Participant

Open for Voting

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

Forum|Forum|3 years ago
August 26, 2022
187 replies
121957 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

B

beauxlefoto

Participating Frequently

"Welcome to AI. I tried to create an image of a pig in a shower or a pig taking a bath and both attempts were banned in Midjourney. Adobe created it with no issues."

What are you talking about? I literally just rendered a pig in a shower or taking a bath with no problem in MidJourney. Its not banned at all.

And again, no one is asking for the AI to generate nudes. We're asking for the AI to do "background extends" or "content removals" of photos that might have nudity or not, even lingerie and glamour shots are forbidden to use GenAI.

B

beauxlefoto

Participating Frequently

"You're missing the point. For one thing, it's not "nude art". You didn't make it, an algorithm did. It doesn't qualify as art."

No, YOU are missing the point. We're not asking for the AI to generate "nude art" for us. We have photoshoots where nudity doesnt even exist... just some skin, a girl in a bikini or lingerie...or even a model in an off the shoulder sweater. The Gen AI is basically useless for my workflow of glamour shots where we want to remove wires, backdrops, extend the background, etc.

"But more critically - you do realize that this is used to bully schoolkids to the brink of disaster? (No, I'm not spelling that out, I'm sure you can imagine)."

What evil intent someone chooses to do with software shouldnt dictate whether something is available or not. If that is the case, Adobe should discontinue Photoshop outright since people can use it for nefarious purposes already, and have been for decades. Thats not how a free society functions, we dont limit the masses for the actions of a few criminals.

daniellei4510

Community Expert

Welcome to AI. I tried to create an image of a pig in a shower or a pig taking a bath and both attempts were banned in Midjourney. Adobe created it with no issues. Live with it. I photographed nudes for 25 years and I have no issue whatsoever if Adobe bans it in Firefly.

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

D Fosse

Community Expert

@Dario de Judicibus

You're missing the point. For one thing, it's not "nude art". You didn't make it, an algorithm did. It doesn't qualify as art.

But more critically - you do realize that this is used to bully schoolkids to the brink of disaster? (No, I'm not spelling that out, I'm sure you can imagine).

Dario de Judicibus

Known Participant

But for what absurd and sick reason should nudity be censored in an image processing product? Most art—I’m talking about sculptures, paintings, and photographs—is based on nudity. In every era. Even in churches here in Italy, we have frescoes with nude men and women! Yet we can't show nudity in an application developed by an American company. How can a software house dare to determine what an artist can or cannot create? And it's a good thing most art was produced by hand because if artificial intelligences had existed centuries ago, we would have lost 90% of the artworks! Do

you realize that all of this is ridiculous and absurd?

Dario de Judicibus

Known Participant

It's a problem I'm experiencing a bit with all American-made products:
there is a real “offense syndrome” in the USA, where everything that might
offend someone is considered politically incorrect. This is a relative and
very hypocritical concept because there is concern about not offending
those who think in a certain "Western" way, not about not offending at all.
For instance, a bare breast is considered offensive, but not an uncovered
head, which would offend many Islamic fundamentalists. So, it's just
hypocrisy. The problem is that if I am a writer and need to write an er0tic
scene, I don't want an AI that bothers me every three seconds telling me
that certain terms are offensive because if I use them, it's because they
are part of the story. If I am a photographer and take a glamour photo, I
want to be able to use the photo editing product without the application
complaining. The choice
of what to write, what to photograph, or what to film in a video should be
left to the author. It will be their responsibility to decide, not the
tool's. Imagine a hammer refusing to drive a nail because it's three in the
afternoon and a neighbor might be taking a nap! We are adult, not children,
and software houses should respect us.

[abuse removed by moderator]

C

Clinton Lubbe

Participating Frequently

@locusofeden I have sent you a message.

Q

QINGCHARLES

Inspiring

I work on photos of professional models and often use AI features like generative fill to try and remove things left in the backgrounds of shoots, or wall electrical outlets etc that are ugly and distracting.

The problem is that Adobe products are made by very prude and conservative American developers for whom a bikini or a n*pple slip is a scandal. (Adobe won't let me write the scientific term for the milk gland of a mammal)

Sometimes I can get around it by cropping the image to take the model out, fix the issue I need and then paste the area back in, but obviously this doubles the time it takes me to edit an image. And often, it just won't do it. That box today was caused simply by having the face of a Playb*y model in the image (nothing below her shoulders).

Can you get a discount from your subscription because the features don't operate?

Has anyone tried to generative fill in Luminar Neo? Does it have any of the same issues? I need a replacement product.

p.s. Generative Fill is fine with murder scenes, just not bare shoulders on women. Bare shoulders on men is fine. T*pless men are fine. (but the word itself is banned by Adobe) Why is this product so sexist? Is there a tort suit available if a company makes a product that so blatently violates the rights of one particular subset of the population?

B

beauxlefoto

Participating Frequently

For the most part I agree with you, except for blaming American developers as prude and conservative. I'm an American developer and conservative, but I am no prude.

[Offensive remarks about racial ethnicity removed by moderator.]

I actually had a moderator from Instagram try to scold me about my photos he removed and "how would I feel if i had a daughter?" type comment.

But yeah, definitely wish we could use generative AI to fix photoshoots with models.

R

Rupert312

Participant

Ich möchte auf den Beitrag von Henrik Heigl eingehen,

"Ich habe eben z.B. "schönes weibliches Model mit schwarzem Kleid und großer Oberweite" ausprobiert und das klappt ohne Probleme oder Fehlermeldungen"

Das Problem ist dass "große Oberweite" manchmal funktioniert und dann wieder mal nicht. Man kann nicht vorhersehen ob ja oder nein.

Ich habe mir von Firefly ein Bild erstellen lassen dass einen Mann zeigen sollte. Unter den erstellten Bildern war eine dass einen Mann mit freien Oberkörper zeigte. Da es für mich gut passte wollte ich es weiter bearbeiten, was mir aber nicht gelang da Photoshop es unter Berufung auf seine Richtlinien verweigerte. Photoshop erstellt also Bilder die es dann selbst als Verstoß sieht. Außerdem sind 80% aller Bilder die Photoshop (Firefly) von Personen erstellt sowieso unbrauchbar, da fast immer irgendwelche Gliedmaßen verdreht oder verstümmelt sind und viele Gesichter verzerrt sind.