Photoshop and AI: An unintentional masterclass in cynicism

January 17, 2024

My feelings are very mixed on the topic of AI, mostly because I believe it is being grossly misused right now. It has incredible power to improve our ability to utilize large amounts of data, whether by allowing more effective, intuitive command processing, by utilizing that data to generate more reliable statistical predictions, or countless other legitimate uses that can actually make people's lives and interactions with technology easier and better. This isn't blockchain or web3 or the metaverse or any of the other digital snake oil that's been peddled in the last few years, there are real, powerful use-cases for AI to make the world better.

And instead of using it for any that, because the technology is primarily in the hands of out-of-touch executives at massive conglomerates, we're using it to try and eliminate jobs, gut creative work, and invent self-driving cars that totally don't commit automated hit-and-runs.

What I want to talk about today is a commercial that Adobe, one of these out-of-touch corporations trying to push AI into places nobody asked for it, has been pushing the last couple months, because I feel like it has no idea how depressing and soulless a depiction of AI's utility it has wound up presenting.

A commercial that is, in my opinion, far more depressing than intended.

The premise for the video is pretty simple. Now you and your child - because let's be honest most small children will need an adult's help to use photoshop - can use generative AI to create your own fantastical images! On its face, this seems like a perfectly reasonable sales pitch to make.

And yet I find it an extremely depressing premise, because the AI isn't being used to accomplish some impossible task the child could have never done before. It is being used as a substitute for the child drawing the art in-question themselves.

The pitch Adobe is making is that the world is better if your child's drawing were automated and done by a machine, and that is... just so, so depressing.

I loved drawing as a kid. This sort of "Me in a magical garden with bears and cats and a castle" idea is the kind of thing I would've spent an entire afternoon having a blast coming up with. All the cats would've had names and personalities, as would the pegasus!

And all of that is just handled by a click of a button and an algorithm, and that's...sad to me. Sure it probably looks much "better" than the small child's handiwork. The kid would probably draw a bunch of stick figures and blob cats around a rectangle with triangles on top for a castle. In terms of looking "professional" it's not even a contest.

But basing the merit of the child's drawing on that completely misses the point to me. A child's drawing isn't supposed to be a masterpiece, or a professional quality work you can publish. It's an opportunity for a child to be a child, to have fun and enjoy the act of creating. Foster and learn a creative pursuit that could become a lifelong passion. None of that happens with a couple keyword searches and a click of a button.

More than anything though, there's no excitement. No joy. A child's drawing may not look impressive, but there is love and passion in it, an excitement and earnest joy that shines through even absent any fine detail. The drawings my parents saved from when I was a little kid aren't impressive visually, but they were truly labors of love. I loved making them, and I had a ton of fun doing so. That was the real value. Not something that looks like the dust jacket of a grocery store paperback, but a kid getting to make something they loved, bringing their idea to life, and crafting every bit of it with a passion and glee a lot of us lose as adults. They didn't save those drawings because I was Rembrandt at seven, they saved them because every one of them had every ounce of care and focus my tiny hands could muster, and that meant the world to both them and me. Far more than any spit-shined generation.

That enthusiasm and wonder are truly, genuinely magical. This whole ad posits that we're better off replacing them with an AI generated amalgamation, because Dall-E's interpretation of "A pegasus on a castle" looks more "professional" than the drawing your kid spent an hour on. It fundamentally misunderstands the purpose and beauty of children creating art, and that is just... sad for what is ostensibly an art company.

I can tolerate marketing your AI features to professional adults. I mean shit, when I used to be a photographer, I'd occasionally use tools that amounted to primitive AI to fix red-eye and similar issues. There's some valid sales pitches to make there. But marketing it based on its ability to replace a child's drawings is just so unbelievably cynical, divorced from the whole point. Every time I see it, I don't think to myself "Wow, what a cool feature," I think to myself "Wow, how jaded and out of touch was the marketing team to think that this was anything other than depressing?" It reeks of people who're so concerned with making every single thing have a neon shine and a mirror polish that they're completely oblivious to the human element that makes art worth making and consuming in the first place.

Which, thinking about it, makes a lot of sense given the features they're touting here.