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.

[SilmarilCreator]

So I'm aware generative fill is not meant to create nudity, but i have a bunch of sexy pictures where some of them include nudity and the images themselves are smaller than I'd like & i wish to extend the canvas to my preferred desktop size (2560x1440) & then have the generative fill, fill out the background.

Is this still possible and okay in regards to the terms of service?

I don't want to start a subscription only to find out I can't use it for the main purpose i wanted it for.

[Ged_Traynor]

@SilmarilCreator you can read the user guidelines here

https://www.adobe.com/legal/licenses-terms/adobe-gen-ai-user-guidelines.html

[SilmarilCreator]

Thanks Ged,

But the reason i ask is because i don't find the user guideline specific enough to understand whether my scenario is allowed within those guidelines.

As i understand it, it says: Do not use the generative AI to create pornographic material or explicit nudity, but i'm only interested in using the generative fill functionality to create boring backgrounds. However the original parts of the image could contain nudity.

[mrphototx]

I was trying to extend the image below, and GF did fantastic on the left, right and top, but when it came to the bottom, I got a violations error!  THAT IS HER ARM!!!  There is NOTHING wrong with this image and it should not have been flagged. And thanks to AI's failure to know what an arm is, I have multiple violation errors reported on my account!  Remove them, and fix this.

[Graham24508943nobd]

I'm sure 99.9 % of us have dozens of violation errors for no reason what so ever. Ignore them and carry on as normal

[Pao0927]

I am not even doing anything in the body of a person now. See the white area I am selecting. I Just need to extend the background of this photo (a classroom with children), so the image adjusts to the different formats I need to generate and it won't let me, telling me it violates the guidelines.... I definitely understand the need to regulate these tools, but the restrictions need to be smarter.

[Graham24508943nobd]

when I was doing a scene, I typed in child. VIOLATING GUIDELINES.    I typed in kid... Works fine.  Bloody daft !!

[daniellei4510]

Are you using Generative Fill or Generative Extend, which is new in the latest version of photoshop?

[3Hounds]

I installed the latest update of PS Beta this morning (25.0), worked on 3 images... 2 Female headshots and 1 Boudoir/Lingerie shot. I received no guidlines warnings and no scary monster generations. No fingers or toes in any of the shots, so time will tell.

I did have to rerender multiple times to get results that I could blend in to a satisfactory result, but it was a lot less time and effort than doing it the old way... meaning 1 month ago.

[yassine249163050owt]

I would like to express my deep concern regarding the implementation of restrictive "woke" guidelines within your creative platform. As a long-time user of Adobe products, I have always admired the company's commitment to empowering artists and creators to express themselves freely. However, recent experiences have left me feeling frustrated and disheartened.

Specifically, I encountered an issue while attempting to generate an image of a fit person using Adobe's platform. To my surprise, I found that my creative endeavors were hindered by these guidelines, which appeared to limit the visual representation of certain body types or traits.

As a user, I firmly believe in promoting inclusivity and diversity within the creative space. Artists should have the liberty to depict individuals of all shapes, sizes, and backgrounds without fear of running afoul of rigid guidelines. Creativity thrives when it knows no boundaries, and by imposing restrictions on harmless visual elements, the very essence of artistic expression is compromised.

It is essential to recognize that portraying a fit person is not synonymous with promoting body shaming or exclusivity. Fitness is a lifestyle choice for many individuals, and it should be celebrated as part of the diverse human experience, not restricted by guidelines that may inadvertently limit creativity.

I implore Adobe to reconsider the application of these restrictive guidelines and adopt a more balanced approach that encourages artists to explore a wide range of ideas and representations. By providing educational resources and support, Adobe can help creators approach sensitive subjects with tact and respect, rather than outright prohibiting certain visuals.

Moreover, transparency and open dialogue with the creative community are crucial. Collaborating with artists, designers, and users to gain insights into their concerns and aspirations will lead to a more nuanced and effective approach to inclusivity.

In conclusion, I urge Adobe to reevaluate the impact of these "woke" guidelines on creative expression. Let us work together to foster an environment that celebrates diversity, promotes responsible creativity, and respects the rights of artists to express themselves freely.

[DavKa88]

Generative Fill policy violation sensitivity has gotten WORSE not better with the new update release that contains "generative expand".  It is painfully frustrating.  I've been using and testing generative fill since it was released and applaude its capabilities.  I've also read the many, many issues users are having with the policy violations.  However, up until now, I was able to extend a background on a glamour image (such as a landscape) without raising the ire of the policy judge.  Now I am consistently limited....to the point of frustration.  This generative AI feature is turning into a toy, not a professional tool.  If that trend is what AI will do to Photoshop in the future then users will quickly become ex-users.

[default9yx46xzit3lm]

Absolutely unusable. Given up

[yassine249163050owt]

You're absolutely right. If Adobe's AI feature is restricted by their own policies to the point where it hinders creative freedom and imposes significant limitations, it would be ethically questionable to heavily advertise the feature without transparently communicating these restrictions to users, or abadon the feaure all together.

[FitzFoto]

Strange, it works 100% of the time for me when I get a warning.

[FitzFoto]

Firefly doesn't like "nook", as in "a corner nook".  There's little rationality to it.  I wonder what it does about "beaver" and "butt", two words with straightforward meanings (an animal and the target end of an archery field)?

[daniellei4510]

On occasion, when a word is banned, I look it up on urbandictionary.com. There are often less than appropriate definitions for otherwise common words. This is an issue that will probably be fixed in time, especially once the bot learns to tale into account the context of the request.

[whirlabou]

Adobe better change this in the official version. This "guidelines" thing is hypocritical since you can add weapons without so much as a beep

[jeasolar]

I'm getting this all time, generation doesn't meet the guidlines, when I'm doing something as simple as removing a glare. Really frustrating. I make a simple selection and ask to generate without even a prompt. 

[DarthVengeant]

demon horde group

cloaked horde group

with and without period. BOTH "Violate Terms"

Any prompt I try to use with the word Blood in it "Violate Terms"

WHY????????????????????

Utterly ridiculous. 

[Alexia30336418briv]

I've now been having this issue on a senior photos. So obviously a very appropriate photo. I'm very frustrated because it worked once and now it's flagging everything. 

[CozyAce]

Adding another frustrated, working creative professional voice here - I'm unable to use generative fill for something as simple as improving the texture of a dress shirt when before I was able to create pretty much anything my imagination could come up with. The subject matter on my particular image is a boring asf male laywer headshot. Do you want us to use these tools or not? I get that we're in "beta" still so I'm not that surprised and I'm happy to help Adobe improve their tools but please make this tool more reliable over time not less... 

[jjaylad]

Hey guy, I feel your pain, but when I first posted having a similar problem some time back, people advised me to put a simple period "." in the dialog box. I don't have any issues now that I am putting either ONLY that period in the box or eles adding a period before or after the text I put in that box. Can you try that and let us know if it works?

[Molfy49]

I am attempting to correct problems in an old family picture.  The is a line on the picture that should not be there from the upper right hand quadrent accross the face and down to the lower left quadrent.  I broke the fix up into three solutions all using Beta v25.  I was able to use Photoshop Beta v25 to correct the first issue in the upper right hand quadrent with no issues.  When I tried a similar fix on the lower left quadrent I receive a message that states I am violating user guidelines.  I am not, this is a private family picture.

[sixsides]

[virewer discretion advised] I was not getting results with any word or phrase I typed into the generative fill, simple phrases like "internal conflict" or "military care" to spark some kind of stock image kept giving me the tired "violating guidelines" error -- once even a "we don't tolerate that language" kind of error. Just simple english, nothing vulgar.

On the other hand, just typing the word "anything" into the generative fill gave me some of the most disturbing nightmare fuel I've ever seen. What in the world is going on with this software?! These are the types of images PS beta should be focused on removing, good greif! More than a few bugs to work out I'm sure ☹

[daniellei4510]

Enter a period (.) in the generative fill box. Or, better yet, just use content aware fill.