Sounds like a good idea. The original engine was written for mostly CPU-based processing, and parallel compute has become much more of a thing since then.
They won't be able to do everything on a GPU, but they can optimize the system for GPU compute and have graceful fallback for operations that a GPU can't do.
considers
They might also consider adding distributed support. My understanding is that Photoshop is cloud-based these days. I haven't used Photoshop in decades, never seen the cloud-based product, but if most of the compute happens server-side, I imagine that that's a lot more amenable to selling higher-end services where you loop more hardware in for more compute capability.
That'd be an area where they could legitimately bill cloud-based operation as a plus versus local stuff like Gimp.
I’d say the desktop offering is the main thing, but moving further into the cloud could be an interesting move on the subscription journey.
Not interesting for me, as a user, but as a concept and an investment for the company.
[raises hand] I’ve used MatLab instead of Photoshop, I guess.
Seriously though, as an amateur photographer, working on a new engine instead of just adding more gen AI features to every pixel sounds like a good move. I’ll be sticking with my buy-once option, either way.
As a developer I also found this interesting:
Can make steady progress even when a problem is ambiguous or not fully prioritized yet
That’s a super important skill a lot of people don’t even want to develop.
Only the time I took to play around with FOSS options, which is fine for a hobby.
There are actually really good options out there, they just don’t match my needs.
True. How much time you invest in "playing around" is your choice. I mostly treat it like a video game demo. I play for a bit and if I enjoy it I'll donate. If I see issues or it doesn't do what I want I don't donate.
11 Comments
onlinepersona@programming.dev · 23 pts · 3d
Fuck adobe
Vosh@programming.dev · 4 pts · 2d
Adobe is scum. But it's important to know what they are up to.
I'm pretty sure they have a team spying on open source projects. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to undermine them.
tal@lemmy.today · 14 pts · 3d
Sounds like a good idea. The original engine was written for mostly CPU-based processing, and parallel compute has become much more of a thing since then.
They won't be able to do everything on a GPU, but they can optimize the system for GPU compute and have graceful fallback for operations that a GPU can't do.
considers
They might also consider adding distributed support. My understanding is that Photoshop is cloud-based these days. I haven't used Photoshop in decades, never seen the cloud-based product, but if most of the compute happens server-side, I imagine that that's a lot more amenable to selling higher-end services where you loop more hardware in for more compute capability.
That'd be an area where they could legitimately bill cloud-based operation as a plus versus local stuff like Gimp.
nebeker@programming.dev · 2 pts · 3d
I’d say the desktop offering is the main thing, but moving further into the cloud could be an interesting move on the subscription journey. Not interesting for me, as a user, but as a concept and an investment for the company.
nebeker@programming.dev · 9 pts · 3d
[raises hand] I’ve used MatLab instead of Photoshop, I guess.
Seriously though, as an amateur photographer, working on a new engine instead of just adding more gen AI features to every pixel sounds like a good move. I’ll be sticking with my buy-once option, either way.
As a developer I also found this interesting:
That’s a super important skill a lot of people don’t even want to develop.
vrek@programming.dev · 1 pts · 3d
Better than buy once, try and if you like donate options
nebeker@programming.dev · 1 pts · 3d
In concept, absolutely, but I tried and didn’t like.
vrek@programming.dev · 2 pts · 3d
So you don't lose anything win-win
nebeker@programming.dev · 1 pts · 2d
Only the time I took to play around with FOSS options, which is fine for a hobby. There are actually really good options out there, they just don’t match my needs.
vrek@programming.dev · 2 pts · 2d
True. How much time you invest in "playing around" is your choice. I mostly treat it like a video game demo. I play for a bit and if I enjoy it I'll donate. If I see issues or it doesn't do what I want I don't donate.
nebeker@programming.dev · 1 pts · 2d
Right. I’ve been known to open an issue and move on with my life. That’s not nothing, as far as contributing to FOSS.