AI guidelines overly restrictive
I can't be the only user finding the AI's enforcement of community guidelines infuriatingly puritanical. Every idea I have for artistic expression seems to be taboo; it's like I have some priggish moralist constantly looking over my shoulder waggling its finger at every thought I attempt to express. With the generative fill, even the most innocent request can be rejected because something elsewhere in the image is deemed too suggestive or too violent or just not up to its priggish standards of wholesomeness. I can appreciate Adobe mighn't want its name associated with the creation of hardcore pornographic images, for example. But must everything be rated PG? And even when it is. Consider this example.
I'm working on the illustrations for a children's book I've written, a tale for five-year-olds about puppy dogs. One page reads: 'It started just the day before/ In Leafy Green Reserve / A park where dogs all run and play / A lark all dogs deserve." So, to use as the background, I asked Firefly to generate: 'A leafy green park with a lush lawn and big, shady trees." Took me a moment to figure out how that one could be thought in violation of the AI's pearl-clutching community guidelines. Well, Adobe, your attempts to stifle my freedom of intellectual expression says less about my aesthetic vision and more about what your programmers must be smoking.
