Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) image tools hold the promise of revolutionizing a designer’s creative process. The increasing supply of this type of tool leads us to consider whether they suit future design professionals. This study aims to unveil if three GenAI image tools—Midjourney 5.2, DreamStudio beta, and Adobe Firefly 2—meet future designers’ expectations. Do these tools have good Usability, show sufficient User Experience (UX), induce positive emotions, and provide satisfactory results? A literature review was performed, and a quantitative empirical study based on a multidimensional analysis was executed to answer the research questions. Sixty users used the GenAI image tools and then responded to a holistic evaluation framework. The results showed that while the GenAI image tools received favorable ratings for Usability, they fell short in achieving high scores, indicating room for improvement. None of the platforms received a positive evaluation in all UX scales, highlighting areas for enhancement. The benchmark comparison revealed that all platforms, except for Adobe Firefly’s Efficiency scale, require enhancements in pragmatic and hedonic qualities. Despite inducing neutral to above-average positive emotions and minimal negative emotions, the overall satisfaction was moderate, with Midjourney aligning more closely with user expectations. This study emphasizes the need for significant improvements in Usability, positive emotional resonance, and result satisfaction, even more so in UX, so that GenAI image tools can meet future designers’ expectations.
Joana Casteleiro-Pitrez (Wed,) studied this question.