ArtCraft: Free Adobe Alternative, But Can You Trust It?

You've no doubt seen ArtCraft all over the internet over the last week or so; it's a set of free apps that look an awful lot like Photoshop, Lightroom, Premiere and the rest of Adobe's apps, and they've all been built using AI. There's been video after video, article after article and thousands of comments cheering it on, but having read through a lot of it, there are a few things I haven't seen anybody mention.

Before I get into it, I want to be upfront about where I'm coming from. I do occasional work for Adobe, recording tutorials for Adobe Learn, presenting and so on, and I use Creative Cloud every single day. I also use Claude, which is the AI that was used to build these apps, and I love it. I'm editing more and more of my videos in DaVinci Resolve rather than Premiere Pro, and I love that too, so I'm all for competition. I just want you to know where I stand so you can weigh up what I've got to say.

What's actually happened

A software developer called Brandon Thomas has released seven free apps under the ArtCraft name. PhotoCraft is his version of Photoshop, LightCraft is Lightroom and FilmCraft is Premiere, and there are versions of Illustrator, InDesign, After Effects and Acrobat as well. He says he built them using Anthropic's AI, Claude, and they're open source, which means the code is published for anyone to look at.

The reaction has been huge. GitHub is where software developers share their code, and people can give a project a star, a bit like a like on YouTube. Eleven days after it all came out, PhotoCraft alone had 44,000 of them. He also tried posting about it on the Adobe Reddit forum, but understandably that post didn't stay up for very long.

Early, very early

What's had a lot less attention is how finished it is. By PhotoCraft's own roadmap, it's at about 25% to 35% of what a professional needs for daily work. Only two of the seven apps are even labelled as early alpha; the rest are still in development. When it launched he promised it would match Adobe completely within a month, and when people started pointing out what was missing, that became 99% within months.

It's also not trying to hide where it comes from. PhotoCraft's own website describes it as "the open-source image editor you already know how to use", and one look at the screenshot tells you why: the menus, the tools down the side, the Curves panel, the Layers panel. You already know how to use it because it's been made to look like Photoshop, and that's the whole pitch.

What can Adobe actually do about it?

I'm not a lawyer, so take this as my understanding rather than legal advice. Copyright protects the actual code, the written instructions that make a program work, and things like the artwork and the icons, but it doesn't protect an idea or what a program does. If he really hasn't copied any of Adobe's code, which is what he says, a copyright case isn't straightforward.

An intellectual property attorney called Steve Hanson made a really good point about this in [his own video]([FILL IN: link to Steve Hanson's video]). He reckons copyright probably isn't where Adobe would go at all, and that it's more likely to be the contract, the terms you agree to when you sign up. Section 17 of Adobe's terms says, in Adobe's own words, that they don't allow you to recreate, or attempt to recreate, their products.

Then there's the look. There's something called trade dress in the US, and passing off here in the UK, which is about whether a product looks so much like another that people could be confused about who made it. The menus, the panels and even the keyboard shortcuts match Photoshop, and that's exactly the area people are pointing at.

So far Adobe hasn't said a word, and there's good reason it might stay that way. Taking a free, open-source project to court would hand it more publicity than it could ever buy, and the code is already out there for anyone to copy; people already have, and there's another free editor built on PhotoCraft's code. Even if ArtCraft stopped tomorrow, the apps wouldn't disappear.

I remember when Affinity Photo first came out and everyone was saying how close it was to Photoshop, in how it looked and what it could do. We all kind of thought something was going to happen, but nothing did, and today Affinity is owned by Canva and it's free. It's going to be really interesting to see what happens with this one.

Why he built it

This is the part I find really interesting. He's said Adobe charged him its cancellation fee more than once, and in his own words, "They charged me the 'cancellation fee' on multiple occasions and I've hated them ever since." Elsewhere he said he'd been "bit by the dark pattern cancellation fee one too many times."

So this didn't start as a better way to edit photographs; it started with someone who hates Adobe.

I do understand the frustration. In March this year Adobe agreed to a $150 million settlement in the US over how it sold and cancelled Creative Cloud subscriptions. Half of that was a penalty and half was free services for customers, and Adobe didn't admit any wrongdoing. Plenty of people have felt exactly what he felt, and Adobe brought a lot of this on itself, but I'd want to know a lot more about someone who built software out of a grudge before I put it on my computer, let alone gave them my card details.

Who's behind it

Brandon Thomas is a software developer with around 15 years' experience, and he's worked at Square, the payments company. Before ArtCraft he was CEO of a company called Storyteller.ai, and ArtCraft's contact email still goes to Storyteller. Storyteller's best-known product is FakeYou, a site for generating the voices of celebrities and characters using AI, and in 2022 Italy's data protection authority opened an inquiry into it because it could reproduce the voices of public figures, including Italy's Prime Minister, from whatever you typed in.

ArtCraft itself started out as a tool for making and editing AI-generated images and video, and that's still what it's selling.

How it's paid for

The apps are free. What ArtCraft sells is credits for AI image and video generation on a monthly subscription, at $10, $35 or $60 a month, using AI models from Google, OpenAI and others, including Google's Nano Banana, the same model Adobe has put into Lightroom's Prompt to Edit.

So a project that launched with the message of no more subscriptions is paid for by a subscription. To be fair, the site does say you can use the apps without paying, and it's actually a very similar idea to Affinity now, where the app is free and you pay Canva for the AI features. The difference is who's behind it. With Affinity it's Canva, a company you can look up and hold to account; here, it's someone who's told us he hates the company he's copying.

A question if you're worried about AI

There's been a lot of anger about AI in Adobe's apps, and about AI being trained on work photographers and artists never agreed to. I totally understand that; I've shared videos about my own concern over too much AI in Lightroom and Photoshop, and plenty of you have told me how you feel about it.

If that's you, what do you make of this? A set of apps built by AI, copying Adobe's software and paid for by selling access to AI image generators. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just asking whether it sits differently with you because it's aimed at Adobe.

A link versus an install

There's one more thing about all of this I just can't get past. We're all really careful about clicking a link in an email we're not sure about, yet installing software gives it far more access to your computer than clicking a link ever could, and thousands of people have installed this without a second thought. That's the bit I can't get my head around. Why would you be more careful with a link than with a program you're putting on your computer?

When you install software from someone you know nothing about, can you be 100% sure what's in it? I'm not saying there's anything in it that shouldn't be there, and there's no evidence of that at all, but can you be completely sure? I couldn't.

When someone's prepared to go this far over a grudge with a company, building copies of seven of its apps and giving them away, I'd also want to know how they'd treat me, someone they've never met, if I ever fell out with them or if they ever needed something from me.

Would I install it?

No, not as it stands. It's early alpha software, it's not clear what it'll look like in a year's time, and the person behind it has told us he hates the company he's copying. That doesn't mean he's done anything wrong, but think about what's on the computer you'd be installing it on. For me it's every photograph I've ever taken, but it's also my emails, my passwords and the same computer I log into my bank on. That's my whole day-to-day life, not just my pictures, and I'd want to know a lot more history behind something before I gave it that kind of access, and well before I handed over a card number.

If you're curious, there's a version that runs in your web browser, so you can have a look without installing anything at all.

Competition is good

I'm all for competition. Look at what's happened with cameras over the last few years, Canon, Nikon and Sony pushing each other, or Apple and Android. That's when we win, with better products and better prices.

You're free to use whatever you want; it's your choice, not mine. I only use what's fit for purpose, whoever makes it, which is exactly why I've moved more and more of my video editing over to DaVinci Resolve. Affinity, DaVinci Resolve and Capture One are all really good alternatives to Adobe and I'd encourage anyone to look at them. The difference is that there's a company behind each one with a history that you can look up, and that you can hold to account if something goes wrong.

Five questions before you install anything

Whatever you're thinking of installing, ArtCraft or anything else, these are the five things I'd ask first.

• Who's behind it, and what have they made before?

• How is it paid for? If it's free, how is the person making it earning a living?

• Is the installer signed by a named publisher? Your computer will usually warn you if it isn't, and that warning is worth reading rather than clicking straight past.

• Where do your files and your card details go?

• If it disappears tomorrow, can you get your work back out of it?

If you can answer all five and you're happy with the answers, go for it. If you can't, I'd wait.

Adobe Now Owns Topaz: Is This GOOD News or BAD?

On the 23rd of September 2026, Adobe completed its purchase of Topaz Labs. If you use Photoshop, Lightroom or any of the standalone Topaz applications, the obvious question is: what does that mean for us?

Will we get better tools? Will more of the technology be included in what we already pay? And what happens if you prefer using Topaz on its own?

There are some answers, but there’s still plenty we don’t know. In the video above, I share my thoughts on the acquisition, where I can see some real benefits, and what I’d personally like Adobe to do next.

What Has Adobe Confirmed?

Adobe announced the proposed acquisition in June. The September announcement confirms that the deal has now gone through.

Adobe says the Topaz brand will remain, and its applications and models will continue to be available as standalone products. If you use Topaz separately, perhaps alongside a different editor, that’s encouraging.

It’s also worth clearing up the subscription question. Topaz introduced its newer subscription offering in September 2025, before this acquisition. Whatever your feelings about subscriptions, that change wasn’t introduced by Adobe buying the company.

Has My Opinion Changed?

Earlier this year, I made a video about the Topaz integration in Lightroom, and I was frustrated.

At the time, it felt as though Adobe could be taking the easier route by bringing in somebody else’s technology. Given Adobe’s experience and resources, I wanted to see what it could develop itself. I still would.

But I can also see the reasoning behind this purchase. Topaz has specialist knowledge and people who have spent years working on image and video enhancement. Bringing that experience into Adobe could be a sensible way to improve the tools we use.

That’s something I probably could have given more weight in my earlier video.

There is, however, one point I still stand by: when I’m working in Photoshop or Lightroom, I want the tools to feel like they belong there. I want them to work together, follow a consistent approach and give me enough control to get the result I’m after.

Changing who owns the technology doesn’t automatically achieve that. It takes development.

Where Could This Benefit Photographers?

The most obvious opportunity is a better editing experience.

Say you’ve cropped a photograph quite heavily and want to make a print. Having a suitable enlargement tool available inside the application you’re already using could be really useful—especially if you can judge the result properly and adjust the processing without a complicated round trip between applications.

That’s the kind of integration I’d welcome.

Adobe doesn’t have to invent every piece of technology from scratch for it to be valuable. What matters is whether bringing these teams together produces something better when we sit down to work on a photograph.

There’s also the possibility of more processing happening on our own computers. Adobe has highlighted Topaz’s NeuroStream technology, which helps demanding AI models run locally.

Depending on how Adobe uses it, that could reduce the need to upload files for processing. But it isn’t a promise that every feature will work offline, or that every computer will suddenly process everything quickly. We’ll have to see how it develops.

Give Us More Control

For me, one of the most useful places to start would be the controls.

The integrated Topaz tools haven’t offered the same experience as the standalone software. The controls have been limited, with what’s available differing between applications and models.

Having the technology available is useful, but I also want some say in the result.

We’ve all had that moment when an adjustment gets close, but isn’t quite right. Perhaps the effect is a little too strong, or some of the detail doesn’t look as natural as we’d like. That’s where being able to refine the processing makes a difference.

It doesn’t have to mean putting every possible slider on screen. A simple option is useful when it gives you what you need. When it doesn’t, I’d like the option to go further.

Adobe hasn’t announced that the acquisition will bring the extra controls I’m asking for. It’s something I’d like to see.

How Does It Fit Into the Lightroom Workflow?

In Lightroom, Generative Upscale creates a separate DNG file, leaving your original photograph intact. Adobe recommends applying it at the end of your editing workflow.

Understanding that you’re creating a new file matters when deciding how to fit the tool into your editing process. Over time, I’d like that process to become as flexible and clear as possible.

There’s also an important distinction between Lightroom and Lightroom Classic. A feature being available in one doesn’t automatically mean it’s available in the other.

At the time of writing, Adobe’s published FAQ says there are no plans to bring this particular Gigapixel integration to Lightroom Classic. That refers to the built-in integration; it doesn’t mean you can’t use the separate Topaz application with Classic.

What About Generative Credits?

This is where the practical questions become particularly important.

At the time of writing, Adobe’s published charges for the integrated tools are:

ToolFinished output sizeCredits per generationTopaz Gigapixel in Photoshop or LightroomUp to 25 megapixels10Topaz Gigapixel in Photoshop or LightroomAbove 25, up to 56 megapixels20Topaz Bloom in Photoshop1–9 megapixels35

These are Adobe generative credits for the integrated features. You can check the current rates in Adobe’s credit table.

If you have several thousand credits each month and use these tools occasionally, that might be perfectly manageable.

But imagine you have 200 credits remaining. At 20 credits a go, that gives you ten generations, assuming you don’t spend any elsewhere.

That’s ten attempts, rather than necessarily ten finished photographs you’re happy with. Generate another version and you use more of your allowance.

The 200-credit figure is just an example. Your allowance and access depend on your plan, so check your own account.

For me, this connects directly with the question of control. When each new generation uses part of your allowance, being able to get a result you’re happy with becomes particularly important.

Could Ownership Mean Better Value?

When one software company uses another company’s technology, there’s usually a commercial agreement behind it. That might involve licensing fees or usage charges.

We don’t know the details of Adobe’s previous agreement with Topaz, so I can’t say how much of the credit charge reflected that arrangement.

But now Adobe owns Topaz, it’s reasonable to ask whether that changes the calculation. Could fewer credits be required each time? Could more usage be included in our existing plans?

There are still costs involved in developing and running the technology. Ownership doesn’t make those disappear.

The acquisition announcement doesn’t promise lower credit charges, either. Better value is something I’d like Adobe to address, rather than something we’ve been told to expect.

Clear pricing, a practical allowance and more control over the result would make this integration more useful.

What I’d Like to See Next

I can see why Adobe has bought Topaz, and I can see opportunities for photographers to benefit.

Closer development between the teams could improve the tools. Local processing is interesting. Better integration could make editing easier. And continuing to offer standalone Topaz products preserves a choice that matters to plenty of photographers.

For me, the test will be what Adobe does next.

I want to see useful improvements, more flexibility and tools that feel like a complete part of Photoshop and Lightroom. If Adobe’s resources and Topaz’s expertise produce that, I’ll be very happy to give them credit.

What do you think? Would you like more of the standalone Topaz controls inside Photoshop and Lightroom, or does the simpler approach already give you what you need? And if you use Topaz separately, what would you most like Adobe to preserve or improve?

Let me know in the comments.

Details reflect the published information checked on 24 September 2026. Features, credit charges and plan allowances may change.

Your Next Camera just got MORE EXPENSIVE

If you've been saving up for a new camera here in the UK, it's worth going back and checking the price you've got in your head, because it might not be the price any more. Three Fujifilm bodies cost noticeably more today than they did a couple of weeks ago, and nobody said a word about it.

What actually went up

I'd heard a rumour that price rises were coming in on the 1st September, so on the 31st August I wrote down the prices of 13 camera bodies across Wex and the manufacturers' own stores, then went back a few days later to see what had changed.

Comparing one shop against another never tells you anything useful, because there's always a promotion running somewhere, or a different margin sitting behind the counter. The only thing that means anything is the same camera at the same shop on two different days.

At Wex the changes were clear:

• Fujifilm X100VI, £1,599 to £1,749

• Fujifilm X-T50, £1,299 to £1,399

• Fujifilm GFX 100 II, £6,999 to £7,499

That's £150 on the X100VI, which is a shade over 9%, £100 on the X-T50, and £500 on the GFX.

This isn't a case of a retailer quietly moving their margins about either, because Fujifilm's own UK web store shows exactly the same prices, and when a manufacturer changes the price on their own shop, that's the new baseline.

Two bodies that turned up on a leaked European retail list earlier in the summer, the X-S20 and the X-E4/X-E5 line, have stayed where they were for now.

Why it's happening

The interesting bit is that Fujifilm did explain all of this, just not to us. They explained it to their investors.

In their August quarterly financial presentation they set out a big jump in production costs tied directly to memory chips, which is the DRAM and flash memory that sits inside a digital camera. Demand from AI data centres has pushed the price of those components up, and cameras are competing for the same parts.

Fujifilm had originally forecast that memory costs would hit their imaging division by around 6 billion yen this year, but in that August report they more than doubled that to 14 billion yen, naming digital cameras and instant photo systems specifically. Their stated plan for handling it is "pricing measures and the procurement of alternative materials", which in plain English means passing some of the bill along to us.

Loud in Japan, silent over here

What makes it frustrating is that none of this is being said out loud in this country, because in Japan the manufacturers have been completely open about it all year.

Canon published formal notices about price adjustments across dozens of products back in May, Nikon issued official notices covering bodies like the Z50 II, and Sony posted updates for their cinema line in August. Over here we just woke up to bigger numbers on the product pages.

If you shoot Canon, Sony or Nikon and you reckon you're in the clear because UK prices haven't moved yet, I wouldn't get too comfortable. Shops tend to sell the stock they've already got at the price they paid for it, so once the warehouse clears and the next batch lands at the new wholesale cost, the shelf price usually follows.

OM System are doing the complete opposite at the minute, running their own discounts on their site through to late September on bodies like the OM-1 Mark II and the OM-5.

What I'd check before buying

However, there's a simple way to work out where you actually stand, and it takes a couple of minutes.

Start on the manufacturer's own store, because that gives you the true current RRP and it'll tell you straight away whether a quiet rise has already gone through. Then go and look at the independents you normally buy from, because if they're still sitting on earlier stock they may well still be selling at the old price, and that difference stays in your pocket. Depending on the body, that could be anywhere from £100 to £500.

None of this is a reason to rush out and buy something you weren't going to buy anyway, but if a camera has been on your list for a while, it's worth knowing that the number you wrote down a month ago might not be the number you pay. If you've spotted a quiet rise, or a sudden discount, on something you've been saving for, do say so in the comments; it all helps everyone work out where things are really heading.

Focus Stacking, AI and What Counts as a Photograph

World Press Photo has tightened up the rules for its 2026 contest, and the list of what's now out is longer than you might expect. No synthetic images. No generative fill. No AI enlarging either, so Adobe Super Resolution and Topaz Photo AI are both named and both ruled out. Then there's the bit that surprised me more: phone pictures are only eligible if they were shot in standard mode, so HDR, portrait mode, creative lighting effects and panorama mode all disqualify an entry, and multiple exposures and stitched panoramas are gone as well, however they were made.

It's worth sitting with that for a minute, because a fair bit of ordinary, honest photography falls outside those lines.

The rule is about trust, not technique

To be fair to World Press Photo, none of this is really about punishing anybody for blending frames. It's a photojournalism contest, and it's trying to hold a line on one question: does this image record something that actually happened, in front of a lens, at a moment in time. Nothing added, rearranged, reversed, distorted or removed from within the frame. Colour work and cropping are fine, sensor dust can go, but anything that changes what's in the picture is out, and any influence over the scene has to be declared, so a posed portrait or a reenactment gets said out loud in the caption, as do any directions given to the person in front of the camera.

That's a sensible place to draw it for news photography, where the whole point of the image is that it's evidence. I understand exactly why they've put it there.

Worth saying as well, because it gets missed, the rules aren't anti-AI across the board. Denoise is fine. So are automatic adjustments on levels, colour and contrast, along with object selection for local adjustments, all on the condition that they don't add or remove anything the camera captured. You can use AI to pick out a sky and work on it, but you can't hand in a shot your phone quietly built out of several exposures, which tells you the line isn't really about how clever the software is, it's about whether anything got added along the way.

But hardly any of us are shooting under those rules

Here's the bit that's been nagging at me. Outside of photojournalism, computed images aren't the exception; they're the default. Plenty of landscape and seascape photographers stack focus or blend exposures as a matter of course, and most stopped thinking of it as anything unusual years ago. Every phone in every pocket is doing HDR without ever being asked. Portrait mode is now how most people on earth see a photograph of a face, and none of that is invented out of nothing, it's still light hitting a sensor, but it is an image assembled from more information than one exposure could ever hold.

So when a contest draws its line at the single frame, it's protecting something real for its own corner of the industry, but it also shows up how far the rest of us have drifted without ever really noticing we'd crossed anything.

Then there's what AI is doing to all of it

The reason World Press Photo has had to spell this out in so much detail is the same reason it matters to the rest of us. Generated images are now indistinguishable from photographs at a glance, and they're being made at a scale that's hard to picture. The Gemini app passed a billion people a month on the 11th August, and Google reckon it's turning out over 150 million images a day. That's one app.

Google also had to pull the AI image feature out of Google Earth a day after it launched, because people were immediately generating photorealistic satellite imagery that broke its own policies. One day.

Against that, a photography contest banning AI outright isn't an overreaction; it's one of the very few places drawing any line at all, at a point where a convincing photograph of a real place, taken by nobody, is a perfectly normal thing to come across.

Where I land on it

I don't think World Press Photo is wrong to ban AI images from a photojournalism contest, because that's precisely what the contest is for. However, I don't think the stricter stuff about HDR and portrait mode and stitched panoramas is really about AI at all. It's a reminder that "unmanipulated photograph" stopped being a simple category a long time before generative AI turned up, and most of us made our peace with that a good while ago without giving it much thought.

So the more honest question probably isn't whether a picture is AI or not; it's what any of us are actually claiming happened in front of the camera when we hand somebody an image and call it a photograph.

I haven't got a tidy answer to that, and I'm not sure the industry has either.

🚨 Here’s a link to the World Press Photo Competition Rules: www.worldpressphoto.org/contest/entry-rules

I'm Touring with WeX for their Summer Roadshow 2026

This summer I'm hitting the road with Wex Photo Video as part of their Summer Roadshow 2026, a series of in-store talks, live demos and hands-on photography experiences across Wex stores. I'd love to see you at one of the dates.

I'm presenting at eleven locations across the UK between July and September. In Edinburgh I'm opening with a talk, and at every other stop I'm on the shopfloor throughout the day with my live demo, "No Studio, No Problem: Classic Portraits with Minimal Kit."

Where I'll be

Here are all the dates I'm presenting at:

• Edinburgh, the 3rd of July ( LINK )

• Leeds, the 17th of July ( LINK )

• Newcastle, the 18th of July ( LINK )

• Bristol, the 23rd of July ( LINK )

• Birmingham, the 24th and 25th of July ( LINK )

• Manchester, the 30th of July ( LINK )

• Milton Keynes, the 14th of August ( LINK )

• Nottingham, the 15th of August ( LINK )

• Norwich, the 21st of August ( LINK )

• Belfast, the 3rd of September ( LINK )

• Glasgow, the 11th and 12th of September ( Day 1 - LINK ) / ( Day 2 - LINK )

What to expect on the day

Each roadshow day brings together leading camera brands and accessory manufacturers, so you can explore the latest cameras, lenses, accessories and imaging technology all in one place. You'll be able to meet brand experts, get personalised buying advice, ask technical questions and pick up practical shooting tips to help you get more from your kit. There are live demonstrations on the shopfloor throughout, showcasing key gear in action.

Alongside the hands-on side, there's a programme of guest speaker seminars and brand talks from professional photographers, filmmakers and industry specialists, all designed to inspire, educate and help you take your photography or filmmaking further.

My session: No Studio, No Problem

You'll find me on the shopfloor throughout the day for "No Studio, No Problem: Classic Portraits with Minimal Kit." You don't need a studio, expensive lighting or a van full of gear to create classic, timeless portraits. You just need to know what you're doing with what you've got.

This is a practical session with no shortcuts and no assumptions about your budget or your space. I'll show you exactly how I build my signature classic portraits using minimal kit in a limited area, from choosing the right equipment and setting up the light, right through to working with a subject in front of the camera.

I'll cover the kit itself and why less is often more, how to set up and use light for a clean, timeless look, and the skill that gets overlooked far too often: relaxing your subject in front of the camera. Because the best lighting setup in the world won't save a portrait if the person in it looks uncomfortable. These are informal, ad-hoc sessions running between the seminar programmes, so come and find me, ask questions, and you might even walk away with a free portrait.

Booking and good to know

Entry to the in-store day is free. One thing worth knowing: general admission gets you into the store day, but to attend the ticketed guest speaker talks you need to book separately through the links on each event page. My shopfloor sessions are part of the free in-store day, so no separate ticket needed to catch those.

You'll find full details of the wider Summer Roadshow programme, including venues and what's on at each store, on the Wex Photo Video website at wexphotovideo.com/roadshow.

I'm genuinely looking forward to this one. Eleven dates, a lot of miles, and a lot of portraits.

Please do, come and say hello.

I've Joined the Fotospeed Ambassador Team

Now, I'm one of those people who's very selective.

You won't find me jumping on every bandwagon going, putting my name to whatever company offers to line my pockets with silver.

I think long term, and I want to work with companies that think the same way.

That’s why for a number of years now I’ve only wanted to work with Westcott and BenQ.

With Westcott, I've built a fantastic relationship over the years. Not only do they produce world-leading products, but they're great people too, with world-leading customer service to match.

The same goes for BenQ ; fantastic displays, wonderful people behind the scenes and a brand I trust completely.

Fotospeed are the same calibre. Great products, but also a great bunch of people. They're forward-thinking and dynamic in what they do, they put a lot into education, and they genuinely care .

They're proactive, always pushing into new markets around the world. It's exactly the kind of company I want my name next to, and this is why I’m incredibly happy and proud to announce that I'm now a brand ambassador for Fotospeed.

Why print matters to me

Photography has never just been about the moment you press the shutter. A photograph comes to life when it becomes something tangible, something you can hold, frame and experience properly.

A great print transforms an image. It gives it presence, texture and permanence in a way a screen can't replicate.

That belief sits at the heart of my creative process, and it's exactly what Fotospeed stand for.

What's next

As part of my role with Fotospeed, I'll be sharing my creative process, my approach to printing, and the products I trust to get the best from my images. I'm also looking forward to presenting for them at FotoFest on the 6th September 2026 in Bath, UK ( LINK )

So, watch this space, there's plenty more to come 😃

Premium Lifetime is Now Available Inside The Photography Community

I’m really pleased to share that there is now a Premium Lifetime option available inside The Photography Community on Skool.

This is something I’ve been thinking about for a while, because I know many people are trying to cut down on subscriptions. We all seem to have enough monthly and yearly payments quietly ticking away in the background, and I completely understand why adding another one can feel like a bit much.

So Premium Lifetime is designed to keep things simple.

You pay once, and you get ongoing access to the Premium area inside The Photography Community.

No yearly renewal.
No monthly payment.
No subscription to keep track of.

Just a one-time payment for Premium access.

What is The Photography Community?

The Photography Community is a friendly online space for people who love photography and editing their images.

It is a place to share images, take part in challenges, join live calls, ask questions, learn new techniques and connect with like-minded people who enjoy photography as much as you do.

The free side of the community is still there and is not changing.

You can still join for free, be part of the forum, take part in the monthly challenges, join the wider community calls and share your work.

Premium Lifetime is simply an optional upgrade for those who want more structured learning, access to the Premium Classroom and additional Premium sessions.

The Current Premium Options

At the moment, Premium is available as either:

• $15/month

• $99/year

These options are still there for anyone who prefers to pay monthly or annually.

But for those who would rather avoid another ongoing payment, there is now a new option:

Premium Lifetime

Premium Lifetime is available for:

$199 one-time payment

That means you pay once and get ongoing access to the Premium area inside The Photography Community.

No monthly payment.
No yearly renewal.
No subscription.

What Does Premium Lifetime Include?

Premium Lifetime gives you access to the Premium area inside The Photography Community.

This includes:

• Premium Classroom access

• Existing masterclasses and tutorials

• Conference Recordings

• Premium session recordings

• Guest webinar recordings

• Premium live sessions

• Live Image Feedback + Progress Sessions

The Premium Classroom includes training and recordings covering photography, editing, lighting, printing, creativity and more, all in one place inside the community.

The Live Image Feedback + Progress Sessions are designed to help members move forward with their photography in a more focused way. These are practical sessions where we look at selected images together and talk through what is working, what could be strengthened, and how to keep progressing.

Why Lifetime?

The idea is simple.

I wanted to create an option for people who want access to Premium without needing to sign up to another subscription.

A yearly or monthly payment can be great for some people, but it is not for everyone. Premium Lifetime gives you another choice.

Pay once, get access to Premium, and enjoy the training and sessions without thinking about renewals.

Is the Free Community Changing?

No.

The free side of The Photography Community stays exactly as it is.

Nothing is being removed.

The forum, challenges, community interaction and wider activity are still part of the free community.

Premium Lifetime is just there for members who want to go a little deeper and have access to the Premium Classroom, extra sessions and recordings.

A Quick Note About Future Content

Premium Lifetime includes access to the current Premium library and future Premium session recordings added inside the community.

Separate standalone courses, special workshops, events or programmes may still be sold separately.

I want to be clear about that from the start, so everyone knows exactly what Premium Lifetime includes.

Who Is Premium Lifetime For?

Premium Lifetime is ideal if you:

• Want structured photography and editing training

• Prefer a one-time payment instead of a subscription

• Like having tutorials and recordings available in one place

• Want access to Premium live sessions

• Want to join the Live Image Feedback + Progress Sessions

• Enjoy learning as part of a friendly photography community

It is for photographers who want to keep learning, stay inspired and have a place to come back to when they want guidance, ideas or a bit of creative momentum.

How to Join Premium Lifetime

Premium Lifetime is available now for $199 one-time payment.

After purchase, your Skool account will be manually upgraded to Premium, so please make sure you use the same email address you use for The Photography Community on Skool.

If you are already a Premium member and would like to move over to Lifetime, just send me a direct message and I’ll help you with that.

Thanks so much for being part of The Photography Community.

Whether you are here as a free member, monthly Premium member, annual Premium member, or decide to upgrade to Premium Lifetime, I’m really glad you’re part of it.

See you inside,
Glyn

BenQ Creative Pro PD2770U: The Display I've Been Waiting For 😍

There are products that come along and tick boxes, and then there are products that come along and actually solve a problem you've been living with for years. The BenQ Creative Pro PD2770U falls firmly into the second category for me.

Let me explain why …

A Built-In Calibrator. Finally.

If you've followed my work for any length of time, you'll know I've been a BenQ display user for a long time. I've recommended their monitors, used them in my own setup, and talked about them on the channel more times than I can count, but there has always been one thing missing … a built-in hardware calibrator.

Every time a new BenQ display launched, that was the thing I found myself quietly hoping for, and every time, it wasn't there. Until now.

The PD2770U is the first BenQ PD Creative Pro display to feature hardware calibration with a built-in calibrator, and honestly, that alone was enough to get my attention. Hardware calibration is a different beast to software calibration. Rather than adjusting things at the GPU level, it works directly inside the monitor's chip. The result is more accurate, more consistent, and doesn't eat into your bit depth the way software calibration can. For anyone doing colour-critical work, that distinction genuinely matters.

What makes it even smarter is something BenQ calls Light-Adaptive Calibration. The display has a light sensor that reads your ambient environment and adjusts the monitor's brightness to match before the calibration runs. It sounds like a small detail, but it's actually solving a real problem. How many times have you calibrated a display only to find the brightness felt off the moment you sat back down to work? That's exactly what this is designed to prevent.

Also, you can schedule it. Set it, walk away, come back to a calibrated display. No puck, no laptop, no cables. Just done.

Why I've Made This My Main Display

I've switched the PD2770U to my main display, and the reason comes down to one thing: Adobe RGB.

I do a lot of work that ends up in print, and Adobe RGB covers a much wider range of printable colours than standard sRGB. When you're working in a narrower colour space and then sending files to print, you're essentially working blind. What you see on screen isn't what comes back from the lab. The PD2770U covers 99% of Adobe RGB, which means what I'm seeing when I'm editing is as close as it gets to what's actually going to be printed.

Pair that with a Delta E of ≤1.5 out of the box, triple certification (Calman Verified, Pantone Validated, and SkinTone Validated), and the fact that the panel goes through BenQ's AQCOLOR uniformity calibration where every section of the panel, right out to the edges, is individually tuned, and you've got a display that I genuinely trust. That trust is hard to put a price on when you're making colour decisions for print.

The Bits That Make Day-to-Day Life Easier

Beyond the calibration story, there are a few things about this display that have genuinely improved how I work day to day.

The magnetic shading hood is one of them. It snaps on cleanly, blocks ambient light from messing with how you perceive colour on screen, and is built from noticeably sturdier material than what I've seen on other hoods. It's one of those things where you don't realise how much ambient light was affecting your judgement until you block it out.

The Wireless Hotkey Puck G3 is another. It's a small dial that sits on your desk and lets you switch colour modes, inputs, and now with the G3, launch applications directly. I use it to jump between Adobe RGB mode and sRGB mode when I need to check how something's going to look on a standard screen. It sounds like a minor convenience, but when you're doing it multiple times a day, having it on a dial rather than digging through a monitor menu makes a real difference.

On the connectivity side, the PD2770U has two USB-C ports (both at 96W charging), two HDMI 2.1 ports, a DisplayPort, and a wired ethernet port via RJ45. My desk runs a single USB-C cable from the laptop to the monitor, and everything else flows through the display. Clean, simple, exactly how it should be.

The Panel Itself

27 inches, 4K UHD, IPS. The panel uses BenQ's Nano Matte technology, which brings the reflection rate down to under 3%. That's noticeably lower than a standard matte panel sitting at 3.5%, and miles away from a glass panel at over 4%. In a real working environment with lights and windows, that matters more than it sounds on paper.

It's a 60Hz panel, which for creative work is absolutely fine. This isn't a gaming monitor. It's built for people who need to trust what they're looking at.

Is It Worth It?

If you shoot for print, work in Adobe RGB, or just want the confidence of knowing your display is consistently accurate without faffing about with external calibrators and third-party software, yes, I think it is. The built-in calibrator alone changes the equation for the PD range. The fact that it comes with everything else the PD2770U offers makes it, for me, the most complete BenQ display I've used.

I've wanted a display like this from BenQ for a long time, and this has definitely worth the wait.

Content Credentials: The Future of Proving Your Photos Are Real ✅

In a world where AI can generate a photorealistic image in seconds, how do you prove that your photograph is actually real? That it was captured by a real camera, in a real place, by a real photographer?

That is exactly the problem Content Credentials are designed to solve, and in 2026 this technology is finally moving from niche experiment to something every working photographer needs to understand.

What Are Content Credentials?

Think of Content Credentials as a kind of nutrition label for your photographs. Just as a food label tells you what is inside the packet, Content Credentials can tell viewers key facts about an image: who created it, which camera or software was used, what kind of edits were made, and, crucially, whether AI tools were involved at any stage.

Under the hood, Content Credentials are powered by an open technical standard called C2PA, which stands for Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity. C2PA is a cross-industry specification backed by companies and organisations including Adobe, Microsoft, Google, Sony, Nikon, Canon, Leica, Fujifilm, the BBC, the Associated Press and many others.

The key point is that Content Credentials do not judge whether a photo is "good" or "bad". They provide a tamper-evident record of provenance, meaning a factual history of where an image came from and how it was made, so that editors, clients and audiences can make their own decisions about whether to trust what they are seeing.

How Do Content Credentials Actually Work?

At a technical level, C2PA uses cryptographic hashes and digital signatures, the same kind of technology that protects online banking, to bind provenance information to media files. In practice, the chain looks like this:

1. Capture. On supported cameras, a C2PA manifest is signed at the moment of capture, recording the device identity and, where enabled, when and where the image was created.

2. Edit. When the photo is opened in C2PA-enabled software such as Photoshop or Lightroom, the software can log key edits, including the use of generative AI tools, into an updated manifest.

3. Export and publish. On export, the photographer chooses what information to include. The Content Credentials can be embedded in the file itself, published to a cloud service, or both.

4. Verify. Anyone can later inspect the credentials using tools such as the Content Authenticity Initiative's Inspect site at contentcredentials.org/verify, browser extensions, or compatible apps and services.

If someone tampers with the pixels or tries to alter the signed provenance after the fact, the cryptographic checks break. The result is that the credentials are tamper-evident: you cannot quietly change the file or its signed history without that being detectable.

Which Cameras Support Content Credentials in 2026?

Camera support has accelerated over the last two years. A useful snapshot comes from the community-maintained c2pa.camera site, which tracks devices that can sign images using the C2PA standard.

As of early 2026, supported cameras include:

One particularly important entry is the Google Pixel 10. Thanks to its Tensor G5 and Titan M2 security chips and built-in C2PA support in the Google Camera app, it is currently the least expensive way to capture C2PA-signed images. That matters because not every working photographer or journalist will be carrying a flagship mirrorless body at the moment something newsworthy happens.

On the mirrorless side, Fujifilm has committed to rolling Content Authenticity support out across its X and GFX cameras, starting with models like the X-T50 and GFX100S II, with further firmware support planned but not yet fully detailed.

Content Credentials in Lightroom and Photoshop

The good news is you do not need a C2PA-enabled camera to start using Content Credentials. Adobe has built support directly into Lightroom Classic, Lightroom Desktop and Photoshop, using C2PA under the hood.

Lightroom Classic

In Lightroom Classic, Content Credentials are applied at export time.

Open the Export dialogue and scroll to the Content Credentials section, then enable Apply Content Credentials. You will need to choose how the credentials are stored: you can publish to Content Credentials Cloud, attach them to files by embedding them in the JPEG, or do both at once, which is the recommended option for most photographers. You can also decide what information to include, such as your name from your Adobe account, any connected social accounts, and a log of the editing steps recorded by Lightroom.

A few practical limitations are worth knowing about in 2026. Lightroom Classic only applies Content Credentials on JPEG export, not on TIFF, PSD or RAW files. An active internet connection is also required for the feature to work, even if you are simply attaching credentials to files rather than publishing to the cloud.

Lightroom Classic

Content Credentials are set in the Preferences and Export section …

Photoshop

Photoshop takes a slightly different approach because it can record provenance while you edit. Go to Settings or Preferences, then History and Content Credentials, and enable Content Credentials for saved documents. For each document you can turn credentials on or off individually, so not every file has to be recorded. When you export, Photoshop can embed a detailed edit history into the Content Credentials, including the use of Generative Fill, Generative Expand and other AI-powered tools.

The system records a summarised, provenance-oriented history rather than every brush stroke, but enough to show that AI tools were used and how the file evolved over time.

Keeping the Chain Intact Between Lightroom and Photoshop

If your workflow moves between Lightroom Classic and Photoshop, it is worth thinking about the provenance chain. A robust approach is to export from Lightroom with Content Credentials turned on, then open that exported file in Photoshop with Content Credentials enabled for the document. Export again from Photoshop with Content Credentials, and if you want the final file back in your Lightroom catalogue, import the Photoshop export so that Lightroom sees the credentialled version.

Is it perfectly seamless? Not yet. But this approach ensures that each major step in your workflow adds to the same signed chain instead of breaking it.

Why Content Credentials Matter in 2026

Several developments make Content Credentials especially relevant right now.

Photo Mechanic and Press Workflows

In February 2026, Camera Bits confirmed that Photo Mechanic is gaining support for the C2PA standard. For decades, Photo Mechanic has been the first stop in press photographers' workflows, used for ingest, culling and metadata. Camera Bits' goal is to preserve C2PA signatures from C2PA-enabled cameras all the way through to publication, so editors can trust that a signed image really traces back to a specific moment and camera.

Camera Bits has been clear that this feature is still in active development with no public release timeline yet, but for photojournalism this is a significant shift.

Competitions and Clubs

The Canadian Association of Photographic Art has adopted a Content Credential model for its competitions to address AI-generated imagery. Their current stance, through at least 2027, is that the model is optional and educational rather than mandatory, but potential winning entries already undergo verification that includes Content Credentials analysis, AI detection and forensic checks. Images that fail those verification steps can be disqualified, which is a strong signal of where competition rules are heading.

Platforms and the Broader Ecosystem

On the platform side, there has been real movement. LinkedIn now displays a CR icon for images carrying Content Credentials, which users can click to see the provenance summary. Google has brought C2PA-based Trusted Images to Android and Pixel, using Content Credentials and SynthID to distinguish originals and AI-generated content. Cloudflare Images and other services now preserve Content Credentials through transformations, so the provenance remains intact when images are resized or optimised for delivery.

The Content Authenticity Initiative itself has grown into a global community of more than 6,000 members by the end of 2025, spanning media, tech, education and government. This is no longer a small experiment.

The Honest Challenges (As of 2026)

That said, Content Credentials are not magic, and the current limitations are worth being transparent about.

Social Platforms Still Strip Metadata

Many social platforms still strip embedded metadata from uploads, which removes embedded C2PA manifests along with traditional EXIF and IPTC data. Tests have shown that platforms like Facebook remove Content Credentials on upload, which is one reason Adobe allows you to publish credentials to a cloud service as well, so you can still verify an image via the cloud record even if the embedded data is lost.

The Chicken-and-Egg Problem

Camera makers want platforms and tools to support provenance before they invest heavily. Platforms want a critical mass of signed content. Newsrooms want both to be stable before they change their workflows. PetaPixel's coverage of the Digimarc C2PA Chrome extension in 2025 summed up the situation bluntly: at that point, basically no photos published online were carrying C2PA metadata. That is slowly improving in 2026, but it remains an adoption loop rather than a solved problem.

The Perception Problem

At CES 2026, several analyses highlighted that many visitors misunderstood the Content Credentials icon, assuming it marked AI-generated content rather than authentic content with a provenance record. Without better public education, there is a real risk that authenticity labels are misread as AI labels, which is the exact opposite of the intended outcome.

Inconsistent Implementations

Some early implementations have also bent the semantics in unhelpful ways. Critics have pointed out that certain smartphone workflows only add C2PA manifests to images that have been processed with AI features, not to ordinary captures. That reverses the intent entirely: the real images are the ones that most need a verifiable credential.

Privacy and Identity

Finally, there is the privacy angle. C2PA and Adobe both make identity assertions optional and opt-in, so you choose whether to embed your name, social accounts or edit history. That flexibility is valuable, but it also means you should think carefully about what you are comfortable attaching to every exported file. For some photographers, including personal account details on every share will feel like a useful feature; for others, it may feel like over-exposure.

Should You Start Using Content Credentials?

For most photographers who share work online, the pragmatic answer in 2026 is yes, it is worth turning on now, even with the current rough edges.

There is no extra cost, as Content Credentials in Lightroom and Photoshop are included in your existing Adobe subscription and do not consume generative credits. They are non-destructive, meaning enabling them does not alter your image content or require a different editing approach. It simply adds metadata, and optionally a cloud record, at export.

Starting now also means you build good habits early. As more contests, clients and platforms start expecting provenance, having a back catalogue of signed images will be an advantage rather than something you are scrambling to retrofit. Organisations like the Canadian Association of Photographic Art explicitly highlight that embedded creator information and timestamps help strengthen copyright and attribution claims as part of a wider evidence chain. And the export settings give you control over privacy, so you can choose to share just a minimal provenance chain or a more detailed record including identity and edit history.

For photojournalists and press photographers, this is already moving from a nice-to-have to something expected. For commercial and fine-art photographers, it is a professional differentiator that signals authenticity and transparency at a time when clients are increasingly wary of AI fakery.

How to Check if an Image Has Content Credentials

If you want to verify an image, whether your own or someone else's, there are several options available. You can upload a file at contentcredentials.org/verify to see its provenance, including capture and edit history where available.

Adobe and its partners also provide browser extensions that detect and surface Content Credentials as you browse the web. On LinkedIn, look for the CR icon on images; clicking it shows the stored provenance for that image. Nikon users, editors and agencies can use the Nikon Authenticity Service to validate C2PA-signed images from supported cameras. And Leica's FOTOS app can read and display authenticity information for images from the M11-P, SL3-S and related cameras.

Where This Is Heading

The direction of travel is clear. The C2PA Conformance Programme and the CAI's growing membership are pushing the ecosystem towards more consistent implementations across cameras, software and platforms. Open-source tooling is making it easier for smaller developers to add support. And regulatory and industry pressure around AI transparency, especially in news and political advertising, is giving content authenticity a real tailwind.

As Camera Bits put it when discussing Photo Mechanic's planned support, the goal is not to replace trust in photographers, but to provide an additional layer of confidence in an environment where synthetic media is increasingly common.

For working photographers, the message in 2026 is straightforward. The tools are here, they are free to switch on, and they are only going to become more important. Enabling Content Credentials today is one of the simplest practical steps you can take to protect your work and to prove that it is genuinely yours.

Drone Photography: Are the Changes in Law and Restrictions Killing it?

If you have glanced at the headlines recently, you could be forgiven for thinking the drone hobby is coming back down to earth. Between sweeping restrictions in the United States and tighter registration rules in the UK, the carefree "wild west" years of flying are clearly behind us. Yet despite the extra admin, the sector itself is thriving. Recent reports put the global drone photography services market at close to the one‑billion‑dollar mark and growing at around 19–25 percent a year, which firmly positions aerial imagery as a serious commercial service rather than a weekend toy.

What Has Changed in the Rules?

The big question many pilots are asking is how the latest rules actually affect them. The answer depends heavily on where you live.

In the United States, the updated FCC "Covered List" is the main story. In December 2025, the FCC was effectively barred from granting new equipment authorisations to certain foreign‑made drones and components, including DJI products, which means newly designed foreign models cannot be approved for import, marketing or sale in the US unless they qualify for a specific waiver. Existing drones tell a different story: aircraft that already have FCC approval remain legal to purchase, own and fly, and retailers can still sell those earlier authorised models. That makes the situation more of a squeeze on future variety than an overnight flying ban.

In the United Kingdom, the Civil Aviation Authority has confirmed a major shift in weight thresholds. From 1 January 2026, anyone flying a drone or model aircraft that weighs 100 grams or more must hold a Flyer ID, and if that drone has a camera (or weighs 250 grams or more), they also need an Operator ID. This is a big change from the previous 250 gram threshold for most registration, and it brings a large number of small "everyday" drones into the regulated category, especially popular mini camera drones.

Regulators are also getting tougher on bad behaviour. In the US, the FAA and other authorities have made clear they intend to take enforcement more seriously when flights put people at risk, and civil penalties for serious violations can run into the tens of thousands of dollars per incident. The message is straightforward: casual flying is still welcome, but reckless flying increasingly has real financial consequences.

The Rise of the Lightweight Drone

All of this has turned drone "weight‑watching" into a serious buying consideration. Many pilots are moving towards lighter aircraft to reduce friction with the rules while still getting strong image quality.

On the prosumer side, there is intense interest in compact models that squeeze larger‑than‑phone‑sized sensors into sub‑250 gram frames, offering high‑resolution video, good low‑light performance and multi‑directional obstacle avoidance in a bag‑friendly package. For beginners, the sweet spot tends to be affordable drones with strong safety features, such as built‑in propeller guards, simplified flight modes and easy hand launches, which make that first flight much less intimidating.

The regulatory pressure in the US has also opened the door wider for alternative brands. With new foreign‑made models facing an approval freeze, manufacturers that already have authorised aircraft in the market, or those operating outside the traditional big‑name ecosystem, are getting more attention, particularly when they can offer 3‑axis gimbals and 4K recording at a lower price. The result is a slow but noticeable diversification of the shelves, even as some pilots remain loyal to existing line‑ups.

Are People Actually Giving Up?

So with more paperwork and stricter enforcement, are hobbyists dumping their drones and walking away? The broader picture suggests the opposite.

Market research on drone services and drone photography shows steady growth through 2024 and 2025, with strong forecasts into the early 2030s, particularly in sectors like real estate, construction monitoring, inspections and media. That does not look like a hobby in decline. While there is certainly some regulatory fatigue in online communities, usage data and revenue projections point towards more flights, more paid work and more creative output … not less.

On the second‑hand market, much of the activity looks less like a mass exit and more like a "fleet refresh". Many pilots are selling older, heavier aircraft in favour of lighter, regulation‑friendly models that are easier to keep compliant under the 2026 rules in both the UK and US. It is a natural response: swap one or two bulky legacy drones for a compact, modern model that is simpler to register, carry and justify to clients.

What 2026 Really Means for Drone Photography

Drone photography has grown up. It has moved from being treated as a novelty to being recognised as a serious imaging tool that sits alongside your main camera kit. The entry barrier is undeniably higher than it was a few years ago, with registration requirements, Remote ID timelines and more stringent enforcement now part of the landscape. At the same time, the technology has never been better: smaller drones, better sensors, improved safety features and expanding commercial demand are all pulling the market upwards.

For bloggers, creators and photographers, the takeaway is simple. The sky is not closing. It is just becoming more organised. If you are willing to learn the rules, pick the right aircraft and fly responsibly, drone photography in 2026 is still very much on the way up.