P: Generated images violate user guidelines

[Hematita]

So as you can see, it's a PG-13 relatively inoffensive image of a woman in a bunny outfit. The top worked fine, and I was able to complete the top ear, which is cool. When I tried to extend the bottom with generative fill, though, I got this warning. They're just a pair of legs wearing stockings, and I wanted to extend it.

It feels like a false flag - though I could be wrong? I find myself thinking it would do the same for women in swimsuits.

Figured I'd share here.

[gascolator]

Customer Care case number ADB-32299169-W7S8

[gascolator]

I did flag it. 

To no avail. 

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@gascolator it's called Machine Learning - its learning as it goes. The more feedback and user input that you can give via the reporting features improves the system. This has only be released for less than 6 mo.

[stockphotog.miller]

jay.sims my experience has been exactly the same. The only time I ever have the orange "guidelines" warning is when there's a female in the image, often fully clothed. The maddening thing is the inconsistency of the program and Adobe's complete lack of support on the matter. I was editing a set of images, a nude model in a outdoor scene. there was a junky carport thing in the corner of the image, partially covered by a tree limb making it a bit laborious to remove. G Fill worked like a charm on the first three (of ten) images and then it was a community guidelines parade from that point on. I've sked for clarification directly from Adobe, I have tweeted them asking what the issue was, absolutely zero response. If Adobe wants to censor what we work on using their products they should be fully forthcoming with that and spell it out. Also, they should design a program that either works with nudes or doesn't, not the way it is. if they had just come out and said "you can't use this with nudity present (and sometimes females in general)" I could say "fine, theres a rule and I can live with that", but I've wasted so much time tryring to get something to work with no warning that it wouldn't, it has me for the first time in my life considering looing for a different software to use. 

[paul7nt]

Tried that on a partially nude woman without a head. On a new layer above the image I painted in overups over the nude's breasts and crotch. Then extended the Stamp Visible merge and hit AI Gen. Same refusal dialogue by Adobe was received. Adobe (if you are listening) ease up and allow full AI generation on nude bodies.

[stockphotog.miller]

Same results as paul7nt, The only thing I havent tried is removing the entire model from the image "permanently" and then copy/paste back in. 

[Christopher345829120ql7]

Listen, the software morality police know what's best for all of us, and we should just acceppt that we common folk should not be allowed to do certain things for our own good.

[stockphotog.miller]

It's offensive to me that what work I decide to do is judged by a company I pay for a product, but it's their program and they can put any caveats in place that they feel necessary. What I find truly unfair is that they refuse to come out and say "if your work/art includes any nudity at all you will not  e allowed to use all of the features you pay us for". If Adobe wants to restrict the features we're allowed to use in certain instances then they should discount their price instead of charging us full price and then shorting us if we do something they disapprove of. 

[Guest]

Shoot, I tried to create an image of an o ring... yes, the type of seal that's been around for over a century and has been used in everything from cars and garden hose to the friken Space Shuttle, and I couldn't, all because it violated Community Guidelines! I suppose trying to create a picture of crankSHAFT is out of the picture (pun intended). We pay for this stuff, we shouldn't have this kind of limitation! 

[Nicksonian]

It is unfortunate that Adobe has joined the legions of woke, neo-Victorian prudes. Why does Adobe get to decide what is acceptable? Sure, there are extreme examples that should not be allowed, but even total nudity is now commonplace, and Adobe prohibiting the artistic use of a Photoshop function is absurd.

[Radio Paranormalium]

Remember guys, This Is All About Creating A Safe Space For Everyone. Creating A Safe Space by LIMITING YOUR CREATIVITY and (cursing removed) about every single thing a big ultra-freakin'-puritan corpo doesn't like.

[Dorielle35242488wy3r]

Dear Adobe Photoshop Team and Community,

I hope this post finds you well. I am writing to express my disappointment and concern regarding the limitations of Generative AI Fill tool in handling images featuring the nude figure. As an artist who frequently utilizes Adobe Photoshop for creating art that revolves around the human form in non-sexual contexts, I find the current restrictions to be restrictive and counterproductive.

Artistic expression has long been a fundamental aspect of human culture, and the depiction of the human body is a significant element of that expression. It is disheartening to discover that the Generative AI Fill tool, a powerful feature in Photoshop, excludes images of the nude figure based on the current guidelines.

I firmly believe that nudity in art is not inherently inappropriate. In fact, the human body has been a subject of artistic exploration for centuries, contributing to the rich tapestry of our cultural heritage. While I understand the importance of implementing guidelines to ensure responsible use, the aggressive exclusion of images featuring the nude form feels like an unnecessary restriction on artistic freedom.

Specifically, I am concerned about the impact of these restrictions on the representation of women's bodies. It is crucial to recognize that artistic depictions of the female body can go beyond mere objectification and explore themes of empowerment, vulnerability, and self-expression. By enforcing stringent guidelines that limit the use of the Generative AI Fill tool for such content, Adobe Photoshop inadvertently contributes to the ongoing censorship of women's bodies in art.

I urge you to reconsider these guidelines and to develop a more nuanced approach that respects the diversity of artistic expression. Allowing artists to use the Generative AI Fill tool for their non-sexual, artistic explorations of the human form, including nudity, would be a step towards fostering a creative environment that values freedom of expression.

Art has the power to challenge societal norms, spark conversations, and promote understanding. By addressing these concerns, Adobe Photoshop can contribute to a more inclusive and supportive environment for artists working with diverse subject matter, including the depiction of the human body.

Thank you for taking the time to consider my perspective. I look forward to seeing positive changes that reflect a commitment to supporting the artistic community.

[hectorblg]

I believe I'm not the only one with this problem, or maybe I am.

I just want to make a background for a sign in a 2D video game....

"You completed Level 1"

I typed "explosion" IMMEDIATELY BLOCKED BECAUSE IT'S OUT OF THE GUIDELINES

then I tried "triumphal fist" and the word FIST seems to be another IMMORAL OBJECT FOR THE PEOPLE WHO MADE THESE GUIDELINES.

I would understand "fist punching a woman" or "explosion destroying a city".... but why [cursing removed] you have to censor SINGLE WORDS??????

I just quit with this non sense, and will need to get the image browsing in the web, or with another AI image generator.... which is a waste of time.

THANK YOU ADOBE FOR MAKING IT HARDER THAN BEFORE

[Trevor.Dennis]

I hope I am not going to get into trouble for posting this?  The extent of prompt word censorship is definitely annoying, to the extent that it is close to unusable at times.  Note: I have not tried the workarounds in this link, but I rather think I'm going to have to going forward.

https://aicontentfy.com/en/blog/bypassing-ai-content-detectors-ingenious-techniques-revealed

[D Fosse]

I sometimes wonder how people coped before AI, say, two years ago....

[c.pfaffenbichler]

THANK YOU ADOBE FOR MAKING IT HARDER THAN BEFORE

Before when? 

Also: Please mind your manners. 

Something may appear incredible unreasonable to you but that does not mean the Forum Guidelines don’t apply. 

[hectorblg]

My manners? So now using the word "stupid" to refer to a guideline, which is an object, not against any person, is "against the guidelines"? I guess the forum is as heavily censored as the AI and word "stupid" is censored, no matter if it's not used to insult somebody. My message was perhaps cynical, but not unpolite.

Now regarding to your question, yes the AI is worse than before. Before AI, I just looked for a background in the web, downloaded it, used it and that's all. Now, with generative AI, I tried first "cartoon explosion"... then it was the annoying censorship... I wrote the feedback... tried again with "explosion".... same annoying censorship, wrote another feedback... tried "supernova", not censored, but the results were not as good as I liked. Then tried more things to soothe the word "explosion" like "water explosion", and some others I don't remember, all heavily censored. Then I thought about something else, and  imagined a fist like a sign of triumph. Used "triumphal fist".... the same annoying censorship...."fist showing victory"---> more censorship tried "fist"----> more censorship and realized it was the fault of the "super annoying immoral word fist". Wrote a final feedback, letting Adobe know that their cesnsorship is RIDICULOUS. And in the end, it was like before AI. Browsed for an image, downloaded one, inserted and adjusted it, just like in the old days before DUMB AI, but with the difference that it took double, because I wasted a lot of time dealing with the RIDICULOUS CENSORSHIP.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

I asked you to mind your manners; your post was apparently neither removed nor (as far as I can tell) edited, so please stop misusing the word »censorship«. 

As for »censorship« with regard to Photoshop’s Generative AI features:

In the olden days would you have accussed a Stock Image site that did not offer images of explosions and fists of censoring you? 

If not then the argument that Generative Fill not creating images of those constitutes »censorship« would seem arbitrary. 

[steveb85434972]

i am editing a picture in generative fill of a model in a bikini. no nudity involved. it keeps telling me its against ethical guidelines. how can I get this to stop?

[Nancy OShea]

AI has trouble with human skin. Try using a smaller selection. Alternatively, use other editing methods that don't rely on AI, like Clone/Stamp & Patch tools.

IMO, Generative Fill is fine for limited use cases. But it's not a replacement for other replacement tools. Some things are best done manually.

[JR Boulay]

Sometimes the Remove tool is more useful. See :

https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop-ecosystem-bugs/photoshop-turns-35-and-ai-generative-guideli...

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

Please note: This thread has been locked by admins. Please start a new thread if warranted.

[JR Boulay]

A lock that still allows you to post...

Interesting!

🙂

[jane-e]

@JR Boulay wrote: A lock that still allows you to post...

Staff and Experts can post on locked threads. Others cannot.

Jane

[JR Boulay]

jane-e, I'd never noticed that before.