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.

[daniellei4510]

I entered a period . for the prompt and this resulted in removing the hair AND your marching ants. 🙂 Entering a period has been a known work-around for some time instances like these. But yes, I would have used more traditional tools.

[jjgallegos]

This is exactly my concern. I've been using Photoshop for nearly 20 years. A majority of my images of of **** and semi-**** women. And as you mentioned above, I'm sure the adult industry has been using PS for their retouching needs. As of yet, there are no impediments to retouching **** images. So the question will be, is there going to be a change in how PS tools are used? Since Firefly is embedded in PS (Beta), will they hobble Firefly or the entire PS so they can't be used for any **** or adult material? This is not a question for the Adobe Wizards but for their policymakers--those who make the decisions.

[Abuse removed by moderator]

[JR Boulay]

Without prompt:

[JR Boulay]

With "Remove" prompt:

[Caity.psd]

Hi @JR Boulay could you update to 25.1 and test again and let me know?

Judging by your screenshot I see the older error toast message. 

[Caity.psd]

Hi @Ambrosial_Flair5FA3 could you also update to 25.1 and test again? Judging by your screenshot I see the outdated error toast message and want to see if you face the issue still in 25.1

[jjgallegos]

I see some people have successfully updated to v.25.1. Unfortunately, mine still crashes after I launch it. Version 25 is working well, except for the expand function which is not seamless. I understand it's fixed for v.25.1. Am I the only one whose v.25.1 crashes, or are there still other folks out there who are still having this problem?

Old Dell

32GB

Windows 10-64bit

Nvidia GT 1030

[JR Boulay]

Hi Caity.psd

Nothing has changed, it's exactly the same behaviour.

[Ambrosial_Flair5FA3]

Glad to see there is a workaround. I hope they don't take this away. 

[Ambrosial_Flair5FA3]

Hi @Caity.psd , updated to the latest and the violation error is gone.  Thank you.

[FireSpeed5CBA]

Photoshop beta generative fill should be able to identify Japanese anime and their respective characters. along with the use of the term "photorealistic". the term environment for some reason doesn't work for me when I'm trying to generate underwater ocean environments.

[Mod: Moved to the Photoshop Beta forum]

[chaztize]

I have tried to use Generative Fill to clean creases in the skin like smile and brow lines. It worked once very well, but most of the time I get a note that "The generated images were removed because they violate user guidelines." I think this needs to be addressed because it could be very useful.

[Justin Other]

This error drives me insane. I've given up trying to work on any image that has a human in it. It takes many times longer to use Photoshop AI to clean up portraits or to extend hair and such than it does to do it with my long-established workflows. I think how the team deals with this error is what will make or break the tool for Adobe. At present, it's a great idea on paper, but it's frustrating to see that message about guildines all the time —esoecially when there is no basis for it. I get it, sure, the AI doesn't have perfect knowledge of exactly what is in the image nor the intent and purpose of the image. Nonetheless, it's a fair guess that not all images that include a human are for prurient purposes. Here's hoping that the AI gets better trained, sooner.

[jjgallegos]

Hi Chaztize,

Sometimes a period (.) helps when making small fills.

[Rafaelis]

Like someone wrote elsewhere in this topic, typing a period in the What would you like to generate? (Optional) field will get you around most of these guideline errors. At least when it comes to editing something out of an image. 

 

[RLeintzPhotos]

I have had this same error on and off since Beta released Gen Fill. I have found a few workarounds for different scenarios

1. If you are only working on an image with a face in it (no female body) you typically won't see the user violation error. If you do, try "remove wrinkles" or "." in the prompt window and this usually removes the error. 

2. If you are working on an image that has the toro or legs of a woman in it, make a duplicate layer of the image, draw a black box over the body, then select the area on the face you want to retouch - be sure to turn off the original layer. 

These two work arounds have worked for me about 75% of the time. I also find that sometimes, when the system just keeps throwing errors at me for no apparent reason, if I close down Beta, PS, and Bridge, it sometimes seems to reboot and the errors stop. Hope some of this helps! 

[JR Boulay]

Hi Caity.psd

Same behaviour when using the Content Aware Move Tool

[Caity.psd]

Hi @PictureArt I hear you and am looking into our plans in this area.

Always curious to hear thoughts on how we might allow this without causing harm in other areas (if you have any thoughts there please share!). 

I am merging your post to our main conversation thread on this. Thank you!

[PeterGJones]

One work around adobe's problem with flesh tones is to invert the file. The censor does not recognize blue with white shadows as something to censor. Make your corrections then invert back. Works sometime

[daniellei4510]

It's a bug. I've had success adding clothing to entirely nude models while getting guideline violations with fully clothed ones. You haven't lost any functionality. It's just misbehaving. Keep trying.

[daniellei4510]

As I've noted elsewhere with an example, I have had no issues putting swim tops and bottoms on entirely nude models with no issues. But I have occasionally received violatiosn (as have many others) with fully dressed models. It's a bug, and it's mostly likely on the server side and not local with the application itself. So future updates won't necessarily fix the problem for the time being. There are also various workarounds noted on this board that you might wish to investigate.

[danielc11218304]

What are my options?! I would love to have a human review this image instead of bots and AI. Nothing is wrong w the image!!!!!!!!

[daniellei4510]

Try using a period (.) as a prompt. Or a peried AFTER your prompt. Try selecting a very small selection of the background in addition of your actual selection. Those are two work-arounds that may or may not be helpful.

[Caity.psd]

@danielc11218304 what is your prompt/selection?

See below, I expanded the image but like others said, placed a "." instead of leaving blank.

I was also able to add "halo above hair", baset, flowers, etc. 

[debbies79739583]

Everything you just said I couldn't have said better.

Mark my words, Adobe. You're not the only one that will have this tech, and if you continue to feel you need to be some sort of bizarre moral filter on artists, we will leave you for the compititon. This whole issue is agreeably insane.