Adobe Firefly and ChatGPT images in WhatsApp mark apps as generative AI hubs
Earlier, Perplexity too made its AI available as a chatbot on WhatsApp, which also includes an ability to generate images with text prompts.
A Firefly app, finally
At Adobe Max last year, HT had detailed how the company gave its creative apps a broader feature suite, with AI as the foundation. All of this, defined by their Firefly model. Yet, as time passed, there remained a nagging feeling that Adobe was missing a trick with its Firefly AI suite by not having an app for smartphones. More than anything else, to simply make it easy to access, on a user's phone or tablet.
In this time, coincidentally, AI companies generally made considerable moves to fine-tune AI-enabled content creation. Another illustration of this rapid transition is that just before this year's I/O keynote, Google rolled out updates for the Gemini app across Android and iPhone, unlocking Veo 2 for video generation and new Imagen model for images.
That has now changed. Adobe's Firefly app is now available for iPhones and Android devices. The integrated tools include text prompts to generate a video clip up to 7 seconds in duration and in up to 1080p resolution, text to image as well as generative fill and generative expand that had already found space in Adobe's popular creative tools including Photoshop.
'Our goal with Firefly is to deliver creators the most comprehensive destination on web and mobile to access the best generative models from across the industry, in a single integrated experience from ideation to generation and editing,' says Ely Greenfield, Adobe's senior vice president and chief technology officer. If you are thinking Adobe's simply pushing a case for its own Firefly models (of course it is) and not much else, you'd be very, very wrong.
There are Adobe's own Firefly Image 4 Ultra, Firefly Image 4 and Firefly Image 3. And then there are the third-party models, including Google's Imagen 4, Imagen 3 and Veo 2, as well as OpenAI's GPT Image.
Adobe says the Firefly generative AI ecosystem will be integrating models from Ideogram, Luma AI, Pika and Runway, alongside existing models from OpenAI, Google and Black Forest Labs too — that makes it the first creative platform of its kind, to integrate a large number of third party models too, as users get broader choice of generative styles, aesthetics and specifics such as formats and resolutions.
Subscriptions are priced at ₹499 per month or ₹4,999 per year for 750 monthly credits, and 100GB storage. Generations get synced basis the Creative Cloud account, linking them to other Adobe apps including Lightroom and Photoshop, as well as the consumer focused Express.
OpenAI unlocks more, on WhatsApp
Remember those Ghibli-style images that caught social media feeds by storm, earlier this year? OpenAI's WhatsApp bet sees the image generation capabilities being made available as part of their WhatsApp toolset (1-800-ChatGPT is the number to save in WhatsApp). This is underlined by the company's newest generation GPT-4o model, which natively supports image generation.
There are two broad ways to use image generation within WhatsApp using the GPT-4o model — ask AI to create any image with a detailed text prompt, or upload a photo and describe how a user would want to transform it.
'GPT4o's image generation follows detailed prompts with attention to detail. While other systems struggle with ~5-8 objects, GPT4o can handle up to 10-20 different objects,' the company had said in a statement, when the model was released earlier this year.
OpenAI says ChatGPT on WhatsApp works with all subscription tiers — that is Free, Plus and Pro — but each with differing amounts of usability that will be notified as a user closes in on those rate limits.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
25 minutes ago
- India Today
AI godfather warns tech giants are downplaying AI risks, says only DeepMind's Demis Hassabis gets it
Geoffrey Hinton, widely known as the 'Godfather of AI,' is raising concerns about the rapid development of AI and the fact that major technology companies are downplaying its dangers. Speaking on the One Decision podcast, Hinton said many corporate leaders are aware of the risks but are avoiding taking meaningful action. 'Many of the people in big companies, I think, are downplaying the risk publicly,' Hinton said. 'People like Demis, for example, really do understand the risks and really want to do something about it.'advertisementHinton, who is also a Nobel Laureate, was awarded the 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics alongside John J. Hopfield for their work on artificial neural networks. In fact Hinton's decade-long research paved the way for today's rapid advancement in artificial intelligence. However, he is now warning that advanced AI systems are becoming smarter and smarter and are even learning in ways humans don't fully understand. 'The rate at which they've started working now is way beyond what anybody expected,' he also admitted that he regrets not recognizing these dangers earlier in his career: 'I should have realized much sooner what the eventual dangers were going to be. I always thought the future was far off and I wish I had thought about safety sooner.' Hinton left Google in 2023 after more than a decade at the company. His departure was widely interpreted as his protest against its aggressive AI push. However in the podcast Hinton clarified that this narrative was not true and instead exaggerated. 'There's a wonderful story that the media loves this honest scientist who wanted to tell the truth so I had to leave Google. It's a myth,' Hinton said. 'I left Google because I was 75 and I couldn't program effectively anymore but when I left, maybe I could talk about all these risks more freely.'He added that staying at Google would have inevitably meant some level of self-censorship. 'You can't take their money and then not be influenced by what's in their own interest,' he the podcast, Hinton also spoke about Demis Hassabis and praised hims as one of the few leaders who 'really wants to do something about' the risks of AI. Hassabis, who sold DeepMind to Google in 2014 now heads its AI research arm. While he talks about their development, he has also long expressed concern about the potential misuse of advanced AI this year, in an interview with CNN, Hassabis admitted he is worried about AI. But he said he is less concerned about AI replacing jobs and more focused on the possibility that the technology could fall into the wrong hands.'A bad actor could repurpose those same technologies for a harmful end,' Hassabis told CNN's Anna Stewart. 'And so one big thing is how do we restrict access to these systems, powerful systems, to bad actors but enable good actors to do many, many amazing things with it?'- Ends
India Today
25 minutes ago
- India Today
Should you double-check your doctor with ChatGPT? Yes, you absolutely should
First, there was Google. Or rather Doctor Google, as it is mockingly called by the men and women in white coats, the ones who come in one hour late to see their patients and those who brush off every little query from patients brusquely and sometimes with unwarranted there is a new foe in town, and it is only now that doctors are beginning to realise it. This is ChatGPT, or Gemini, or something like DeepSeek, the AI systems that are coherent and powerful enough to act like medical guides. Doctors are, obviously, not happy about it. Just the way they enrage patients for trying to discuss with them what the ailing person finds after Googling symptoms, now they are fuming against advice that ChatGPT can dish problem is that no one likes to be double-checked. And Indian doctors, in particular, hate it. They want their word to be the gospel. Bhagwan ka roop or something like that. But frustratingly for them, the capabilities of new AI systems are such that anyone can now re-check their doctor's prescription, or can read diagnostic films and observations, using tools like ChatGPT. The question, however, is: should you do it? Absolutely yes. The benefits outweigh the harms. Let me tell you a story. This is from around 15 years ago. A person whom I know well went to a doctor for an ear infection. This was a much-celebrated doctor, leading the ENT department in a hospital chain which has a name starting with the letter F. The doctor charged the patient a princely sum and poked and probed the ear in question. After a few days of tests and consultations, a surgery — rather complex one — was recommended. It was at this time, when the patient was submitting the consent forms for the surgery that was scheduled for a few days later, that the doctor discovered some new information. He found that the patient was a journalist in a large media group, the name of which starts with the letter new information, although not related to the patient's ear, quickly changed the tune the doctor was whistling. He became coy and cautious. He started having second thoughts about the surgery. So, he recommended a second opinion, writing a reference for another senior doctor, who was the head of the ENT at a hospital chain which has a name starting with the letter A. The doctor at this new hospital carried out his own observations. The ear was probed and poked again, and within minutes he declared, 'No, surgery needed. Absolutely, no surgery needed.'What happened? I have no way of confirming this. But I believe here is what happened. The doctor at hospital F was pushing for an unnecessary and complex surgery, the one where chances of something going wrong were minimal but not zero. However, once he realised that the patient was a journalist, he decided not to risk it and to get out of the situation, relied on the doctor at hospital is a story I know, but I am sure almost everyone in this country will have similar anecdotes. At one time or another, we have all had a feeling that this doctor or that was probably pushing for some procedure, some diagnostic test, or some advice that did not sit well with us. And in many unfortunate cases, people actually underwent some procedure or some treatment that harmed them more than it helped. Medical negligence in India flies under the radar of 'doctor is bhagwan ka roop' and other other countries where medical negligence is something that can have serious repercussions for doctors and hospitals, in India, people in white coats get flexibility in almost everything that they do. A lot of it is due to the reverence that society has for doctors, the savers of life. Some of it is also because, in India, we have far fewer doctors than are needed. This is not to say that doctors in India are incompetent. In general, they are not, largely thanks to the scholastic nature of modern medicine and procedures. Most of them also work crazy long hours, under conditions that are extremely frugal in terms of equipment and highly stressful in terms of this is exactly why we should use ChatGPT to double-check our doctors in India. Because there is a huge supply-demand mismatch, it is safe to say that we have doctors in the country who are not up for the task, whether these are doctors with dodgy degrees or those who have little to no background in modern medicine, and yet they put Dr in front of their name and run clinics where they deal with most complex is precisely because doctors are overworked in India that their patients should use AI to double-check their diagnostic opinions and suggested treatments. Doctors, irrespective of what we feel about them and how we revere them, are humans at the end of the day. They are prone to making the same mistakes that any human would make in a challenging work finally, because many doctors in India — not all, but many — tend to overdo their treatment and diagnostic tests, we should double-check them with AI. Next time, when you get a CT scan, also show it to ChatGPT and then discuss with your doctor if the AI is telling you something different. In the last one year, again and again, research has highlighted that AI is extremely good at diagnosis. Just earlier this month, a new study by a team at Microsoft found that their MAI-DxO — a specially-tuned AI system for medical diagnosis — outperformed human doctors. Compared to 21 doctors who were part of the study and who were correct in only 20 per cent of cases, MAI-DxO was correct in 85 per cent of cases in its none of this is to say that you should replace your doctor with ChatGPT. Absolutely not. Good doctors are indeed precious and their consultation is priceless. They will also be better with subtleties of the human body compared to any AI system. But in the coming months and years, I have a feeling that doctors in India will launch a tirade against AI, similar to how they once fought Dr they will shame and harangue their patients for using ChatGPT for a second opinion. When that happens, we should push back. Indian doctors are not used to questions, they don't like to explain, they don't want to be second-guessed or double-checked. And that is exactly why we should ask them questions, seek explanations and double-check them, if needed, even with the help of ChatGPT.(Javed Anwer is Technology Editor, India Today Group Digital. Latent Space is a weekly column on tech, world, and everything in between. The name comes from the science of AI and to reflect it, Latent Space functions in the same way: by simplifying the world of tech and giving it a context)- Ends(Views expressed in this opinion piece are those of the author)Trending Reel
Time of India
25 minutes ago
- Time of India
AI may beat doctors at diagnosis, but trust still wins: Sam Altman
Synopsis OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says AI can now diagnose illnesses better than most doctors, but people still prefer human care for trust and connection. He warned about risks like AI-driven fraud and privacy issues, stressing the need for stronger protections for sensitive conversations users have with tools like ChatGPT.
