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.

[zvi_t]

Ask yourself: does Adobe's stock image library include offending imagery? No, it does not.

By @rayek.elfin 

Yes it does. Occasionally, I come across images and videos on Adobe stock that are illegal. Because I got banned from the forums last time for being too specific (instead of thanking me for helping keep Adobe stock safe), I cannot elaborate. All I can say is that I now send my findings to an Adobe employee, and they are removed within a few days.

[rayek.elfin]

@zvi_t Ah, good to know. It does validate my basic argument: Adobe does not want offending imagery in their image stock. With many contributors it is difficult to keep track of all the content, which is a classic challenge for any stock library.

[FitzFoto]

AI development is rapidly becoming a demonstration of a von Neumann Universal Constructor, with code writing code.

Maybe it will only end when the universe runs out of electrons. 😉

[Reuben2715543031pr]

I have had several cases where Generative Fill did not work and I was given the error that it violates user guidelines. But it is just a photo of a red wall. Attached is a screen shot of what I was working with and the area I was trying to fill. 

[D. Evans]

I've been trying out the generative fill feature to remove wrinkles from a backdrop. For the most part it has been producing good results but more frequently, I have been getting a pop up saying that I'm going against the guidelines. Im only making a selection and having it generate without any prompt. Any ideas on why it thinks I'm doing something wrong?

[Terry23670060nana]

Good morning,

I'm not sure "what" is going on with the latest update but something is definitely wrong. Here's an example:

shuimobysim closeup face portrait of a white woman wearing, short gray hair, smooth soft skin, big dreamy eyes, beautiful intricate colored hair, symmetrical, anime wide eyes, soft lighting, detailed face, by makoto shinkai, stanley artgerm lau, wlop, rossdraws, concept art, digital painting, looking into camera.

I have run this many times within the last month and no real issues. This week, I am trying to run this script and get the issue that it's violating your terms. I've researched the terms and there is nothing in this script or others that I am trying to run that violate your terms.

Here is the latest one that I have been trying to run... altering words to see if that were the issue but no matter what... THIS one will not go through.

shuimobysim brown bear wearing an unzipped jacket, holding a cappuccino, coffee beans on the ground, symmetrical, anime wide eyes, soft lighting, detailed fur, by makoto shinkai, stanley artgerm lau, wlop, rossdraws, concept art, digital painting, foggy background

Please fix the last update... It sucks.

[J E L]

Hi @Terry23670060nana, I tried your prompt and got these results (Photoshop Beta 25.0.0 Release; Windows 10). Note that if you put specific artist names in the prompt, you will likely get an error message.

shuimobysim brown bear wearing an unzipped jacket, holding a cappuccino, coffee beans on the ground

[Terry23670060nana]

J E L,

I do get that but this is a script I've been using since beta came out and never had issues with "concept" art. I took all artists name out of my script:

brown bear wearing an unzipped jacket, holding a cappuccino, coffee beans on the ground, symmetrical, anime wide eyes, soft lighting, detailed fur, concept art, digital painting, foggy background

Here is the outcome and NOT what I was looking for.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

People are coming out weird as well, its almost as if the algorithm is now pulling more "Firefly"/concept based art generations instead of more realistic results. I'm seeing similar issues - prompts that gave me photo realstic backdrops and people before now look cartoonish and distorted.

[daniellei4510]

Have you tried going to firefly.adobe.com to accomplish what you are trying to do? Why do it within Photoshop when there are so many more options to choose from in firefly.

[rayek.elfin]

@Terry23670060nanaTried your prompt in AI-Runner with various AI models and settings...

Got me laughing out loud 🙂 Thanks for the play. Sorry for interrupting the thread.

Some of those bears began to have rather intimidating expressions. After the last one shown here they all got red piercing eyes and angry expressions. Time to change image ratios...

How droll. Illustrative style.

Honey, you keep saying that's a chocolate Mozart Kugel, but I've never seen one float before like that

At this point I have no idea where the coffee beans went... Or why one bear got replaced by a girl in a bear outfit.

Let me offer you a cup of this delightful coffee. What? Oh, don't mind the bear. He's harmless.

Manga style

Trust me! This is delightful coffee! Here! Take it! Take it now! (pixar style, the fog in the background adds tension. Who is this guy? Why is that bear grinning at me like I'm a science experiment?)

...aaand suddenly we're transported from city center into the midst of woodlands. Who can fathom the depths of generative AI?

True Manga style

Switching to a more current XL AI model.

That's all folks. Thanks for bearing with me. 😉

[GRPImagery]

Firefly is not a good alternative given the independent workflow and lack of other advanced editing tools available in Photoshop).

[J E L]

@daniellei4510, re: Have you tried going to firefly.adobe.com to accomplish what you are trying to do?

One reason might be because creations made with Firefly Beta are watermarked and can not be used commercially yet.

[daniellei4510]

But neither can images made with generative fill, since the results are firefly based and generative fill is still in beta. 

[J E L]

Yes, that's correct, and it's spelled out in the terms of use. https://www.adobe.com/legal/licenses-terms/adobe-gen-ai-user-guidelines.html, But there isn't a watermark in Photoshop Beta creations, so I imagine that some users are trying to get around the rules.

[maximeb98570593]

Totally agree. Firefly is becoming completely useless with those rules. I was attempting to extend up a picture of a DJ I'm working for (he gives me the right to modifies his pictures in order to create flyers and other visuals). The problem with the picture of him, is that the top of his head was missing. I wanted to use generative extend to add the top of his head and continue up the background. Blocked by "against user guidelines". No sex, no violence, no nothing.

By the way, the funniest thing is that Adobe software is likely to be used by the whole adult industry. Hey Adobe: aren't you being a little hypocritical?

[maximeb98570593]

This last sentence I wrote regarding the adult industry litterally scares me. In the future, if generative AI progresses allow it, would Adobe use it to control the kind of content we are currently editing using their software? Could you imagine Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects, etc. refusing to execute an operation because it is against "User Guidelines", after automatically scanning text, graphic assets, etc.? 

[G Barry5CCE]

Photoshop: Using generative expand:
Image is flagged as violating safe use guidelines when it clearly is not.

[Joyful_Coconut5EF3]

If you try to use generative AI with 'Elk' as a prompt, it will trigger the "this violates guidelines..." warning. This happens 100% of the time for me. 

[The Dungen]

If it indentifies a woman in the picture generative fill with no prompt considers everyhing in breach of the user guidelines.

[The Dungen]

This is how I think it works. It's a two tier system, first is a keyword system. It's somehwta intelligent for an example allows swimsuit and woman but not woman in swimsuit, it gets a lot more restivtive soon as it catches a female pronoun or anything that identifies the subject as a woman.

The second layer is it generates the outputs and scans them, my guess is they use a pcuture interpretor AI for this, turning it back into text and then it goes back into the same keyword system as the first layer.
I would guess that if there is a prompt only the returned layer is scanned, if there is no prompt the entire picture is scanned. No idea why.

[defaultv0ebunsxbki0]

I find that 90% of images that have an above average amount of skin showing gets flagged...  I am a fashion and glamour photographer and this tool is pretty much usless to me... it is to bad because it would save me time in certain situations.

[Olivier2023242526]

misogyny

[JULIO CESAR HERRERA PEÑA]

LAS FOTOGRAFIAS DE PERSONAS AL HACER RELLENO GENERATIVO CONTINUAMENTE ME MANDA EL MENSAJE DE QUE VIOLA LAS NORMAS COMO SI FUERA UNA FOTOGRAFIA CON POCA ROPA ME IMAGINO Y NADA QUE VER ES FRUSTRANTE.  ADJUNTO LA IMAGEN SOBRE LA CUAL ME MANDA EL MENSAJE 

[Caity.psd]

@JULIO CESAR HERRERA PEÑA what is the selection you are making or trying to add or remove?

I tested with the latest 25.1 build (release today) and had no issues.

Thank you,

Caity