adobe × parsons

i was selected for adobe's not generated creative ai lab with parsons * a two-day intensive exploring generative ai, authorship, and responsible creative practice. the lab gathered designers working through what these tools mean for how images get made, and for who gets to be called the maker.

the lab kept returning to the same set of questions my thesis work sits inside: what does authorship mean when a model contributes to the making? what does responsible practice look like when generation is cheap and judgment is scarce? my position comes out of the work * the tool is real, the authorship question is real, and neither is resolved by pretending otherwise.

i developed and presented an adobe firefly implementation plan * how firefly could sit inside a working creative practice rather than around it: where it helps, where it stops, and how the designer keeps authorship of the outcome. (plan documentation to come.)

i treat ai the way i treat any production method: as a way to investigate, visualize, and test faster. the practical questions are always the same * what is the input, where is the judgment, and which hand finishes the work. this site is itself the example: campaign imagery, illustrations, and tooling built with ai-assisted development under a single design judgment.

generation is cheap now; judgment is what makes a result a work. the name of the lab says it directly: not generated. the designer's value in this era is not the pixels the machine produces * it is the taste, the framing, and the decision about what deserves to exist.

i was interviewed for adobe's film about the program, alongside the work from the lab.