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.

[phil bauch]

Hi @Pete.Green , as we do see all more clearly now, putting a period (aka full stop) often fixes this problem (experienced beta users no do know this, while newcomers are still annoyed as they fear restrictive censorship behind this message and forget that it is still a beta version. I felt the same way at the beginning, first the excitement, then the disillusionment. I now find that this trick kills the message 99% of the time, and I see Firefly as a great addition to the daily workflow. Sure, it doesn't have the genrative abilities of other AI's, but that's not the point either. For corrections of any kind, which is the main part of Photoshop work, it's a great tool, and a real timesaver.

Three short questions and a suggestion:
1. What exactly does the period trick do behind the scenes on the programming side? (no company secrets, just to better understand the prompt logic)
2. Is there a general page from Adobe whith prompt tips and keywords, or is this planned for the release?
3. Is there an expected release date yet?

Regarding the unloved hint: Why not provide a direct feedback option right away in this modal? I think that would be a clear win-win situation, both user experience, as well as feeding your feedback database

Find attached a small demo, which would make me as a user way happier than the suspected blue (well, orange) lights of the vice squad 😉

Cheers, Phil

[daniellei4510]

"Is there an expected release date yet?"

Well, considering that Photoshop's Neural Filter for Depth Blur was first introduced in July of 2021 and that it still remains in beta, I think it will be quite some time before we see a fully working version of Generative Fill. 🙂

[Graham24508943nobd]

I honestly can't see it happening anytime soon. I'm not a kick on the backside off 70, so I reckon I'll be pushin up the daisies before it get's released. FAR too many bugs yet.

[thekohlervillager]

I would agree. I got a warning over a common word (don't remember what it was, now) that wasn't being used for anything remotely related to sex. But it was a word that COULD be used for that purpose. I would've thought AI could detect the context of the photo. I did report it. 

[Roxksie]

When asking the Ai to make a texture seemless it keeps sending me to the Adobe terms of service which suggests that the ai keeps attempting to create somethings it was never asked to make

[Костя5D95]

Почему это не работает? :((((

[granadaprophoto]

I am having the same issues. Client would like a different cut of the swimwear and Adobe AI keeps adding coverage, sportsbras, full coverage swimsuits on the model every time. It is very frustrating.

[kevin stohlmeyer]

Hi @granadaprophoto what are you entering for a prompt? One reality users are going to have to deal with is learning how to enter specific, detailed and accurate prompts with any AI in order to get better results from the generation. I expect a big market on training materials for designers, photographers, etc to train them how to use effective AI and not rely on random results.

[Jan Bertman]

Adding a prompt worked for me when I tried it for the second time. I just updated to version 24.7.0. Hope you all can figure out this bug. Thanks for the beta, I absolutely LOVE it! It's a game-changer. 🙂

[Carl Caylor]

I keep getting a message that I am violating the use of generative fill.  I am now working on removing cords from a bathroom.  I have also had the same thing many times near a nose on a face. Or items against a person.  How can we get around this?

[Graham24508943nobd]

Add a period (.) or full stop (.) to your request

[Droxine]

Community Guidelines restrictiveness renders RF (late July 25.0.0 beta) almost to the point of being useless except for the most mundane and safe tasks. I don't get it. Community guidelines should be enforced on saving files in Adobe public accessible and viewable areas, not while creating - editing. I would think that cloud server usage would be more important, as multiple failed attempts by virtually everyone that uses it have to be an issue. These falures MUST be wasting a lot of server resources. The AI is rather amazing in its technical abilities, but is absolutely awful at discering true X rated imagery. Who cares what the rating is if other measures are in place as I alluded to at the beginning. Pretty damn ironic that most of the violations I get are fills that the AI created. RF has been out long enough to address this despite it being a so called beta. This minimum age thing to use RF is also just madness .. though I'm well over 18. Adobe programmticlly impresses me somewhat sometimes, but often has me looking for alternatives ..

[Graham24508943nobd]

I had one earlier where i had a woman on the beach. I'd generated her head about 15 times as her faces were so hideous. Three of them violated user guidelines. My last one generated a mans head with long hair, and THAT too violated user guidelines 😅😅😅.  It certainly violated my brain before dinner LOL

[Graham24508943nobd]

Has anyone else found that trying to generate any part of the human body since the last update has been almost impossible ?

I've been trying to get a horribly deformed mouth to suit a pretty face but it's taaken me 20 attempts. Here's three of the horrors I've had to endure so far. As for limbs ?  Sheeeesh what a joke. One woman had four arms, with the green head she looked so much like Medusa I had to get her off my screen in case she turned me to stone .  My opinion is that generations have become much much worse 

 

 

 

[SilverIrisPhotography]

Hi there!

I am trying to edit a photo in the photoshop beta, and all I am trying to do is replace a floor where a mother and daughter are standing. However, I keep getting a notification saying that "The generative fill has been removed due to guideline violations" which is totally not true! 

I'm thinking this is a bug. 

[András5C1C]

If I don't need prompting, my solution is to turn the layer to Invert by an Adjustment layer. Merge, select and use generative fill. If you are happy with the result turn it back inverting it back.

[David30122720qek7]

The "looking for alternatives" is key here. I run a business and spending hours trying to coax PS into letting me put a bucket on a beach without a violation means that I don't use it. Ultimately another company will do it properly, and PS will lose out.

[Claudivan30426554ysia]

Censorship! Since the last update, the tool has become practically unusable. The yellow warning constantly pops up, everything is offensive. I believe the community wants to pay for something that doesn't restrict their creativity. Personally, if this continues until the end of the month, I will cancel my subscription. It seems like everything is offensive in the latest beta version.

[Guillermo30570723t76n]

Hola, el relleno de la ia detecta que violo sus reglas constantemente, soy fotógrafo de bebés recién nacidos, podrían ajustar los filtros de la ia un poco menos severos

[Graham24508943nobd]

I agree, not only the warning box, but the actual generations have become a LOT worse IMO.

[defaultgh5c5ca9s2ud]

I'm using Generative Fill to blend the edges of layers. 6-8 out of 10 times the tool reports that the generated images violate the guidlines. 100% of the time the content of the selection is entirely benign — a shirt sleeve, a shoe, a window, a section of someone's ankle, the whispy hair around the top of someone's head, etc. The selection is often so small it's difficult to even imagine what it could be trying to generate that is violating the guidelines. It appears to happen most ofen anywhere in proximity to anything that is similar in color to a white person's skin. It's incredibly frustrating.              

It could be helpful to at least see tiny examples of what was generated so that users can actually give feedback on whether the generated content obviously violated the terms. Or at least have the error message report what it thinks it generated that violated the guidelines and let users report when the reason it gives is incorrect.

[kevin stohlmeyer]

@defaultgh5c5ca9s2ud what are you entering for a prompt or are you just rolling the dice and hoping for an outcome?

[defaultgh5c5ca9s2ud]

Yes and no. It's more likely to generate something if a prompt is entered, however, a prompt basically always produces worse results in a use case like this. In my particular example, fussing with the exact pixels of the selection several times eventually generated something I was looking for, while any reference to "shoes" would always try to fill the area with part of a Converse-style sneaker, apparently no matter how it was worded, whether very general or very specific.

[KaiserBoy]

Put a "." (period) in the input dialog space and all will be well.

[GABRIEL31368664lswz]

My common violations. Brown armchair arm he insists on blocking anyway.