P: Generated images violate user guidelines

If the bot flags it's own results, what the error message indicates, and the image source of the AI is Adobe Stock, ... um ... 😉

I'm getting a"user guidelines" violation error when using genterative fill on various things. And I'm violating absolutely NO guidelines, unlesscreating rusty metal and crackled paint is forbidden. LOL.

Unless saying "white paint" was a problem. Surely any color is acceptable and it knows the difference between the drug crack, and crackled paint?  Help. Thanks, Bryan S.Welborn

I get the same thing when I tried to add smoke to a picture of a waterfall. I selected the water, clicked generative fill, and typed "smoke". I was then met with the same error that my image had been removed due to violation.

I also tried to have a ninja's cowel, cloth hood generated over my face while I was wearing a red clown nose. I was met with the error. The same thing also happened when I tried to generate "blood". I wanted to replace water in a waterfall with blood.

But the bot isn't flagging the object. It's flagging its own results.

The important thing to note, is that it's the 'results' that the the guidelines say can't be displayed.  It has nothing to do with the source image, but what images the AI finds that will fit the requirements.  For example you have a image with a cropped elbow, but to replace that elbow the best bit image the AI comes up with includes nudity, and bam you get 'guidline blocked'.  This is all due to the AI needed more training, i.e. more source material to work from.

The only solution for this is for the generative layer's mask to be taken into consideration by the currently overzealous censor, and only censor what will be visable.  I realise that people could then simply edit the mask to show the censored content, which is why I suggest locking the mask for any results that go against the guidelines.

Like I said in a previous reply the hands are HIDEOUS. VERY frequently the generation DOESN'T keep the shape of the selected subject. 

OK. I've only tried this twice, but it's been successful twice, so maybe I'm on to something but don't hold me to it, I was attempting use generative fill to remove tape and a feeding tube from the cheek of a newborn baby. This was at the request of the mom because she wanted some decent baby pictures to look back on some day without the feeding tube showing up in every photo.

I made a loose selection of the tube and repeatedly received guideline violation warnings. On a whim, I made an additional but very small selection on another area of the photo (something I could easily fix with content aware or the spot healing brush).

On my next attempt, generative fill worked flawlessly, with three examples to choose from. I tried it a second time and had the same positive results. Then I tried it again with a different image of the same baby. If I only selected the tube, I'd get warnings. When I selected another small area of the photo in addition to the main selection, it worked perfectly once again.