ArtCraft has announced "Crafting Apps," a set of seven free creative apps meant to replace major Adobe products such as Photoshop and Premiere Pro. In a Reddit post, the developer explains that the apps were reimplemented in Rust with the help of Claude Opus 5.5, and that frustration over Adobe's cancellation fees was what prompted the project. The apps recreate familiar workflows, and their source code is public. But being free is not the same as being a seamless move from an existing production environment. AI can speed up development, but it does not resolve the challenges of ensuring compatibility with existing work and maintaining the software over the long term.
Seven free apps born from frustration with Adobe's cancellation fees
![FireShot Capture 002 - Crafting Apps\_ open-source creative tools — ArtCraft - [getartcraft.com].webp](https://media.xenospectrum.com/Fire_Shot_Capture_002_Crafting_Apps_open_source_creative_tools_Art_Craft_getartcraft_com_b3d4f180f6.webp)
Crafting Apps is a project that offers a separate app for each purpose, from image editing to video production to page layout. ArtCraft's official site presents all seven as free, open-source software and provides installers for macOS, Windows, and Linux.
Each app aims to replace an Adobe product, but their features and output are not identical.
| App | Adobe product it aims to replace | Main use |
|---|---|---|
| PhotoCraft | Photoshop | Image editing |
| VectorCraft | Illustrator | Vector illustration |
| FilmCraft | Premiere Pro | Video editing |
| LightCraft | Lightroom | Photo management and RAW processing |
| PdfCraft | Acrobat Pro | Viewing, editing, and organizing PDFs |
| EffectCraft | After Effects | Visual effects and motion graphics |
| DesignCraft | InDesign | Page layout and typesetting |
Not all seven are finished, however. In the official lineup as of October 8, PhotoCraft and PdfCraft were labeled "early alpha," and the other five were listed as "in development."
The PDF app's name is also inconsistent: the developer's post calls it "PrintCraft," while the official site calls it "PdfCraft."
The plan is ambitious, aiming to cover Adobe's major creative fields in one go, but a polished, complete production environment is not yet in place.
In a Hacker News post, the developer described repeatedly being troubled by Adobe's cancellation fees and argued that AI makes it possible to reimplement the functions of existing software independently.
On Reddit, the developer also says they have 15 years of development experience and are supported by a team that builds software for filmmakers. Rather than AI completing the software on its own, it appears to be experienced developers using AI in their work with help from a team.
The frustration over Adobe's cancellation terms has a specific background.
In its announcement of March 13, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice disclosed a proposed settlement with Adobe over a lawsuit concerning the disclosure of subscription terms and the cancellation process.
The proposed settlement includes a $75 million civil penalty and $75 million worth of free services for customers. The total is $150 million, but not all of it will be refunded in cash.
It also requires that early termination fees and how they are calculated be clearly disclosed before customers sign up, and that the cancellation process be simplified.
Adobe, in a statement released the same day, said it disagreed with the government's claims and denied wrongdoing, but agreed to settle. It also indicated that it would notify customers, subject to court approval.
Adobe positions subscriptions as the mechanism that supports continuous software updates, cloud features, and new services. Still, the question remains whether the value of paying continuously is balanced against the burden of ending a contract.
Fast feature implementation with AI doesn't guarantee professional usability
The effort-estimate record published by the PhotoCraft team says that eight AI agents were run in parallel and implemented about 70 menu items and major features in a few hours.
Because multiple agents ran at the same time, the sum of each agent's working time differs from the actual elapsed time. This is the developers' own record and does not show the development time or cost for all seven apps.
Even if a large number of features can be implemented in a short time, that doesn't mean all of them are good enough for professional work.
In a self-assessment dated October 10, the development team rated PhotoCraft 0.6.0 at roughly 76% coverage of Photoshop's features, and roughly 45% in terms of the level at which professionals could actually switch from Photoshop for real work.
The former figure is a weighted tally of implemented features. The latter is an estimate that takes into account missing functions and usability issues that matter in everyday production. Neither is a pass rate from independent third-party testing.
The team itself acknowledges that its initial effort estimate was too optimistic.
The early assessment focused on whether a feature existed, so it did not fully reflect polish or real-world usability. Because bug reports came in even for features listed as implemented, the team re-evaluated by separating feature coverage from practical usability.
Development is certainly progressing steadily.
The PhotoCraft roadmap dated October 10 says the macOS 0.6.0 release now supports a complete flow from basic editing through saving and reloading, and meets the criteria for an alpha release.
However, some operations require workarounds, and problems remain in exchanging PSD files with Photoshop. There are cases in which PSD files exported from PhotoCraft cannot be opened in Photoshop, and the team lists this as an issue to resolve before moving to beta.
Furthermore, preserving a file's appearance when PhotoCraft opens and re-saves a PSD is different from rendering it the way Photoshop does from the start.
According to the PSD compatibility explanation in PhotoCraft's README, the app rewrites layer information, image resources, and other data on save, so the saved file does not match the original byte for byte.
Good test results for a standalone PSD parsing and writing library also do not mean the whole editing app is fully compatible with Photoshop.
In real work, simply being able to open a PSD file is not enough.
You need to display a received design correctly, edit text and layers, save it, and have the other party open it again in Photoshop and keep working. Reproducing familiar shortcuts reduces the burden of relearning, but it does not guarantee compatibility across the whole production process.
These problems are not limited to image editing.
The FilmCraft roadmap, checked on October 8, lists the lack of support for loading and using external audio and video plugins as a practical issue.
The LightCraft development assessment also says that a camera color-calibration database based on actual measurements is not yet in place, and that color matching with Lightroom has not been systematically verified.
In video editing, whether you can use the effects and plugins you rely on matters; in RAW processing, whether your favorite camera's colors are reproduced properly. These are key factors in deciding whether to switch.
Neither problem can be solved just by putting the same features and buttons on screen.
Free editing apps, with AI generation services funding development
ArtCraft's business model also differs from that of traditional Adobe products.
The official pricing page offers monthly and annual paid plans, plus generation credits that can be purchased as needed.
However, charges apply mainly to services that generate images and videos with AI; a paid contract is not required to use the free Crafting Apps.
ArtCraft says the apps can be used without subscribing to ArtCraft if you use your own computing resources or contracts with other companies' services.
In other words, the editing software itself is distributed for free, and revenue comes from optional spending on AI generation services.
On its pricing page, the company states that subscription revenue helps keep ArtCraft free and open and speeds up development.
This differs from a model that charges every user a monthly fee for the editing software.
Still, the cost of using the editing apps, the cost of AI generation, the burden of migrating a production environment, and long-term development and maintenance costs need to be considered separately.
The conditions ArtCraft has published can be summarized as follows.
| Type of cost or burden | Conditions published by ArtCraft | What users should check |
|---|---|---|
| Editing app fees | Crafting Apps are free. PhotoCraft code is available under the MIT or Apache-2.0 license | Whether the features you need are there; whether you can make your own improvements or derivative projects |
| AI generation costs | Generation credits are available via optional subscription or one-time purchase. Other companies' services or your own computing resources can also be used | Consider the editing app fees separately from the computing costs required for AI generation |
| Migrating production environments | Issues remain with PSD compatibility, external plugins, RAW color reproduction, and more | Whether you can reproduce your workflow through to delivery using your own work and equipment |
| Development and maintenance costs | The operator says revenue from paid services will go toward developing the free apps | Whether long-term development funding and a maintenance structure will be secured |
This summary is based on the app terms of provision and the PhotoCraft license checked on October 8, the development assessments for each app, and the generation service pricing checked on October 11.
For PhotoCraft's practical assessment, we used materials dated October 10; for the FilmCraft and LightCraft assessments, we used materials checked on October 8.
The table organizes various costs and burdens; it does not measure the cost of migrating a production environment or ArtCraft's actual operating costs. Nor does it count optional AI generation charges as required fees for the editing apps.
If the apps are free to use, more people who previously couldn't try them because of cost will have options.
On the other hand, migrating a production environment may require verifying existing files and revising work procedures. Even after release, work such as fixing bugs, supporting new operating systems, and improving features continues.
If the source code is public, other developers can take over development. But there is no guarantee that people and funding to do so will naturally appear.
The current pricing page alone does not show how much development and maintenance cost ArtCraft can continue to put into each of its seven apps.
Can AI-operable design set the apps apart from Adobe products?
PhotoCraft has a feature beyond recreating Adobe's workflow: it is designed with operation by AI agents in mind.
According to the design described in PhotoCraft's README, on-screen operations and operations by scripts or AI use a shared set of editing commands.
In addition to the GUI, it supports the command line, JSON-based control, and MCP, which lets AI agents call external tools; all of them can run the same editing functions.
For example, processing that opens a large number of images in sequence, edits them, and exports them in a specified format can be automated without a person clicking repeatedly on screen.
This offers a kind of value distinct from simply providing an interface similar to Photoshop.
People edit their work with familiar operations, while repetitive tasks are left to scripts or AI agents. If this division of labor works, it could make production work more efficient.
However, using AI to develop an app and being able to operate the finished app with AI are separate characteristics.
The PhotoCraft assessment dated October 10 also states that features such as AI image generation are lacking. Developing with Claude does not mean the generative AI features Adobe offers have been implemented.
A mechanism that lets AI agents call shared commands is an advantage for automation. But whether the results are correct must be verified separately.
For example, if color or layer interpretation differs from Photoshop, automation could spread that difference across a large number of files.
There is still a gap between being able to automate operations and being able to trust the whole production process to them.
Whether ArtCraft can become a credible alternative to Adobe products depends on whether it can edit familiar files without problems, exchange them with other creators, and reproduce the same work after software updates.
If revenue from paid AI generation services and collaborative development by the open-source community support long-term maintenance, and the compatibility and stability needed for professional work are secured, the way people choose creative software could change.
Users would be able to choose their production environment not only on monthly fees and feature richness, but also on the freedom to improve the software themselves and the flexibility to automate the production process with AI.