Copy link to clipboard
Copied
The recommended order for applying edits is:
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Well, that's interesting, it failed. That was send via email since when I clicked on the "Reply" button it shifted to email. Now that I see I'm here, let me try again. If you want/need the raw, let me know.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
[This post contains formatting and embedded images that don't appear in email. View the post in your Web browser.]
@gary_sc, Remove with options Generative AI and Object Aware immediately removed the shadow on the first try:
This usually indicates that there are pixels along the edge that have been cropped out. Did you apply Crop, Lens Correction, or Transform, all of which can crop out pixels? If so, temporarily disable all three tools and redo the Remove.
If that doesn't help, please upload the raw to Dropbox, Google Drive, or similar and include the sharing link here. (The forum platform doesn't accept raws!)
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Filling empty space is something on our backlog. Thanks for the feedback.
Barry
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hate it! A simple spot removal that used to take a second now takes several minutes to process. Totally unacceptable.
Please put it back the way it was.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@silversnaps I would not be using Generative Remove for a simple spot.
None of the existing tools were removed. I recommend using the previous Heal/Clone/Remove tools for simple spots and leaving Generative AI off. They are very different tools for very different purposes.
Here is a nice guide: https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-cc/using/generative-remove-faq.html
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Agree. 2 + minutes to remove a minor small glare on a window with a blue background is unaccepatable. In Photoshop it takes less than a few seconds.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@MackeyRJ, I don't see significant time differences between PS and Lr on Generative Remove on the same image. Can you post a video showing equivalent edits on similar images, demonstrating the difference in time?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Same here. Progress bar takes about as long as in photoshop, but then after reaching 100% it takes a few minutes to display the result.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
It would be helpful to mention which Lightroom Application you use when seeing this delay. Lightroom Classic? Lightroom Desktop, Mobile, Web?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
YesterdayI saw this behavior in Lightroom classic. Progress bar as quick as in photoshop, but it takes a few minutes to display the result.
Surprisingly today the complete processs was as fast as in Photoshop.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Running LR Classic (13.3.1)on a Mac Mini M2 Pro running Ventura 13.6.7
In general, remove object works very well. However, fairly often a random image is inserted in the image. The original object to be removed is correctly done and the background is created correctly but then an image is inserted in that masked space. Often it is a bird or birds. In the image I'm working on, I wanted to remove an object on the far left left of the image. That was some light equipment against the backdrop of a stage. What I should have had was pretty much a dark fill. Instead I got a half of a drinks cup inserted. Half as in vertical.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I don't like it either: with each update lately LrC becomes slower, editing not just with the new additions but also with the standard features
When using the new Generative AI I also noticed that the exported jpg becomes at least twice as big
In general: workflow slows down quite a bit
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Same for me. Progress bar takes some seconds to reach 100%, but then it takes a .... few .... few .... few ... minutes to display the result - unaccepatable.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I AGREE 10000%
Please bring it back to how it was... PS is now easier but such a hassle to open the image into PS to finish off removing blemishes, objects, etc. Ridiculous!
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
It seems to struggle slightly with items in focus against a blurred background - I've just tried it on images of flowers with stalks nearby that I want to remove. After a great many attempts on one image, it eventually removed the stalk and put a fly in its place - and I defintely selected subtract. Whats more, I swear the fly is looking at the camera - a bit of a photobomb. This AI has a sense of humour?! This is literally my first play with it and it looks cool - going to look for images to mess with. It would be nice if one could choose whether the Add or Subtract option is the default.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hello,
Generative removal does not yet work well on lights reflected on glass, as they are transparent. Is it possible to improve the cancellation of reflected lights?
Regards
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Does (or will) use of the new generative remove count toward the Adobe credits that were introduced earlier?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@SuperFabe
Generative Credits are required for Generative Remove, but at this time, Adobe is not enforcing credits for paying customers. More info can be found here: https://helpx.adobe.com/firefly/using/generative-credits-faq.html
I would expect this to apply while the feature is in "Early Access"
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thanks for the response. I thought that might be the case. As a paying customer of the full suite, how can I send my feedback on this credit system to Adobe?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
This thread is the best place to submit feedback.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thank you. My feedback to the Adobe credit system.
I can understand the costs to maintain the backend cloud servers, developers and operational support costs that go into it (former IT Management). Being that the AI/Firefly code will eventually be the framework of all the Adobe apps, I would expect that an All apps subscription increase of maybe some reasonable $5 or $10 annually, single app plans like the Photography or Illustrator plan maybe $1 or $2. would be easier to justify then having to keep track of some mysterious credit based system. For software that doesn't require a subscription (i.e. Adobe Express), it would benefit from this credit system as it would encourage the user to be a paid member. Certainly there will be pushback from the Freeware community as they are being singled out with some credit based limitation, but their voices shouldn't count as much as the actual paid subscribers. This method reduces the complexity of the credit system while encouraging it's continued adoption to the paid subscribers.
Adobe already the metrics to determine the operational cost justifications, but please don't try to make Firefly a profit center.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
so you forced me to update LRC for the generative removal capacity and it still doesn't work. And, I can not go back to the old version. How am I supposed to function with a non-working "improvement"?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi Rikk,
I'm wondering if there's any clarity on situations where "refresh" vs. a forced "recompute" hits credits. It seems like every full "Refresh" (i.e. I don't like the 3 variations, try again, or I changed the size of the area) probably debits 1 credit, based on the FAQ page.
However, sometimes a tweak to an unrelated setting, or some other unknown change, will force a recompute/refresh of AI settings generally. That's obviously fine for the local AI stuff (context-based remove, AI masks) as it always has been, but it seems like it's probably hitting the server again for the generative piece. I may be incorrect there. Do you know if these forced recomputes will also hit as a credit?
Or, if there's no clarity now (which is fine), just something to pass along as a situation to figure out! It would be nice if it didn't.
Some other feedback to pass along re crediting is that as this is as a "removal" feature, it may require more small tweaks on the user end to get that removal right. This may be true after the feature is refined and released beyond Early Access. If each tweak hits another credit, that could add up.
It is beyond my comprehension of Firefly/generative AI processing in general, but it might be helpful if there's a way of partially leveraging local computing power and/or returning a less server-taxing "preview" for 0 credits. Newer chips might make this possible. I just don't know.
All theoretical, and kind of all depends on how the feature shakes out in the end, but thoughts I hope are all considered.
Many thanks.