revenue and profit expectations, and on the same day announced it would acquire a smaller but faster-growing rival in online design-collaboration tools. The stock market rewarded the company by pushing down its shares
ADBE,
-3.12%
to the lowest level in almost three years. 

Investors punished the company not for its earnings report, released Thursday, but for their disdain of the Figma deal. Specifically, the deal’s price. 

Read: Nervous investors are slamming tech deals. Just look at Adobe.

In a $20 billion half-cash, half-stock transaction, Figma became the highest-multiple cloud-scale SaaS deal ever done. An estimated $400 million in revenue for all of 2022 marks this deal at around 50 times this year’s revenue in what I believe to be the second-largest software as a service deal in history. 

In this market, where growth is persona non grata, the market deemed this deal a bridge too far. However, in this case, the market may have gotten this wrong.

Figma is among the fastest-growing companies 

If you aren’t familiar with Figma, it’s a red-hot, venture-backed (before Thursday) company that makes collaboration tools used for digital experiences. While Figma was founded in 2011, the first five years were spent trying to get to product. The company printed its first dollar in revenue in 2017 and will hit $400 million in annual recurring revenue (ARR) in 2022. 

For those who aren’t familiar with SaaS economics, hitting $400 million in recurring revenue in just over 10 years is remarkable. However, doing so five years from the first dollar of revenue is even more impressive.

For reference, the average cloud-scale SaaS company books $10 million in revenue after about 4.5 years, according to Kimchi Hill. In the same study, assessing more than 72 SaaS companies that reached $100 million, only eight did so in less than five years from the first dollar — and that was precisely $100 million. Most take five to 10 years to hit $100 million, and well-known names like DocuSign
DOCU,
-6.14%,
Coupa
COUP,
-4.28%,
RingCentral
RNG,
-5.34%
and Five9
FIVN,
-4.22%
took 10 to 15 years. 

Beyond its speedy growth, the company is also performing in a way that should have been lauded by at least the savviest of investors. Its 150% net customer retention rate, 90% gross margins, high organic growth and positive operating cash flow make it more of what investors want in a company today. Adobe already grows in the double digits, plays in attractive markets, compounds ARR and, at this point, has seen its multiple come way down off its highs. 

It is also worth considering how Figma may benefit from Adobe’s strong market position, known product portfolio and defined channels, and go-to-market strategies to speed its growth in this space with a total addressable market of about $16.5 billion. 

Rare companies are still rare 

Perhaps it sounds as if I’m gushing over this deal. I want to be clear that I am not. At least not yet.

However, the hive mind of the market can be quite perplexing at times, and there is a data-driven story here that justifies Adobe’s decision to buy Figma at such a lofty price. Unfortunately, we won’t know with any certainty for five or even 10 years. Investors may not like that, but Adobe’s longevity depends on operating with the longer term in mind. 

Tough economy or not, rare companies are still rare, and Figma is traversing market conditions and delivering growth in a large market, drawing Adobe in at an unprecedented price. Perhaps higher than it should have, or could have, paid. 

However, based on its rapid revenue growth, strong net dollar retention, 100% growth rate in 2022, massive margins and apparent synergies across the Adobe portfolio, it may be Adobe that has the last laugh on this one. 

Daniel Newman is the principal analyst at Futurum Research, which provides or has provided research, analysis, advising or consulting to Adobe, Five9 and dozens of other technology companies. Neither he nor his firm holds any equity positions in companies cited. Follow him on Twitter @danielnewmanUV.



Read original article here

Meet the 30-year-old on the verge of selling his company to Adobe for $20B

Almost overnight, this 30-year-old has become the tech world’s newest titan — and is poised to become one of the world’s youngest billionaires.

Dylan Field, the co-founder and CEO of San Francisco-based Figma, is on the cusp of an epic windfall after Adobe
ADBE,
-3.12%
announced plans to acquire his company for $20 billion this week. Field will stay on with Figma (which makes collaborative design tools), and he reportedly owns a a sizable stake in his company. Forbes estimated it at 10%, which means Field could be looking at a $2 billion payday from the deal. (Field declined to provide details of his ownership share with MarketWatch.)

Considered something of an upstart rival to Adobe, Figma describes itself as a “design platform for teams who build products together.” Its distinguishing factor is that it’s cloud-based, which has made its products especially valuable to designers and other workers separated physically from one another during the pandemic — or to those continuing to collaborate in today’s hybrid work environment.

And Adobe clearly saw value in Figma’s model. The acquisition is said to be the largest in Adobe’s history, although some Wall Street analysts have questioned whether it paid too much. (What’s more, Adobe’s shares tumbled toward their worst week since 2002 in light of the news.) But Adobe chief executive Shantanu Narayen advised investors that the deal will “significantly expand our reach and market opportunity.”

Either way, it’s a mighty leap for Field, who started Figma with Evan Wallace, a one-time Brown University classmate, in 2012. As a Wall Street Journal story noted, Field was living in a gritty San Francisco apartment just four years ago, and buying dollar cups of coffee on his way to work.

“I had a very small sip of Champagne last night.”


— Dylan Field, co-founder and CEO of Figma

On Friday, MarketWatch caught up with Field, who grew up in northern California, to learn more about the Adobe deal — and how it will change his life. Here is some of what he had to say (some comments have been edited for brevity and clarity):

On how Field’s life may change with the payout from Adobe: While Field wouldn’t discuss the specifics of what he’ll earn from the deal, he doesn’t deny he stands to benefit significantly. He says he’s not thinking about much beyond his company and its next chapter. “Right now, I’m just all in on Figma and trying to think about how to make Figma successful, especially in this new context,” he says. In other words, he’s not yet planning on colonizing Mars with his riches a la Elon Musk.

But Field admits he’s still pretty buzzed about the events of the past week. “It’s very cool though, I’m not going to lie,” he says.

On how he celebrated the deal: Field is known to love wine, but he says he hasn’t been drinking much in the last few weeks because he’s been so focused on his work and the deal. Nevertheless, he says, “I had a very small sip of Champagne last night” with the Figma team.

On Figma’s value proposition: Put simply, it’s all about the ability to work together via the cloud. “We’re able to make it collaborative,” says Field of the tools that Figma offers. “So, if you’re a designer and I’m an engineer, no longer do we have to exchange files back and forth… We can make edits together. We can riff off each other’s ideas. That collaboration mattered to a lot of our customers.”

A newer product that Figma offers is FigJam, which Field describes as a “whiteboard solution.” The thought behind it, Field explains, is “that we can help people go from ideation and brainstorming into the design process and all the way to production.”

On why and how the Adobe deal came together: Field notes that when he co-founded the company there was a serious question as to whether the world had enough designers to make Figma a viable entity. “We weren’t sure there’s a big enough market here,” he says. But with the world going ever more digital — and, by extension, tapping increasingly into digital design tools — the design community has flourished, and the need for good design has become ubiquitous. “Every company has to care about design,” he says.

“Adobe’s mission is creativity for all, Figma’s mission has been to make design accessible for all. Those are two sides of the same coin in some ways.”


— Dylan Field, co-founder and CEO of Figma

Thus, Adobe’s desire to tap into what Figma offers its customers as a leading-edge digital design platform, Field explains. And not just tap into it, but also help Figma expand its platform through adding different tools and capabilities — not only for the designer audience, but also for the broader creative audience. “That got us really excited, because it accelerates the impact that we already wanted to have, but also scales the impact,” Field says.

On Figma’s image as an “Adobe killer”: Yes, Figma has been described as that. And Field once even tweeted, “Our goal is to be Figma not Adobe.” Field says he still stands by the remark in that the two companies are distinct in certain respects, although he also notes they ultimately share similar goals: “Adobe’s mission is creativity for all; Figma’s mission has been to make design accessible for all. Those are two sides of the same coin in some ways.” He adds that both companies are aligned “around craftsmanship and community” and “there’s so much we can do together.”

On Field’s views about education: Much has been made of the fact that Field didn’t graduate from college — he attended Brown University, but left in his junior year to start his entrepreneurial career (he got accepted for a fellowship program run by financier Peter Thiel). Field says he is not anti-college per se. “I care a lot about learning, and (going to) a university can be a great way to do that in a structured fashion.” But he also says there are other ways to gain knowledge, pointing to online courses that are readily available. As a result, Field finds it hard to fathom that a lot of companies still require college degrees of applicants. “I think they’re missing out on a lot of great talent,” he says.



Read original article here