Skip to content

Eugene Tyson

My feedback

35 results found

  1. 51 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Hi all,

    Thanks for the detailed feedback on this thread. Reopening it, because we're still actively working on the issue. A few updates:

    Relinking: the case where manually entered alt text was overwritten by generated alt text on relink was fixed in 21.4. If you're still seeing manual alt text get overwritten after relinking, reply here with a sample file and your InDesign version and we'll investigate directly.

    Remove all generated alt text: an option to remove all generated alt text from a document in a single action is on the way.

    We hear the wider feedback here too, and we're keeping this open while we work through it.

    Best regards,

    Sunny

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Eugene Tyson commented  · 

    This remains unresolved.

    The justification for closing this request was that users are shown a CTA and can turn the feature off. Subsequent reports now show that this safeguard is not reliable:

    • AI-generated alt text has reportedly overridden existing custom alt text.
    • The setting can turn itself back on when user settings are imported.
    • Generated descriptions are still being added automatically rather than being presented for review and approval.

    That means this is no longer merely a debate about whether an opt-out default is appropriate. Users can deliberately provide reviewed alt text or deliberately disable the feature, yet those choices may not be respected.

    Existing human-written accessibility content should never be replaced by generated content without explicit confirmation. An opt-out choice should remain opted out. AI-generated text should not become part of a production document until the user has reviewed and accepted it.

    Marking this “Resolved for User” while reports continue to demonstrate loss of control over document content is inaccurate.

    The original request remains unchanged and unresolved:

    Turn generation off by default.
    Generate only when explicitly requested.
    Never overwrite existing alt text automatically.
    Require review before insertion.
    Make the opt-out setting persistent and reliable.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Eugene Tyson commented  · 

    This is still marked as "Resolved for User", but the original request has not been resolved.

    The core request was never about improving the quality of the generated descriptions. It was about default behaviour, consent, review, and workflow control.

    Looking at the 21.4 documentation, the feature remains enabled by default for eligible users:

    "This feature is automatically turned on for users with unlimited credits."

    Alt text is still automatically generated when images are placed, credits are still consumed automatically, and AI-generated content is still being inserted into documents before the user has chosen to generate it.

    The improvements in 21.4 appear to focus on accuracy, regeneration, enterprise controls, and administration. Those are welcome improvements, but they do not address the original request:

    Turn the feature off by default.
    Allow users to opt in.
    Allow generation for selected images or all images.
    Require review before generated content becomes part of the document.
    Provide straightforward auditing and management of generated descriptions.

    A feature can be improved without the original concern being resolved.

    The request was not "make the generated text better."

    The request was "stop automatically generating AI content in production documents unless the user explicitly chooses to do so."

    Based on the current 21.4 documentation, that behaviour remains unchanged.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Eugene Tyson commented  · 

    Thanks Sunny, appreciate the clarification and the more detailed response.

    However, I still think the central concern remains unresolved.

    Even if alt text is only generated when an image is placed or replaced, the issue is still that AI-generated text is being added to production documents by default. That is the part many of us are objecting to.

    Improving the quality is welcome, but quality improvement does not solve the consent/workflow problem. A better guess is still a guess. In professional workflows, alt text is not harmless background metadata. It is document content. It can be exported, read by assistive technology, reviewed by clients, included in accessibility audits, translated, archived, and carried through regulated or approval-sensitive workflows.

    That means it needs the same level of user control as any other content placed into a document.

    I also want to push back slightly on the idea that improved handling of icons and graphics “directly addresses” the inaccurate descriptions reported. It may help, but it does not eliminate the risk. We have already seen examples where a keyline/technical element was described as something like a tall blue building, and other users have reported wildly inappropriate or NSFW-style descriptions for graphics. That is not accessibility. That is inaccurate content being inserted under the banner of accessibility.

    Making documents more accessible is a good goal. Nobody is arguing against that. But making documents appear accessible by automatically inserting unreliable descriptions is not the same thing. In fact, it can make things worse, because users may believe the accessibility work has been handled when the descriptions are actually wrong, misleading, irrelevant, or inappropriate.

    The enterprise admin control is useful, but it does not address individual users, freelancers, small studios, education users, charities, smaller publishers, or corporate users without centralised admin control. Regulated and approval-sensitive work does not only happen inside large enterprise deployments.

    The safer design is still:

    Gen Alt Text off by default.

    Offer to generate alt text when needed.

    Allow generation for selected images or all images.

    Require user review/approval before generated descriptions become part of the file.

    Provide a reliable way to find, audit, edit, or remove generated alt text already added.

    I appreciate that 21.4 improves the feature, but this UserVoice request was not only about accuracy. It was about default behaviour, consent, review, reversibility, and trust.

    Until AI-generated content is opt-in and reviewable before insertion, I do not think this should be considered resolved.

    Related thread:
    https://community.adobe.com/questions-671/indesign-generative-ai-options-on-by-default-1561085?tid=1561085&postid=7672456#post7672456

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Eugene Tyson commented  · 

    Another aspect being overlooked here is document integrity.

    Traditionally, opening an InDesign file should not materially alter its content unless the user intentionally edits something. With this feature enabled by default, simply opening legacy documents can now result in machine-generated text being added into production assets.

    That changes the relationship users have with the software itself.

    For regulated or archived workflows, “opening a document” and “modifying a document” are very different things.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Eugene Tyson commented  · 

    This is not resolved.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Eugene Tyson commented  · 

    That’s a tone deaf reply. The issue isn’t whether there was a checkbox or a CTA once during onboarding. The issue is that AI-generated content is being automatically injected into professional production documents by default — including regulated, government, accessibility, legal, and corporate workflows — and it has already been shown generating NSFW and wildly inaccurate descriptions.

    “Users were informed once” is not really an adequate defence when the feature can create reputational or compliance risks months later inside files people may never manually review line by line.

    AI alt text as an assistive starting point? Fine. AI silently writing production content by default? That’s the part people are objecting to.

    Eugene Tyson shared this idea  · 
  2. 12 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  3. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  4. 612 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Eugene Tyson commented  · 

    19 years and 2 months ago it was requested. On Sept 11, 2017 it was put into a future release/backlog production line - 8 years, 9 months, and 2 days... and this is still not implemented.

    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  5. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  6. 6 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  7. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Eugene Tyson commented  · 

    I've also tested this and it does provide the results, there's lots of info the thread about it so I won't repeat it here, but seems like a bug to us.

    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  8. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  9. 8 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  10. 232 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  11. 296 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  12. 300 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Hi everyone,

    InDesign provides an option to export and import User Settings, providing users with a smooth and enhanced experience to restore their custom settings if needed. The feature is now available in the latest InDesign 2024(v19.3.0.058) 

    Helpx article - https://helpx.adobe.com/in/indesign/using/export-import-user-settings-indesign.html

    Please let us know your feedback in the comments.

    Sanyam Talwar(he/him)

    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  13. 366 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    History panel has been added to the latest version 19.5 of InDesign 2024. Please update your copy of InDesign from CCD app to this latest version to start using this new feature.

    --

    Adobe InDesign team


    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  14. 364 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  15. 497 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  16. 522 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    GPU Acceleration on Windows is available with the latest InDesign 2025(v20.4.0.052). Please update to the latest InDesign via the CCD app to get this feature.

    The minimum system requirements for using GPU Acceleration on

    1. Windows are: Monitor with a display resolution greater than 2K
    2. GPU card with at least 1GB vRAM.

    Note on GPU Acceleration: High-resolution monitors are becoming the standard. With the high monitor resolutions, it is getting difficult for the CPU to handle the rendering. This is where the GPU comes into play. Rendering on high-density displays is best handled by the GPU. GPU acceleration makes the rendering of the documents faster while zooming, scrolling, and panning. The enhanced performance from using the GPU in InDesign powers features like Animated Zoom, which make zoom actions smooth and animated.

    Based on our internal tests, we found that GPU acceleration provides better performance when the monitor's display resolution is…

    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  17. 641 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  18. 795 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  19. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
  20. 23 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Eugene Tyson supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1