Skip to main content
Participant
August 26, 2022
Question

P:Limitation of Adobe Generative AI user guidelines [merged thread]

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 

377 replies

Participating Frequently
June 4, 2024

I noticed that Photoshop.  just like many places in AI, does not support nudity.    That's a huse mistake.  Photoshop is used in art with nudity all the time.     I am sure the root of this has to do with the AI community but i would advise Adobe to re-consider..    That are many tools now which ignore the AI community guidelines on nudity.

Translate
Participating Frequently
June 4, 2024

Sorry.  deplorable grammar here, ( two mis-spellings)     It is a "huge" mistake to govern nudity and "there" are many tools which now support nudity.     Why are we allowing AI to govern our artistic instincts?       Come on now..    Don't restrain artists and the very basic level of using Photoshop. 

Translate
Kevin Stohlmeyer
Community Expert
Community Expert
June 4, 2024

@sjedens This has been discussed multiple times in the forum. My question to you is if it was allowed, what would prevent someone from using this to create nude images using another person? As you stated, this is the route many AIs have taken to prevent misuse.

Translate
Kevin Stohlmeyer
Community Expert
Community Expert
May 17, 2024

There are numerous posts regarding similar topics in the forum. The response has always been referred back to the Usage Guidelines in order to prevent misuse of the service. 

Many users may have good intentions or in your case, a use for artistic needs, but how do you determine that vs someone using this to manipulate someone to remove clothing or other misuse?

https://community.adobe.com/t5/adobe-firefly-discussions/explicit-images-in-firefly-premium-subscription/m-p/14191291#M5053

https://community.adobe.com/t5/adobe-firefly-bugs/generative-fill-censorship/idi-p/14258069

 

Translate
Participant
May 17, 2024

I understand that the nude female form can be misused in our weird society but I am a boudoir photographer and would like to, as an example, I would like to add angel wings to a nude female figure. since the client is on my computer and not being generated by Firefly why can't I do this?  The female form is a viable customer base and Firefly is limiting the use of creative  additions to these clients.  

Adobe Stock has many tastefull nudes so obviously Adobe recognizes the female form as an artform.

 

 

Translate
Participant
May 11, 2024

Ich verstehe nicht warum Begriffe wie vollbusig oder großes Dekolletee nicht erlaubt sind. Das hat nichts mit Sexismus, Po-n- oder ähnlichem zu tun. Ich wollte ein Model erstellen mit großer Oberweite für einen Modeflyer, sämtlich Begriffe wurden nicht angenommen. Dann habe ich ein Bild aus einer Datenbank gekauft. Wofür Firefly wenn ich dann doch wieder zukaufen muss?

Translate
Henrik Heigl
Community Expert
Community Expert
November 4, 2024

Hallo,

 

es mag eben sein, dass die entsprechenden Begriffe eben nicht passend sind. Ich habe eben z.B. "schönes weibliches Model mit schwarzem Kleid und großer Oberweite" ausprobiert und das klappt ohne Probleme oder Fehlermeldungen. Man kann entsprechende Begriffe auch umschreiben, damit diese eben nicht als anzüglich oder gegen die Guidelines verstoßend angenommen werden. Ich hoffe, das hilft etwas.

 

Translate
regards,Henrik
Squeebiscuit
Participant
May 9, 2024

Platform: firefly.adobe.com

Bug: I created a human male reference image to use as a pose reference. His genitalia are covered with the equivalent of swim trunks or briefs. The image is instantly removed when I submit the prompt with a pop-up stating it violates user guidelines. I'm constantly running into this sort of problem with both reference images and prompts with zero feedback on what the filter found offensive. I'm 100% behind Adobe's ethical practices, but these filters are ridiculous and render the product nearly useless for a production environment. Simply too much time is wasted on what seems like random and arbitrary "no nos."

[Edit: Had to remove the reference image from this post because the filters here state that it contains naughty-bits. Even though the entire area was painted over from hip to hip with opaque flat white.]
[Edit #2: Had to remove the more common English usage of the same "g" word I used in my bug description in order to submit the post. The error was message was hilarious: "The message body contains g*****ls, which is not permitted ..."]

 

Translate
Kevin Stohlmeyer
Community Expert
Community Expert
May 9, 2024

What prompt were you using?

Translate
Squeebiscuit
Participant
May 10, 2024
It happens regardless of the prompt I use. The first prompt was "A human
skeleton" and the only complaint about the prompt was that it was too
short.  Longer prompts produce the same reference image removal with a
violation pop-up, but without the prompt complaint. The last prompt I
tried was "A man standing in the woods".
Translate
c.pfaffenbichler
Community Expert
Community Expert
April 14, 2024

@Rangga36724153lvwy , what do you want to communicate? 

Translate
Inspiring
April 13, 2024

I generated AI images in fashion segment. Unfortunately, I suspect that on the Internet and specifically on Adobe there may be different concepts about permitted nudity in advertising photography. So what are the rules regarding nudity? I have those questions.

 

Can you be specific about the categories?
1. Female nipp 
2. Male nipp
3. Girl in bikini or underwear (regular design, nothing visible, just sport style)
4. A girl in slightly see-through underwear (skin visible but not nipp, lace is always see-through, I repeat that we are talking about an advertising photo for clothes)
5. A girl in see-through underwear (where you can see the kinds outline of the nipp, but nothing at the bottom of course). For example bra / or crop top but without bra, theres nipp shape
6. A girl with a completely bare breast, but with some kind of decorative detail covering the nipp for 100%. So the entire shape of the breast is visible, but there is a decorative heart or mini bikini on the nipp.

7. The naked back of a woman (from behind, but it is clear that she is not wearing a bra, bottom is normal clothing, for example, imagine a photo of a back massage).

8. There are different policies in photography about what the bottom of pantie should look like. If we are talking about advertising of the 00s, then there is, let’s say, a straight line (which in reality does not exist in life almost in any clothings types). If we are talking about advertising in the 2020s, then there is already a more realistic picture with a visible form. What does Adobe think about this?

 

Each question talks about advertising of swimsuits, underwear, summer clothes in different forms (crop tops, bikini tops, mini-bras). In general, there are two categories: romantic lingerie for 30s 40s women / and bright, rich summer colors for 20s 30s girls. 

 

Thank you in advance!

Translate
Nancy OShea
Community Expert
Community Expert
April 13, 2024

Stock is a global company.  In some regions, nudity is taboo.  Even if it's accepted by Stock, your content won't get passed strict regional vetting processes which could adversely impact visibility & sales. Provocative content won't appeal to everyone.  Just something to consider.

 

 

 

 

Translate
Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert
Inspiring
May 30, 2024

Well, I'm not interesting of doing something provocative, its just 2024 you know. At many places I see those photos already. Its not about to sell it to Iraq people.

Translate
D Fosse
Community Expert
Community Expert
April 7, 2024

He was.

 

As an artist, he was quite obsessed with chance and randomness, but by putting it into a much larger context he was able to turn it into valid artistic tools. And that points to a possible way for artists to approach AI.

 

He worked on the Large Glass for 8 years, so maybe there are people busy at work out there now...

Translate
c.pfaffenbichler
Community Expert
Community Expert
April 7, 2024

»If Marcel Duchamp was alive today, I'm sure he'd get right on it.«

Wasn’t he deeply into chess in his later years? 

So AI might have been doubly interesting to him … 

Translate
PECourtejoie
Community Expert
Community Expert
April 6, 2024

Yes, Adobe is the adult in the room. A company that caters for artists knows that AI is way to easy to be used by any bad person to hurt another than by artists to please others.

Translate