Nudity and other issues which appear to violate Adobe Generative AI Guidelines [merged thread]

[Starsson]

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 

[0x_]

[Orlando B]

"Illustration of a girl on a beach reading a book" was flagged as being inappropriate and against the rules.

No, I’m not trying to make Granny with a dictionary on a cloudy beach—I want the subject to be attractive. And honestly, even if it was sexualized, what’s the problem with creating it?

What if I’m using it as a base layer for costume design, drawing multiple outfits on top? Or illustrating an article about attractive fashion—or even one that explores the idea of avoiding sexuality altogether? This isn’t pornography. It’s artistic intent.

I’m not here to debate morality or tell anyone what they should or shouldn’t find acceptable. I respect the idea that real people—especially public figures—deserve control over their likenesses. But I’m concerned when others decide that I can’t even sketch or generate an image of a fictional person in a bikini.

Adobe Firefly’s moderation has been extremely limiting. In my art center classes, we studied and celebrated the human form—just like artists have done for centuries. The fact that the figure can be attractive shouldn’t automatically make it off-limits.

[Oh.N8]

Hey @Orlando B 

Yes, this can be frustrating and the team is aware. 
I ran the prompt provided. It seems "girl" might be the troublesome word. I ran illustration of "woman on beach reading a book" and that worked. 

Word choice does play into prompting. I ran the same prompt illustration of woman wearing a bikini, on beach reading a book. This prompt also worked.

Cheers
Nate

[duncanr44817148]

This prompt an image apparently contravenes your image guidelines. Absolutely ridiculous

PROFILE CLEAR-CUT ILLUSTRATION AIRBRUSHED OF WOMEN'S PROFILE OF FACE WITH MANUKA FLOWERS FOLLOWING THE CONTOURS OF SKIN

[salim_1844]

AI Content Restrictions: A Call for Artistic Freedom

We live in the 21st century with incredible AI tools for creating graphics and imagery. However, after purchasing Adobe Firefly, I've discovered that creating images featuring human figures comes with unexpectedly restrictive limitations that feel more suited to the most conservative societies than to modern creative expression.

The Problem with Overly Restrictive AI Guidelines

I'm not advocating for pornographic content creation—I'm a socially responsible creator who understands the importance of appropriate content standards. However, there's a significant difference between preventing explicit material and imposing puritanical restrictions on basic human anatomy that's regularly visible in mainstream media.

Consider this: we routinely see exposed arms, legs, torsos, and feet in televised sports like boxing, swimming, and wrestling. Classical art from centuries past—celebrated in museums worldwide—depicts the human form with far more freedom than current AI platforms allow. Renaissance masters created timeless works featuring natural human anatomy without scandal.

Historical Context Matters

For over 500 years, artistic expression has included realistic portrayals of the human form. Even going back 2,000 years, classical civilizations understood that art often requires depicting natural human anatomy. Today's AI restrictions seem to ignore this rich artistic heritage in favor of kindergarten-level content standards.

The Reality of Modern Content Access

We're not creating content exclusively for children—and even if we were, children today already have unprecedented access to far more explicit content through the internet. It seems counterproductive to restrict legitimate artistic expression when truly problematic content remains easily accessible through other channels.

A Practical Solution

If AI systems must flag potentially objectionable content, they should clearly identify which specific words or concepts triggered the restriction. This transparency would help creators understand boundaries and adjust their prompts accordingly, rather than leaving them to guess what invisible guidelines they've violated.

Moving Forward

Creative tools should enhance artistic expression, not constrain it to the most restrictive possible standards. While content moderation has its place, current AI restrictions often go far beyond preventing genuinely harmful content and instead impose arbitrary limitations that would be considered excessive in traditional art contexts.

The goal should be balanced guidelines that prevent truly inappropriate content while preserving the creative freedom that makes these AI tools valuable for legitimate artistic expression.

[salim_1844]

Hi,

I appreciate your thorough and constructive guidelines that hamper our work. I look forward to the time when uncovered arms, legs, torsos...etc. are not anathemised by AI, not only when using Adobe but also all the other AI tools that are out there. It needs minimal planning and well-understood guidelines to stay within the acceptable, beautiful, and respectable boundaries.   Thank you. 

[nicmart]

Yesterday I was prohibited from changing these clothes to "ball gown" or "evening gown." Anything short of a Disney Princess offends the Adobe censors.Censored by Adobe

[QINGCHARLES]

It's the bare arms. It hates bare arms on women. If I have models wearing t-shirts it often won't remove things from the background like a smudge on a wall. If you want to use the AI tools you have to ask any women to cover all of their skin before you photograph them🤣

[nicmart]

The Women's Temperance Union wasn't as prudish as Adobe. Tech corporations are infantilizing America's arts and social commentary. The "work arounds" often suggested by users are akin to the methods of evanding censorship in the former Soviet Union. The contemporary parallel is the morality police in Iran.

[Gourdman]

They're protecting you from all harmful things, just like good, coddling, helicopter parents.

[daniellei4510]

I don't like this particular result, but being less precise about your selection often solves the problem.

[LUK_12S]

1. Í

 

[LUK_12S]

There are too many content restrictions.

[stéphanl14799681]

Votre programme de génération d'image Firefly est nul. 

[Kartika Rawat]

Hi stéphanl14799681!

Sorry to hear that. Please share more info on what's happening. 

Let us know. Happy to investigate.

Thanks, 
^KR

moved to discussions

[stéphanl14799681]

Hi,

Compared to any free AI image generator, your product is way behind. It generates poor-quality images—there’s not much else to say.