Participant

Open for Voting

Limitation of Adobe Generative AI user guidelines [merged thread]

Forum|Forum|3 years ago
August 26, 2022
188 replies
122119 views

Hello Adobe and its collective users

I am writing to you not only as a devoted user of Adobe’s suite of creative tools but also as a professional photographer whose work has been recognized and displayed in museum settings. My specialization in classic nudes has allowed me to explore the human form in a manner that celebrates beauty, form, and artistic expression. However, I have encountered a significant challenge with the AI restrictions placed on editing images that contain nudity, even when such images are created within a professional, artistic context.

As an artist whose work often involves nuanced and sensitive subjects, I understand and respect the complexities of creating ethical AI tools that serve a wide user base. However, the current limitations significantly impact my creative process and professional workflow, particularly when it comes to editing backgrounds for nude or semi-nude images. These restrictions not only prolong my work but also inhibit my artistic expression, compelling me to seek alternative solutions that may not offer the same level of quality and integration as Adobe’s products.

I propose the consideration of the following points, which I believe could benefit both Adobe and its professional users:

Artistic Integrity and Professional Use: Recognition of the professional and artistic context in which tools are used can help differentiate between content that is genuinely creative and that which the restrictions aim to prevent.

Ethical Use Policy: An ethical use policy that accommodates professional artists and photographers, possibly through a verification process, ensuring that our work is not unduly censored while maintaining legal and ethical standards.

Custom Solutions for Professionals: The development of specialized software versions that allow more flexibility for editing sensitive content, with appropriate safeguards to prevent misuse.

Feedback and Advisory Panel: Establishing a panel of professionals from the art and photography community to provide ongoing feedback and insights on how Adobe’s tools can better serve creative professionals.

Transparent Guidelines: The creation of clear, transparent guidelines that navigate the legal and ethical landscape, especially regarding sensitive content, to ensure users can understand and comply with Adobe’s policies.

I am fully committed to engaging in a constructive dialogue and am willing to be part of a solution that respects both the creative needs of artists and the ethical considerations of digital content. I believe that by working together, we can find a balanced approach that supports artistic expression while adhering to shared values and responsibilities.

Thank you for considering my perspective on this matter. I am hopeful for an opportunity to discuss this further and explore how we can make Adobe’s tools even more inclusive and accommodating for professional artists and photographers. Steven Williams

Imaging

Show previous replies

daniellei4510

Community Expert

I'm actually seeing even more examples where I get violations that I shouldn't be getting. As in, more so than in the beginning. This suggests, possibly, that the programmers might be doing some tweaking to see what sticks, based on examples being submitted. Let's hope. More often than not, I can make things work by changing the shape of my selection in the meantime.

Adobe Community Expert | If you can't fix it, hide it; if you can't hide it, delete it.

T

Tommy James

Participating Frequently

3 years later and the complaints are growing. Please forward our latest complaints as well. Also, the "correct answer" that is auto chosen for this thread is not the correct answer. As you can see by the thread, many of the replys have far more likes and comments debunking the "correct answer". The terms of service that is mentioned in it are not being violated as many are saying here and have provided reference photos as proof.

B

beauxlefoto

Participating Frequently

"It's never as simple as it seems. Human society and behaviour are very, very messy. There is no black-and-white answer within that context. Only "it depends" answers apply." - @rayek.elfin

All the more reason to not have any censorship dictated by humans or arbitrary and subjective rules. It is actually very simple... have a checkbox that you are over 18 when you register or preferences checkboxes that you want to view adult content, etc. Social media already has been doing this for decades.

T

Tommy James

Participating Frequently

Actually what is very very plain and simple is that they lower the restrictions so that family vacation photos, and editing of feet, or hands are not triggered and do not allow us to use the service we are paying for while NOT violating the terms of service. Even without nudity, it blocks things incorrectly, and many of us report every time. Well over 100 reports for me with pictures included. The filters and system are broken. There is no other way to defend it.

As far as your claim about schools and children, they sell those in certain packages. Student and business packages. My high school student has the All Apps student package I bought them and I have the regular package. They pay us Adobe Stock contributors depending on which package the buying person or company has. Therefore, they can release highly filtered versions to schools and businesses while giving the general public the option of lower filtered for professional photographers with much lower detection that doesn't trigger like crazy.

rayek.elfin

Legend

...not that simple. The same desktop software is used in schools, colleges, and universities. Both by adults and under age people.

And what about religious institutes? And government places? Or businesses whose management want to avoid their designers/employees from abusing genAI for unwanted imagery?

Adobe software used at home by professionals is often shared with their children.

It's never as simple as it seems. Human society and behaviour are very, very messy. There is no black-and-white answer within that context. Only "it depends" answers apply.

S

Satrap Web

Participant

It's actually very simple. Those paying for and using the Adobe Suite are typically professionals. Place the limitations on Firefly online and remove the lmiitations in the desktop software.

This is a very simple thing to impelement, as a software engineer I should know.

Q

QINGCHARLES

Inspiring

It's definitely the distance to the person too. When I see something in the background I need to erase and it's a decent number of pixels from the subject of the photo I let out an audible sigh of relief as I know it probably won't give me a lecture today.