Nudity and Semi nudity using AI and its imposed restrictions.

[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 

[Starsson]

Thank you C.pfaffenbichler . Please direct me to the correct dept. Where is the Feature Request located? I appreciate your work-around. 

[perfect_cause5500]

Hello Adobe Team and Fellow Creatives,

I'm reaching out today to spark a conversation about an issue that touches the core of our creative process using Adobe Photoshop: the censorship implemented in the generative fill feature. This isn't just about the restrictions we face; it's about the fundamental principles of artistic freedom and responsibility.

Art, in its most profound form, allows us to explore the depths of human experience, pushing boundaries and challenging perceptions. However, the current censorship on generative fill curtails this exploration, imposing limits that are not only unnecessary but also counterproductive to the ethos of creative expression.

Responsibility for the art we create lies with us, the artists. It's essential that Adobe recognizes this, ensuring that tools like Photoshop serve to extend our capabilities, not constrain them. The censorship of content, such as the depiction of scars from battles or surgeries, restricts our ability to tell stories that are meaningful and impactful. Art should confront, console, and celebrate life in all its complexity, and for that, artists need the freedom to depict reality as it is, or imagine it as it could be.

Moreover, the nuances of human form and condition, including aspects like nudity, are foundational to various art forms. The current restrictions hinder not just the creation of art but also the representation of the human experience in its authenticity.

While the intention behind implementing an appeals process is appreciated, it doesn't address the root issue. The process is a workaround, not a solution, and it introduces unnecessary barriers to creativity and expression.

In closing, I urge the Adobe team to reconsider the censorship policies associated with the generative fill feature. Let's empower artists with the freedom to create responsibly, without undue censorship. Adobe has always been at the forefront of creative technologies, and this is an opportunity to lead by example, championing artistic freedom and integrity.

Looking forward to a constructive dialogue and hopeful for a resolution that aligns with the values of our creative community.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

I'm reaching out today to spark a conversation about an issue that touches the core of our creative process using Adobe Photoshop: the censorship implemented in the generative fill feature. This isn't just about the restrictions we face; it's about the fundamental principles of artistic freedom and responsibility.

@perfect_cause5500 , it seems you might be confusing »AI-based image generation« and »art«. 

A certain AI implementation not readily creating the imagery one wants does not hinder one in creating that imagery as artists have done pre-2023 (or thereabouts) and one can draw, paint, photograph, search stock images, create 3D-models, … just as before or use non-Adobe AI-based image creating applications. 

[D Fosse]

" it seems you might be confusing »AI-based image generation« and »art«. "

Ah, yes, I love that 🙂 Couldn't have said it better myself.

I'm still convinced AI is what's going to bring it all down eventually. We've been flying higher and higher, but this time we flew too close to the sun. And with that said 😉

This isn't Adobe's fault. They had to get on board. And I have no problem accepting that AI can be a useful tool for some purposes. But the emphasis is on tool. There's a lot of creative's and artistic's in this post, and that instantly raises a flag with me.

OK, this is just my opinion. But if we're going to discuss, this is what we should be discussing. Not some technicality in the implementation.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

I think I read last year that some AI model achieved a reliable prognosis of protein folding (deducing the spatial structure of a protein based on the sequence of amino acids), something that had eluded biochemists and/or the other scientists concerned with protein-creation and -properties for ages. 

So as far as I am concerned AI has proven to be good for something. 

But I would not be surprised about people making terrible choices about how to utilize it otherweise … 

[D Fosse]

Yeah, that's my point. There are good uses. But as we all know, the road to hll is paved with good intentions.

What worries me is the way it undermines the basic concept of authenticity, in a totally unprecedented way. People compare it to the invention of photography, but that doesn't hold at all. AI is a whole new category, never before seen in history. "Authentic" is by definition a premise for "creative" and "artistic". That's the whole foundation of our conception of art. So that raises the interesting question: how can AI be, or be made, authentic?

This is a deep rabbit hole.

I'm waiting for artists to put this to a serious test. If Marcel Duchamp was alive today, I'm sure he'd get right on it. So far it doesn't seem anyone has taken it on, but it's probably just a matter of time. What we can be sure of, is that it will involve a lot more than just typing in a prompt in a text box.

In the meantime, by all means, have fun with generative fill and firefly. But I think nudity is the least of our problems.

[PECourtejoie]

I think that Adobe decision is very wise, the possibility of misuse of unrestricted AI for nefarious purposes is way too dangerous, and as a publicly traded company, not worth litigation costs. 

[D Fosse]

Absolutely. Adobe emerges as one of the most responsible operators in this field.

They're also invested in the Content Authenticity Initiative, which may just be what can save credible journalism. Every AI generated image is clearly watermarked. Even if you do have to look it up, it's there if you need to know.

[PECourtejoie]

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.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

»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 … 

[D Fosse]

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...

[From Nothing]

I completely agree. We all have our own unique reasons for using this tool so there should be virtually no censorship so as long as we aren't using the content to incite violence or something.

[Mariam Hovhannesyan]

As a user, not an adobe expert, this is only my opinion
I agree and not agree, because yeah it will be great to create what we want, but how can people track those images who used it where, and how, maybe they will use it for fake news or criminals, etc., and all the resposibilities will fall on the ai program. Not anybody as good as you sadly

[JuliO111]

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!

[Jill_C]

You are not addressing Adobe directly here in this forum, and will not receive a response to your long list of questions. Have you read the Adobe Stock guidelines in nudity? Here's the text:

"Nudity

For submissions containing nudity that has artistic value, the model must be at least 18 years old and the model release must include the model's photo ID so we can verify age. Never submit any sexually explicit, pornographic, or immoral material, including material that sexualizes minors."

I would summarize "nudity that has artistic value" as follows: no genitalia, no nipp les, , no sexually suggestive or exploitive poses. 

[daniellei4510]

A simple search for "nudes" on Adobe Stock will answer all of these strangely specific and detailed questions.

[Abambo]

1-8: I really do not see a need to create nudes or semi nudes. Advertising for fashion will anyhow use the real thing.

[Nancy OShea]

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.

[Abambo]

In addition what has been said: submit and see what gets accepted.

[daniellei4510]

I've often wondered about this. As a former figure/fashion/fine art photographer for over 20 years, will models be among the first to start losing business because of AI? Not now, but eventually. No, we will never see a Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition featuring AI models. People who eat that stuff up want the real thing. I'm thinking more along the line of catalog models, male and female alike, who even now, while real people, are basically interchangable, like living mannequins that can be dressed in different outfits from one day to the next, from one season to the next, or from one fashion trend to the next.

[Abambo]

There wont be a Sports Illustrated in 20 years.But yes, the small modelling jobs may suffer.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

@Rangga36724153lvwy , what do you want to communicate? 

[Festive_epicness157F]

I think you will have a hard time creating nudity by AI. Most - if not all - most common AI generators will not allow anything near nudity.

[Abambo]

You can have your own AI for that.

[Chris36872350tl55]

its like buying a power drill and it wont turn on if you're building a bedroom because people get naked in it.