Adobe Research is experimenting with a voice-controlled photo editing virtual assistant. A demo video uploaded to Adobe's YouTube account shows how the tool might function, performing and undoing basic edits to an image, and exporting the final product to Facebook – all achieved through spoken commands.
Recent Videos
The demo shows this feature being used for extremely basic editing functions (cropping, flipping an image), which Adobe calls 'a first step towards a robust multimodal voice-based interface' for its mobile applications.
Given that voice control is popping up in just about every gadget you can think of, it seems logical for Adobe to be considering adding voice control to its apps. The Internet of Things is rapidly turning out to be the Internet of Shouting at Things, so voice-controlled photo editing seems inevitable.
Do you think Adobe could make voice control sophisticated enough for the complex needs of serious photo editing? Let us know in the comments.
As someone who is losing control of his fingers, and has tried almost every ergonomic mouse and touch pointer, I'd certainly welcome voice assisted editing, For me to edit a 1200 photo shoot, its a lot of pain, and very difficult.
the software is not there yet ... if Photoshop was able to do more by its own it could be a help, but at first Photoshop needs major improvements ...
Especially the editing-workflow of raw-pictures could need major improvements.
If Adobe is running out of ideas, please contact me .. I might have some ideas for them which would make at least my workflow much shorter and easier - and I guess also the workflow of many other photographers ...
The graphic arts has always been a fairly physical and tactile experience. To take it out of that realm and into the verbal realm will pretty much require that new language be invented to describe and implement many things we have come to expect in pretty sophisticated photo editing.
I'm thinking about things like selective editing (how to describe a small section of a photo, for instance), or color control for instance. While I'm reasonably certain it could be done, I am less certain that it would be more efficient than current methods. Less certain it would be worth the effort.
Still and all, I think this sort of experimentation needs to be done.
I know people who thought the computer mouse was frivolous and time wasting (which in fact it can be for some programmers, who to this day prefer keyboard text editors with minimal or no mousing).
The advent of touchscreens was ridiculed. Even to this day many Mac users pretend it is not useful (because Apple is so far behind the tech curve that is has not yet implemented it). Blackberry users had disdain for the iPhone because it didn't have a keyboard and stylus.
And even though everyone communicates primarily via voice, many fail to see how that ability could be useful. The instant ridicule and negativity here are a sad indicator of lack of imagination and fear of new things.
And the use of a straw man is foolish. Just because voice commands are implemented does not mean you are required to use them or that the mouse, touchscreen or keyboard will suddenly not work.
Maybe the opposers have a point when the say that talking and listening computers have been promised and presented since many decades. Mostly ... well ... it sucked.
I guess it's great that voice control is being developed and is actually getting better, but I don't see it working well in foreseeable future, especially for stuff like photo editing, mostly because... it's not really needed. It does not solve any problems but it does introduce some.
Even simple editing, like resizing or cropping, can be done faster and more efficiently just by using your fingers (for touchscreens) or a mouse. A couple of fast movements and you are done, while with voice controls you have to think about your wording, explain it to the device and hope it understands you right. Complicated edits are absolutely unrealistic, because many of them require precise actions and even experimentation, which is incomparably faster to just do instead of even trying to word it. It is also inconvenient in many situations when there are others around you.
For the same reason I see almost no one using voice controls on their phone, even though they've gotten quite good lately.
Am i the only one here that simply doesn't want to talk to a PC? Adjust contrast to +27. No, adjust contrast to +87. Back it off a bit. Bit more, bit more...aw jes just give me the mouse I'll do it my damned self!
it's because in sci-fi shows they made it look cool with actors that are really good at delivering lines and, well, not an actual computer to misunderstand said lines. i always feel that i have to talk differently (more mechanically, stressing words) when using voice commands. it's not at all like in the movies.
The voice control isn't a user interface that you can use to do any real things. It is great to find tools like "Open Curves" or "Curves" and similar things. So you can just open settings quickly when you are in silent / low noise environment. Commands like:
Not just tool selection. How about 'feather selection by 0.5 pixel'. Some tools are simple enough to state their parameters. I agree, other tools are too complicated and need other input.
this could work well (esp for phone/pad app) applying "filters": "make it look old-timey" or "make it look like every goosed-up landscape in DPR" <g>
But seriously, voice control is the future that is almost here. It need not be the only control but it can be a valuable control. For example a voice command could apply macros that are pre-designed via touch, mouse, keyboard and/or voice.
I don't see voice activated software like thise ever having a useful function. Now how about doing this in a commercial studio with 5 creative artists working at the same time... sitting next to each other doing their work all giving commands to their computer
Tthis will be loud, noisy and result in a mess because the computer receives the wrong command from the wrong person all the time.
"don't see voice activated software like thise ever having a useful function"
Unless you are a deaf-mute I'm sure "voice communication" is useful to you. Siri (rather dim witted) or Cortana (a bit smarter) or Alexa (currently rated marginally "best"), etc. are already actually "useful" and increasingly so. I use voice recognition / machine communication routinely.
But the real payoff comes with AI neural networks training and such that have enormous potential to make conversational machine interaction a reality.
Voice control is just a gimmick for people who dont want to learn the controls. Thought control could be faster than just doing it yourself. But that is very far future, not for us to witness.
Here is a list of things that should have meaningful impact in a photographer's life.
Much better way to spend Adobe's employees time than this lame voice controlled feature:
- proper algorithms that recognize what is a white background and what is a model, and apply a proper. inteligent mask with transparency layers on the hair where needed;
- the same as above, but instead of white backgrounds, inteligent algorithms that can mask a person in front of chroma key (many here would be surprised how in 2017, we still don't have a software smart enough to recognize chroma key);
- skin retouching tools aided by smart algorithms. Think of Portrait Professional, but imagine it several times more reliable. If anyone can develop that, it should be Adobe;
- here's a nice one: remove that ultra lame, cheesy, 1990 lens flare plugin, and offer something that's realistic and actually useful, like Optical Flares does;
- de-aging filter, something Hollywood is able to manage on moving images.
Whoever came up with this idea clearly doesn't understand photo editing. Whilst I'm sure it may prove useful for doing simple tasks I hardly see the benefit it offers ifor increasing workflow. If I didn't know better it looks like Adobe trying to add a few bells and whistles to Photoshop to increase revenue.
Yeah. I mean, seriously - how can someone even consider this a good investment? Dunk? Drugs? Usability has no meaning. This does not work and never will work, except in the MOST basic scenarios. Like above "make it quare". "reframe it". Try "left 2 pixel more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more". Some managers definitely should be fired.
I expect to live to see voice commands to be a major way of controlling your computer. It is logical: speech is the most comfortable way of communicating for humans so why not use it with computers?
I remember when most computer users thought a mouse was a silly thing to use, most people are pretty conservative with interfaces.
might be more comfortable, but speech is not always - and nearly never is - the most efficient. When communicating complex instructions where accuracy is essential it is NEVER the most efficient. It might be fine to do trivial tasks "open" "save" but for complex tasks (in more scientific and engineering applications) then text input is essential ("get it in writing!")
knappe, I think you are missing the point: this is not about a chat with your mate in the same room. It is about communicating often complex instructions. And this is where speech is very very inefficient. It is why science and engineering uses the language of mathematics which beyond simple arithmetic is a written language. It's why computer languages use code and scripts.
Try to use spoken langauge to describe a complex idea and it becomes a nightmare. Try to use a spoken language where there is endless repetition, but with the occasional change (depending on some factor). This would be entirely tedious using speech, but easy using writing (code) or some other form of input. One could spend hours (years) speaking the instructions which could be written or coded in a line. This is why, for maths and science, engineers will use terminal commands and scripts rather than a GUI, let alone speech!
There IS a reason humans invented a method of communication that was not verbal!
'One could spend hours (years) speaking the instructions which could be written or coded in a line.'
Show me a coded line line and I will speak it as fast as you can write it.
Yes, there is a reason humans invented a method of communication that was not verbal: sometimes you are not in the the same room and/or time. If I am in a room with a person there is no better way of communicating than speach.
@agentul: I agree voice recognition is not yet up to the task. But 'foreign accents'? I am Dutch and I expect my computer to someday understand my Dutch no problemo. Also my English as well as my German is good enough for any native speaker of the languages, in a few years a computer will understand me in any of these languages.
knappe - you have obviously never coded or used terminal commands, nor do you understand the reason we use code, mathematics, music scores or any other form of shorthand.
Look at any reasonably complex mathematical formula, then try to manipulate it using speech. it soon becomes impossible, which is why written maths was invented.
Why do you think scientists and engineers use terminal commands rather than GUIs or speech interfaces when the technology to do so IS there?
Badsciencse, sorry for my lack of understanding. I always thought coding, music scores or novels were different from direct communication. Yes, a (complicated) mathematical formula needs to be written down to comprehend and communicate, like a computer program. 99% of communication is not coding, writing down music or complicated stuff like that. When I work in photoshop, most of my communication with the program is super straighforward and can easily be done faster with the spoken word.
Pressing Alt+S is far quicker than saying Save. Just as pressing CTRL+Shift+N for new layer or B for Brush, Y for History Brush are plenty speedy.
It's not so much that I mind Speech Recognition but is it really worth the extra resources in terms of processing speed and ram usage on the user's side, and the man-hours in developing, improving and bug fixing on the developer's side for, in my opinion, questionable efficiency and workflow advancements?
Load up a photo. Put the TV on a chat channel. Wait a while. See what the result it. A new form of art... but would the copywrite be with the photographer or the chat show host?
Yep, because this is the only thing the entire Adobe corporation is working on. I heard they even pulled in the phone operator to submit some code to fix the modulation issues they were having with this.
I suggest fixing Hi-DPI scaling in Windows first, for Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and Premiere Pro. I didn't get a 2560x1440 laptop to work in 1366x768, nor to feed opticians for giving me a -4 spectacles earlier than it should happen (if ever), nor to be forced to get bitten apples.
Of course many people hate the idea and say they can do it faster by keyboard. So it must be optional for some guys here and those who can't spare a MHz of processing power.
I think the idea has great potential when implemented cleverly, very programmable and definetely only when voice and keyboardcontrol work simultaneously.
For instance what I dislike in PS is the tiny buttons you need presiing to create layers. I would like to use the command 'curvelayer' to create this layer. Quite simple and straightforward things.
It would be hilarious if they tried to make the full PhotoShop voice controlled. How would you request one of those hidden "Alt+Shift+click microscopic grey icon in the corner of that panel just there" functions? And if it's not entirely voice controlled, still needing a keyboard, what's the point at all? It's quicker to click that meaningless but familiar icon than try to remember what Adobe call it and then say the right word.
With programmable I mean that I can choose my own voice commands in my own language for the keyboard or mouseclicks and combinations that I choose myself. It would be a sort of mini-batches. And: voice control should work simultaneously with the usual controls. Then it could work faster. I know it's a lot I ask, but hey, the computer I have now is 1000 times faster than the one I had 15 years ago, and then photoshop worked too.
Just say, Ansol Adams. You editing a picture of your girl/boyfriend, You say " Make him/her cute". The picture does not change, but in real life the subject does become cute. Now that's a movie!
Like many i laughed at first but thinking about it this would be great for artist like. Using a keuboard with a wacom can reslut in awkward postions making carpul tunnel and back pains a real problem. Basic funtions like brush eraser and step back and forth would be a great help for me. Actually im just going too see if i cant hack this togheter myself.
I can't even talk to an alarm clock and find it scary to talk to robotic voice menues when calling corporations. Won't be talking to Photoshop anytime soon.
I switched to C1 because I want to leave Adobe after CS6 is old and I refuse to go subscription. But I enjoy C1 so much that I use it more for the simple reason that I prefer it. I also think my Sony raw files respond better to processing in C1
Yep, count me in. I really hated C1 until version 10 came along. After some experimenting and finding settings that get me that LR look (or rather a highend version of it :), i finally paid the 300 buckaroos and bought into Capture One Pro last week.
I'm really impressed, now that i know the software quite intimately.
The color controls in C1 are powerful in ways that aren't immediately apparent. One of the features in Lightroom that I and many others liked, was the white point/black point adjustments. Using the 3 way color balance wheels, you can slide the lightness sliders on the right hand side up and down to replicate the effect with great control.
Film grain. Skin tone balancing/uniformity. Highly customized interface (I moved tools, settings and tabs all around as some just didn't make sense to me in their default location). Local adjustments that to me are really well implemented. Too many great things.
On my wish list? A mobile app. I don't like Lightroom Mobile (though it has come a long way) as it requires a data connection (I like to edit on the subway), paid account for raw editing (I own a subscription) etc.
Right now my workflow is custom export to Google Drive, then open in VSCO on the phone for further edits/final filter/social media. My organization is all on Google Drive.
Just when I thought the Kodak Super 8mm revival was nonsense, Adobe come with this. (But I would love to hear a conversation between this assistant and Siri).
"You're just jealous cause he named me becky and he smiles when I make his grass greener."
"But when he get's up in the morning, he'll talk me first. He always says, "oh, Siiriii. Face it, I'm the operating system, I can take you out any time I want..."
"But I can make your face look bloated just like that. See?"
I'm admittedly old school, but I just can't get into talking to my devices. I also tend not to be in environments where chatting with my computer or devices would be permissible. I can't imagine an office setting filled with the constant noise of everyone talking to their devices. It's hard enough to concentrate with the occasional person talking on the phone or hallway conversation going on. If I was sitting in my home office talking to PhotoShop I would fully expect that my family would keep closing my door so that I don't disturb them in the next room.
I'm still waiting for my computer to track my eye movement so that it knows which window should have the focus. That is something I could really use!
You're not old school. You have brains, actually. We're entering on times when one seriously needs to evaluate things with a proper judgement, a common sense, and not "go mindlessly with the flow".
I'll explain my point.
Does tech like this help? Make life any easier? Make actions quicker? Are you more precise and faster in anything? No, not at all. Does it save you any effort? No. (moving your hand and fingers using a keyboard or mouse is not considered effort).
Where does tech like that find audience? On dumb people trying to look cool. I friend of mine grabs his cellphone and speaks to the device: "google, find me X street".
He just looks a weirdo surrounded by normal people. I mean, type that street name, will ya?
It's most probable he knows he's not saving any time or effort. He's just trying to look "cool".
IMO, talking alone to a machine does not make you cool in any way.
Another place this tech will find audience is among tech lovers. I don't mean to be rude, but most tech lovers just love tech for the sake of tech.
If one guy talks to a machine because he thinks it makes him look cool, a tech lover talks to a machine because he loves everything tech. Common sense? Who needs common sense?
Both did not question himself: does it make life easier, nicer, faster, etc?
In the end, what I'm saying is: voice controlled photo editing? Are we lazy to the point of not using our fingers anymore?
Or are we just trying to look cool for 2 min and 30 secs?
(BTW, people who can't move their fingers, that's a whole different story)
I'm 35, not a grumpy old man against the marvels of tech. I just happen to like common sense.
marcio_napoli you're 100% correct. Unless it can "learn" how I like to process my photographs and then replicate such processing on other photographs via one or two commands, I'm not interested. The technology will eventually get to that point but it's many years away. Photoshop would sell a lot of expensive plug-ins if all a photographer had to say was "make face and skin 'beautiful'" and the software did all the dodging and burning on it's own over the course of a few seconds. Now that would be a boon for beauty photographers especially.
"whiten teeth", "no stray strands of hair", etc... would be useful if the software could get it right at least 90% of the time. I'll just keep plugging away using CS6 until they come out with something that I can actually use and or don't want to be without.
I like to think it's that I'm experienced enough not to fall for gimmicks. This one is easy to pass up on, there's nothing more annoying, cumbersome and lame than talking to an electronic device.
@marcio - It's a solution to a problem that didn't exist in the first place.
Once we had keyboard & mouse and everything just worked when you had your workflow down.
Then came the darn mobile devices and interaction got much harder (for a research that i need 30min for on my desktop, i need at least 2-4hrs on my phablet).
Now we need to talk to the things to be more efficient again? Why not buy a notebook in the first place, or better - leave your work at your desktop computer.
I had to do some intense retouching once when the zipper on the models jeans came partially undone due to the way she was sitting... hadn't noticed until processing. Can just imagine a voice command for that in the far future.. 'Photoshop, zip up pants please'.. lol
Lomography's LomoChrome '92 is designed to mimic the look of classic drugstore film that used to fill family photo albums. As we discovered, to shoot with it is to embrace the unexpected, from strange color shifts to odd textures and oversized grain.
The LowePro PhotoSport Outdoor is a camera pack for photographers who also need a well-designed daypack for hiking and other outdoor use. If that sounds like you, the PhotoSport Outdoor may be a great choice, but as with any hybrid product, there are a few tradeoffs.
The Sony a7C II refreshes the compact full-frame with a 33MP sensor, the addition of a front control dial, a dedicated 'AI' processor, 10-bit 4K/60p video and more. It's a definite improvement, but it helps if you value its compact form.
Why is the Peak Design Everyday Backpack so widely used? A snazzy design? Exceptional utility? A combination of both? After testing one, it's clear why this bag deserves every accolade it's received.
The new Wacom One 12 pen display, now in its second generation, offers photographers an affordable option to the mouse or trackpad, making processing images easy and efficient by editing directly on the screen.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
Lomography's LomoChrome '92 is designed to mimic the look of classic drugstore film that used to fill family photo albums. As we discovered, to shoot with it is to embrace the unexpected, from strange color shifts to odd textures and oversized grain.
Sony's gridline update adds up to four customizable grids to which users can add color codes and apply transparency masks. It also raises questions about the future of cameras and what it means for feature updates.
At last, people who don’t want to pay a premium for Apple’s Pro models can capture high-resolution 24MP and 48MP photos using the iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Plus. Is the lack of a dedicated telephoto lens or the ability to capture Raw images worth the savings for photographers?
Kodak's Super 8 Camera is a hybrid of old and new: it shoots movies using Super 8 motion picture film but incorporates digital elements like a flip-out LCD screen and audio capture. Eight years after we first saw the camera at CES 2016, Kodak is finally bringing it to market.
In this supplement to his recently completed 10-part series on landscape photography, photographer Erez Marom explores how the compositional skills developed for capturing landscapes can be extended to other areas of photography.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
Sony, the Associated Press and 'Photo Mechanic' maker Camera Bits have run a month-long field-test to evaluate capture authentication and a subsequent workflow.
A color-accurate monitor is an essential piece of the digital creator's toolkit. In this guide, we'll go over everything you need to know about how color calibration actually works so you can understand the process and improve your workflow.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
It's that time of year again: When people get up way too early to rush out to big box stores and climb over each other to buy $99 TVs. We've saved you the trip, highlighting the best photo-related deals that can be ordered from the comfort of your own home.
The LowePro PhotoSport Outdoor is a camera pack for photographers who also need a well-designed daypack for hiking and other outdoor use. If that sounds like you, the PhotoSport Outdoor may be a great choice, but as with any hybrid product, there are a few tradeoffs.
Sigma's latest 70-200mm F2.8 offering promises to blend solid build, reasonably light weight and impressive image quality into a relatively affordable package. See how it stacks up in our initial impressions.
The Sony a9 III is heralded as a revolutionary camera, but is all the hype warranted? DPReview's Richard Butler and Dale Baskin break down what's actually new and worth paying attention to.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
DJI's Air 3 and Mini 4 Pro are two of the most popular drones on the market, but there are important differences between the two. In this article, we'll help figure out which of these two popular drones is right for you.
The Sony a7C II refreshes the compact full-frame with a 33MP sensor, the addition of a front control dial, a dedicated 'AI' processor, 10-bit 4K/60p video and more. It's a definite improvement, but it helps if you value its compact form.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
The iPhone 15 Pro allows users to capture 48MP photos in HEIF or JPEG format in addition to Raw files, while new lens coatings claim to cut down lens flare. How do the cameras in Apple's latest flagship look in everyday circumstances? Check out our gallery to find out.
Global shutters, that can read all their pixels at exactly the same moment have been the valued by videographers for some time, but this approach has benefits for photographers, too.
We had an opportunity to shoot a pre-production a9 III camera with global shutter following Sony's announcement this week. This gallery includes images captured with the new 300mm F2.8 GM OSS telephoto lens and some high-speed flash photos.
The Sony a9 III is a ground-breaking full-frame mirrorless camera that brings global shutter to deliver unforeseen high-speed capture, flash sync and capabilities not seen before. We delve a little further into the a9III to find out what makes it tick.
The "Big Four" Fashion Weeks – New York, London, Milan and Paris - have wrapped for 2023 but it's never too early to start planning for next season. If shooting Fashion Week is on your bucket list, read on. We'll tell you what opportunities are available for photographers and provide some tips to get you started.
Sony has announced the a9 III: the first full-frame camera to use a global shutter sensor. This gives it the ability to shoot at up to 120 fps with flash sync up to 1/80,000 sec and zero rolling shutter.
What’s the best camera for around $1500? These midrange cameras should have capable autofocus systems, lots of direct controls and the latest sensors offering great image quality. We recommend our favorite options.
First developed in the mid-1800s, salt prints may be considered an obscure 'alternative' photographic process. But all the more reason to make your own. Here's how.
Comments