Not sure why my images "violate guidelines" (image depicts children)

[Trace35191221nizm]

I attempted to generate video from two different photos of a man and his mother and a family walking in the woods. Both were immediately rejected. Then I used Firefly to generate an image of a man holding his daughter and tried to use that, but it was also rejected. I've attached these images here. I can find no reason that the system would reject these on a content-level. So any thoughts you have would be appreciated.

[droopydog500]

Hello @Woolfy,

Thank you for your message. 

I have merged your message into this thread. I am sorry you are having this problem. 

The Firefly image to video model will not generate videos from images containing children. That is why it would not generate the videos. This is a limitation in this model.

Thanks,
    droopy

[TinyAcademyGroup]

I am trying to generate videos via Veo 3.1 Fast, and it returns errors about user guidelines not being met even though the image start frames are and should be safe where it had no prior problems before or on other video generation sites.
 
These are the types of images I already generated on other sites as recourse and am having no trouble with other sites. What gives Adobe/Google? The other partner models work but they produce terrible results compared to Veo 3.1 Fast. Not to mention they are uneconomical with credit usage. Please advise.

[droopydog500]

Hello @TinyAcademyGroup,

Thank you for your message. 

I have merged your message into this thread. I am sorry you are having this problem. 

The Firefly image to video model will not generate videos from images containing children. That is why it would not generate the videos. This is a limitation in this model.

Thanks,
    droopy

[TinyAcademyGroup]

Actually Firefly video works fine with the image to video (same with the other partner models), just Veo 3.1 Fast as mentioned is not working properly with the starting images. This is problematic because Veo 3.1 Fast is the most reliable and best quality video generations (apart from Kling AI which is not included here). Is there a reason the problem only persists with Veo 3.1 Fast and not other partner models/Firefly?

[Xenohart]

I replied further on to another user's complaints. I've followed this since this was in beta mode. A community expert was telling everyone it was a "limitation" of the software. Finally, Adobe's employees got involved and started saying it was a "violation". However, as I've reported to the FTC, and I suggest others do, too, if you've paid for Firefly, given the amount of examples in the instructions, and in the marketing, that you can create family-friendly videos with kids (and there are multiple examples of this), it's clearly deceptive marketing. They hook people under a promise of what can be done, and then disguise the "violation", and it's not unless you come here to the forums that they tell you that "any" image with a child is forbidden material. While that's just a ludicrously unwise feature of a legitimate AI video generator, it's unfair business practice to people, whether legit artists, businesses doing marketing, or individuals trying to create something for themselves, to offer that as a service and then use a bait and switch tactic to deny that service. Not shocking and very disappointing these days with multi-billion dollar companies that profitted from artists, and while there's no "rule" that they have to offer every service - the fact they do offer it and then deceptively hide it, is the problem. This is a growing probelm. where Midjourney, Stability AI, Apple, Google, and Meta are all facing serious consumer legal challenges for deceptive marketing just like this. Reporting or not reporting Adobe to the FTC is entirely your choice / decision. I don't produce anything that has kids in it and only report for the sake of making sure that fellow artists and my I.T. customers at least have somebody out there trying to protect them. But, there's the truth. As I said, you can scan down the forum and see my reply to the response given to TTNY. Thank you. I hope your day is well.

[cinemascene]

bon alors maintenant , on me dit que les images que je viens de créer par adobe ne respectent pas les consignes d'utilisation  ! .. il faudrait vous mettre d'accord , on devient fou à force de chercher comment détourner le systeme qui déraille ..  voyez les images  que j'ai créées avec Nano Banana..  j'ai demandé à VEO 3.1 de me créer une sequence entre les 2 .. non ce n'est pas permis .. pourquoi ? 

[cinemascene]

et c'est pareil avec le modele ADOBE ! 

[droopydog500]

Bonjour @cinemascene,

I have merged your message into this thread. I am sorry you are having this problem. 

The Firefly image to video model will not generate videos from images containing children. That is why it would not generate the videos. This is a limitation in this model.

Bien à vous,
droopy

[pit_graf5421]

Hallo, alles gut und schön mit Kindern aber ich habe ein 50 Jahre altes Bild meiner frau ohne Kinder und untergeordnete Objekte. Eigenes Foto und verstösst gegen die rechte ich kann da nichts finden.

[droopydog500]

The model is not perfect at determinining what is a child or not. In this case, the youthful look of this woman seems to trigger the child restriction. I asked for this photo to be looked at.

    droopy

[TTNY]

firefly not generating video of my grandaughter using prompts, unable after 5 goes - keeps saying something went wrong. have done several Ai generated videos this is the first time i have had this issue. could it be that i am using an image of my grandaughter as a baby ??

[SamarthS]

Hi @TTNY, 

Thank you for reaching out, and I apologize for the issue. Firefly will not use a reference image of a child to create a video. 
This will give you a violation error. Please create a video without any reference image and check. 

[TTNY]

yeah - I thought as much - just wanted to check though. many thanks for the reply. its understandable. again thanks

[Xenohart]

I disagree with this answer, and I believe users deserve an accurate explanation. I have been following this issue for a while as an artist using Adobe and frankly, have grown weary of the lies. Nowhere in the public Firefly or Adobe Generative AI guidelines does it explicitly state that “Firefly will not use a reference image of a child to create a video.”

The published guidelines describe appropriate restrictions, such as a zero-tolerance policy for CSAM and a prohibition on any abusive depictions of minors. Every LEGITIMATE artist AGREES with those rules. However, none of the official documents say that a user may not upload an image of a child as a reference, nor do they say that Firefly will block Image to Video if a child is present in the image. The only place this rule is even hinted at is deceptively scattered in forum replies, not in the Firefly Guidelines, the Generative AI Acceptable Use Policy, the Terms of Use, or any visible documentation.

This creates a real transparency issue because Adobe actively advertises reference image workflows that include children, such as the “child blowing bubbles in autumn” example, and encourages users to guide their creative work using such images. Firefly allows this in other modes, yet silently blocks it in Image to Video without any published rule explaining why and deceptively hides the reasoning as an "error".

That is a material, undisclosed product limitation. When a company sells a feature and then withholds that feature based on rules that are not published, and provides only a generic violation message that does not match the posted guidelines, it falls into deceptive business practice territory under the FTC Act, state consumer protection laws, and basic contract law related to reasonable expectations.

While Adobe’s ToS contain broad discretion clauses, those clauses do not eliminate the obligation to disclose material product restrictions that affect core functionality, especially when the public marketing suggests the opposite. A discretionary clause does not give a company permission to operate with hidden rules that change how its paid features work in practice.

Users deserve clarity. If Firefly has a blanket restriction on using images containing minors in the Image to Video tool, that rule needs to appear in the published Firefly Guidelines, the Acceptable Use Policy, or the product documentation, not only in forum replies after paying customers discover the limitation themselves.

This is completely intolerable policy behavior from a company that has been repeatedly in trouble for continuous violations of its user's rights.

[smaudlin]

My niece is in the hospital and I am trying to create a fun movie based on one of the attached images for her but I continue to get "We can't process this prompt because the reference image doesn't meet our User Guidelines."   I am adding AI to my portfolio of services for my company.  Currently I am using Envato and it is OK.  But as I am a Premier Adobe member I thought Firefly might be better but I am unable to use images like the attached.  Please advise.  I am also considering getting the Adobe AI certification but if I am going to be tied to using Firefly and if Firefly won't allow me to use images for a reason I can't understand then I will learn elsewhere.  I love Adobe and want to continue to be part of the family.  

Please advise.

[daniellei4510]

Firefly (like ChatGPT, Gemini and others) will not create a video if it detects a child or children in the reference image.