P: New AI-powered Generative Remove (Early Access) available across all surfaces.

[Rikk Flohr: Photography]

This post applies to Lightroom Classic and the Lightroom Ecosystem products.
Post Camera Raw feedback here

The Lightroom team is sharing an early look at Generative Remove, which makes it easier to remove unwanted objects and distractions, even on complex backgrounds, with a simple brush stroke. Generative Remove is powered by Firefly AI.

How to use Generative Remove on a desktop:

• You can find Generative Remove under the newly renamed Remove panel (aka “Heal”).
• Make sure the “generative AI” checkbox is enabled before you start brushing (note: when unchecked, Lightroom will use Content-Aware Remove to fill your brushed spots). 
• By default, you will be given a moment to refine your selection with an add or subtract brush. Remember to include shadows for a more accurate result! You can also skip this step by holding down ‘CTRL’ on windows or ‘CMD’ on mac as you finish your brush stroke. 
• Once you’re ready to apply and have accepted the terms, Generative Remove will use Firefly AI to remove your distractions and intelligently fill in the space that’s left by the removed objects. 
• Note: stable internet connection is required to use this feature.
• Generative Remove also lets you choose from multiple variations, so you can pick the one you like best, giving you full creative control. 
  
  Checkout the FAQ and Best Practices

Please give it a try and share feedback and/or report variations in this community forum. It would greatly help to include details like which app you are using (i.e., Lightroom Classic or Camera Raw) and other system details. Our team will continually monitor this thread to track issues to improve the future experience.

Lisa Ngo: Lightroom Product Manager
Posted by: Rikk Flohr 

Update:

Here are some tips if you are having issues with the feature replacing your object instead of removing it. 

• Enlarge your selection - if your brush stroke is too tight, you will have unexpected results.
• Remember that removing an object means painting over it, its shadow, its reflection, and any non-contiguous pieces. If you leave behind a shadow, a reflection, or a disconnected piece (e.g., a hand on a shoulder), the AI will attempt to create something to cast the shadow, reflect, or complete the unbrushed discontinuous item. You can avoid these issue by following the guidance provided in this linked tutorial. https://www.lightroomqueen.com/generative-remove-replace

The recommended order for applying edits is:

1. Denoise 
2. Heal (includes Generative AI Remove)
3. Crop (includes traditional Cropping, Lens Correction, Transform, or any operation changing the geometry of the image)
4. Edit
5. AI Selective edits
   
   If you deviate from that, you may see the removed object remain as a ghost image. If this occurs, you will have to use Update AI Settings, which can be found under the Develop module 'Settings' menu.

[MarkNF]

Also, this seems to be the same issue that theother poster mentioned about replacing a rail. In my photo the house roof is replaced by different roofs. And in the other photo (not posted here) a similar issue.

Mark

[johnrellis]

@MarkNF: "Did you say that you were able to get the LR Remove tool to eliminate the house on the upper right?"

Yes, view my previous post in a web browser to see the images I included.  I've attached a screen recording here (again, view this post in a web browser to see the attachment).

[johnrellis]

@MarkNF: "the jpeg posted in this thread is straight out of the camera, no processing of any kind, no cropping."

The attachment in your original post is only 2400 x 1800 and is stripped of all the camera EXIF metadata. Was it exported from LR at reduced size?

[MarkNF]

John, I'm reposting a jpeg image, straight out of the camera with no processing of any kind. I've exported it from LR Classic using settings of 4,000 for width and height, and 300 dpi.  Also, all exif data attached.  I hope that should be sufficiently hi-res. 

I do not understand why the tool works for you and not me.

Thanks for your help.

[MarkNF]

Hello again,

I messed up in my explanation. The attached jpeg is not a jpeg generated from a PS composite after focus bracketing, but the LR composite generated from focus stacking. My apologies.

Mark


Hi,

I cannot find my original post so am replying to the email instead. Sorry.

Anyway, I’m attaching a jpeg (exported from LR to my desktop) of one of the files that has not been processed. However, it is the resulting composite file that PS generated from stacking a bunch of images. I do not know if that has any effect on the LR Remove function, but when I use PS’s Remove tool it works perfectly on the composite image.

The roof I am trying to remove is in the upper right corner sticking out from the trees.

Thanks for your very prompt reply.

Mark



[MarkNF]

I posted this message (the ones beginning with "Hi Again" and "I cannot find my original post")  in error, please ignore it. Sorry.

Mark

[johnrellis]

@MarkNF, using the high-res 6000 x 4000 JPEG you posted, my LR's Remove does a good job of removing the house in the upper-right corner. I've attached two screen recordings. The first one shows it removing the house, first using Object Aware option, then without (Object Aware tends to exclude the black satellite dish).  The second one shows what happens when you don't quite select all of the bits and pieces of the house partially hidden by the trees -- Remove does an excellent job of generating a replacement house that matches the unselected bits!

If you import that exact JPEG back into your LR, zoom into the house, being careful to select a large boundary around it, and try Remove again, does it work well?

If you're still having problems, perhaps post a screen recording showing what happens in your LR.

[waltweiss]

So a tool where Adobe decides to implement censorship on what can and cannot be processed is not something I am interested in.  How long before you apply the same censorship to Photoshop and Lightroom.?  I am purchasing a tool to use as I see fit.  I am not processing anything I do not own and I am not modifying images other than to expand portrait to landscape and to remove background content.  Your "censorship" has on several occasions refused to function because of supposed guidelines.  In most cases it was people wearing bathing suits.  In some cases they were fully clothed.  I do not need a censor.  I need tools that work.  

[johnrellis]

[This post contains formatting and embedded images that don't appear in email. View the post in your Web browser.]

@waltweiss: "Your "censorship" has on several occasions refused to function because of supposed guidelines.  In most cases it was people wearing bathing suits."

Do you get any kind of notification when Remove doesn't remove a person in a bathing suit? There haven't been any other reports of this here.

I downloaded about 20 beach photos from Google of men and women, half in skimpy bathing suits and half with full-frontal nudity, and each time Remove did a good job of removing them. For example:

 

More likely, you're encountering the "replace instead of remove" issue.  See this article for how to remove objects more reliably:
https://www.lightroomqueen.com/generative-remove-replace/

Most complaints about Remove are addressed in the article. But if it doesn't help, please attach a full-resolution JPEG exported from the unmodified original photo, so we and Adobe can see the issue in detail. With nearly everyone who has posted a problem photo, we've been able to show how to remove the desired objects.

[waltweiss]

I want the people in bathing suits - I dont want things in the background.

For example, this was shot in an airplane hangar and there was a helicopter and part of a cessna in the background.  I had to use content aware and clone tool to get rid of it because Lightroom generative remove refused due to "guidelines"

I still have a lot more to do to the image - but got frustrated with the repeated "guidelines" warning - which only said to review the guidelines

[waltweiss]

here is the original hi res jpeg

[johnrellis]

@waltweiss: "Lightroom generative remove refused due to "guidelines""

1. Can you post a full-resolution screenshot of the entire LR window showing that notification?

2. Which version of Lightroom are you using: Classic, Desktop, Mobile, or Web?

3. I tried both LR Classic and LR Desktop on your JPEG and got similar results in both apps with no notifications about "guidelines":

[waltweiss]

Ok so I went back and took the original image and went through it again and it did a much better job.  The first time I attempted it I got guidelines warning multiple times.  On this run I selected the whole area I wanted to get rid of and it only selected parts of it so I would add to the mask and eventually after a few iterations I got down to this - then I got the guidelines warning.  I don't remember the other images where it occurred - but it has occurred before.

Lightroom classic 13.4 - I always let it auto update so it should be the latest version of everything

Its is desktop on a Windows 11 machine 12 gen I7-12700 2.10 GHZ with 64GB ram nVidia TRX 3060 Ti

So it worked a lot better on the last attempts than previously.  I was quite surprised at the results when I redid it.  I did get the warning one time - but I dont know why - but much happier with the result

[waltweiss]

In the past I got that warning and it said violated guidelines - that may have been using generative ai in Photoshop but I am pretty sure I got it here also.  Just not this time

[johnrellis]

That's very interesting:

I tried Remove at least a 15 times on your photo, trying different things and never saw that error. And I don't think anyone else has posted about it here.  I don't think Adobe intends this (i.e. it's a bug).

If you encounter it again on other photos, please post a screenshot showing the entire photo and what's been selected.

[waltweiss]

So i have the same image as an implied nude and get error. I hesitate to post it although the popup covers most of the body. The background is the same and basically the same image sans bathing suit. 

[Corniger]

Just an idea - have you guys, if you really, REALLY need those nudes removed for the great background, thought about quickly painting over the nude to make it unrecognizable, then try again? If it's just a shape with black splotches  all over, it should work - imo. Haven't tried nudes so far. 

[waltweiss]

not trying to remove any nudes - trying to either convert portrait to landscape or remove things from the background.  The image above is not a nude.  It still gets the guidelines message.  Back to my origiinal comment - I don't need a tool that is going to censor what I can do with it.  What and how I edit is none of Adobe's business.  Especially when they block the tool on images that they mistakenly think violate their guidelines.  The only valid guidelines are the ones that say not to use the content to train ai.  So this "feature" is useless as far as I am concerned.  Who knows what they will censor next - or try to censor.  It is why I still use the classic versions instead of the online versions.  Its why I own other products that do the same thing as Adobe.

[Corniger]

Judging by today's apparent standards, it's absolutely, totally s3x1st and exploiting people who reluctantly took on a job they hate. Yes, I was being ironic. But take into account the bias AI has in general and each and everyone being pushed into either using it or perishing on the cemetary of yonder. Kids at school using Chat GPT to maximise their leisure time will automatically "write" biased content, thus unwanted opinions or "information" are being "rephrased" properly. And since your image may  or may not display a child in a wig and lots of makeup, like in Bad Grandpa, it can automatically be filtered out under said pretense.

That is exactly why it is still very important to have good Photoshop skills - or not even. Generative fill in places is a mere joke that can be surpassed even by average skills.

As I alluded to before - have you tried a temporary paintover on the "child"?

[waltweiss]

I think they fully intend to do it - just their implementation is flawed.  I don't need a censor monitoring what I edit - especially one that gets it wrong.

[johnrellis]

@waltweiss: "I think they fully intend to do it - just their implementation is flawed. "

Here's what Scott Belsky (Creative Cloud Chief Product Officer, EVP) and (General Counsel, EVP) wrote in response to the blowup last month over their clumsy updating of Adobe's Terms of Use:

https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/10/updating-adobes-terms-of-use 

"For content that you upload to our servers — like all content-hosting platforms — Adobe automatically scans content you upload to our services to ensure we are not hosting any c**** s***** abuse material (CSAM). If our automated system flags an issue, we will conduct a human review to investigate." [Words starred out due to bad filtering by the forum software!]

That states they fully intend to scan for CSAM material but the statement implies nothing else, though it doesn't say so explicitly. 

Regardless, it's clearly a bug if Generative Remove refuses to process images not containing CSAM. I encourage you to submit a bug report here:

https://community.adobe.com/t5/lightroom-classic-bugs/how-do-i-write-a-bug-report/idi-p/12386373 

The more original images you can provide in the bug report along with screenshots showing exactly what you selected, the more likely Adobe will be able to reproduce the problem and act on it. In general, if the team can't easily reproduce the problem they won't pay much attention, unless many people report the same problems.  

[colind66897557]

I would like to contribute to this. Adobe flagged an image of shirtless man on the beach as in violation of their content guidlines when I attempted to remove some objects using the generative remove. This is as mundane an image as one could expect, and Adobe precludes my use of their tools to modify it. 

I have the same complaints as @waltweiss. It is my image, taken with consent which, in any case, is not objectionable anywhere outside the most conservative societies. Why does Adobe need to decide what I can do with the image at large if the results it is generating aren't worthy of censure? The man already has no shirt, and I don't see how removing an unesirable object from the background and replacing it will wall has any bearing on his continued being shirtless. If Adobe was generating nudity I might be more sympathetic, but in this case they disrobement is already present and will remain unmodified. 

[Corniger]

He could be a very mature looking child, I'm guessing... 
Have you tried to paint over the person and then replace the layer?

[colind66897557]

The subject in question is very much an adult man. This post is more about providing feedback on the tool than looking for work arounds to the problem. I want it to reduce time spent, rather than require me to find ways around entirely arbitrary limitations 

[Corniger]

I was trying to be ironic. Apparently, according to a previous posting, all this comes down to protecting children. Which is understandable, but badly executed. 

In Photoshop, I didn't experience problems - I just tried, downloading a half n4ked man & bikini woman and saw no issues, so maybe this is a temporary thing in LR?