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.

[Gregusaurus]

I updated this morning to the new version of Photoshop Beta 25.1. A  new alert now pops up when the  generated  image seemingly conflicts with the guidelines. We can now "request a review". I have not seen this before. See the image attached.

 

[yarivYO]

Hello. I'm just trying to extend the floor in a blurry office photo and I get an orange message that I violate user guideline.

very strange

thank you

Yariv

[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. 

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@Joyful_Coconut5EF3 I get the same trying to enter "elk" but I can get a "moose". I think the AI has it in for the Elk population or is moose-biased. lol.

[J E L]

@Joyful_Coconut5EF3, maybe 99.9 percent of the time?

[Joyful_Coconut5EF3]

Lol. I tried yours and it did work. I will agree it's < 100%.

[J E L]

Love it, lol, no charge. Note that short prompts (especially single words) are often a problem. I find the wordier I get, the better chance something will go through without the violation error.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@J E L mine also only worked with your specifc prompt - the minute I tried something different it failed lol

[Caity.psd]

Hi everyone, quick update :sparkles:

With Photoshop (beta) app version 25.1, we have added the ability to request a review for false violations. You may choose to include the image in your review by checking the box "Include image and layer data with your feedback" and attach a note with your review request.

This will help us improve the experience for everyone. Thank you all!

Caity

[Programmierung98A6]

Retouching a birthmark on the cheek? Violates user guidelines!

Changing my beard to be a clean shave? Violates user guidelines!

Repearing my cats foot, which was just out of frame? Violates user guidelines!

Removing the print on my shirt? Violates user guidelines!

Generating an axe? Violates user guidelines!

Generating a cats body, just from its head as a source? Violates user guidelines!

Fixing a house flies wings in a macro shot, which are partially out of frame? Violates user guidelines!

Fixing a butterflies wings, which are just out of frame? Violates user guidelines aswell!

About 15-25% of all my generative expands end up being blocked as false-positives.

It's really disappointing seeing the new Photoshop being so capable, yet straight up refusing its service, because of distrust in me, the user. Either make the "user guideline violation" classifier a LOT more lax, or provide the user with an option to "continue anyway" at the users descretion of staying within user guidelines.

I've had it happen multiple times since using the beta that I had to put an image out now, and it was just missing one last detail, but Photoshop refused to do it, because it falsely thought it violated user guidelines. This is an absolute no-go. I am the user, I know better what I'm working with. So let me decide and let me take responsibility!

[The Dungen]

The AI can take inputs in a bunch oof languages so my guess is elk means something flaggable in some other language.

[Jim319775500hsf]

I tried to remove a cigarette from a woman's fingers on a wedding photo and because she was holding a wine glass with the same hand, next to her cleavage, Firefly branded me a pornographer. If we can't be treated like adults when testing a tool we're literally paying good money for, I'd prefer not to have it at all. Relase it when it's caught up to 21st century attitudes to a women's right to wear whatever she wants and then let me know - but until then it's just not ready for serious use in portrait photography. 99% of my clients want items removed from the background. If I can't make a selection around these areas without Firefly also detecting what's outside of the selection, then imposing some sort of Irainian style censorship on them, I won't use it at all. I expect better than this from Adobe. Just not cool at all.

[daniellei4510]

Actually, you can remove it yourself simply by using the official release of Photoshop, which is the one you are actually paying for. Using the beta is done on a volunteer basis and you are not required to participate in the project.

[3Hounds]

I just did the 25.1 update available this morning. Generative fill worked flawlessly without prompts, when fiixing hair and other wardrobe issues on a lingerie model, delivering 3 useful high resolution results each time. No violation messages. Also no warning that Beta required me to update MacOS.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@Programmierung98A6 What are you entering for prompts when it fails?

[AH-2]

The app is totally useless. I do edit photos of women, but they are all DRESSED  for God's sakes. There's no nudity whatsoever in the pics. 10 times out of 10 I get guideline violation message. Prompt, no prompt- same result. It looks like when the cloud detects ANY type of a female in the picture, it rejects it by default. This is completely rediculous. Well, gonna have to wait for some other AI plugin to come up to do the job.

[AH-2]

The app is totally useless. I do edit photos of women, but they are all DRESSED  for God's sakes. There's no nudity whatsoever in the pics. 10 times out of 10 I get guideline violation message. Prompt, no prompt- same result. It looks like when the cloud detects ANY type of a female in the picture, it rejects it by default. This is completely ridiculous. Well, gonna have to wait for some other AI plugin to come up to do the job.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

Hi @AH-2 thank you for your feedback. Can you supply screenshots of the selection and specific prompts you are using when you get a failure that may be an error?

[AH-2]

@Kevin Stohlmeyer 

What makes it even more pathetic that I am not even trying to modify the image itself. All I am trying to do right now is outcropping the background. Sometimes I do have to overlap with the image to get the generative expand. I tried different lenghts of overlap, none of them worked. As far as the prompts, where should I start? We can open the dictionary and it's all there, by the numbers.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@AH-2 so you can give examples then? Help us help you. Or just complain, your choice.

[AH-2]

@Kevin Stohlmeyer 

I already described the problem and I don't complain. What I can do though is that I can, and probably will, switch to a different software. There are choices out there now. Adobe will lose a customer and somebody else will see my money.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@AH-2 you do realize this is a voluntary beta test program and not a final public release? You are participating in testing and giving constructive, detailed feedback to help improve the program and AI. As many others have posted in here, how you use the Gen Fill or other AI driven components and utilize effective prompts can make all the difference between a false flag failure and a positive outcome.

[daniellei4510]

As an Adobe Stock Contributor, I don't use generative fill when working on images I intend to submit. But as a former figure photographer, I do enjoy experimenting with it from time on time on some of my old photographs. Here I added a swimsuit top to a nude model. I got back three examples and no guideline warnings. What you are experiencing is a bug and has nothing to do with Adobe being "moral gestapo."

[Ambrosial_Flair5FA3]

It seems the latest version of photoshop beta has excessive restriction on the Ai tool.  I came across this error many times when trying to remove unwanted objects from the photo.  In this case, I am trying to remove stray hair from the subject.  I know there are other ways to remove hair in this particular case.  But I don't see how this violate any community guidelines and believe its a bug.  Let me know what your experience is and how to get around it. 

[Jake32004707sg2m]

hi I actually put a poll out on this intrestingly enough so if you go to submit a idea on adobe express and type in the following verbatim "How about a NFSW mode as a choice and the person just agrees to terms?"