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.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

HI @David30122720qek7 the thread you are replying to "Paying for every use with their credits scheme only to be told a bikini is immoral, or a girl has to be a woman, or similar" is not true at all.

[MontyWales]

Haaa so I asked for The tardis from Dr Who. I got this 🙂 LOL And they think I should pay for this 

[omnius42]

I assume you mean the anecdotal evidence that some people (3Hounds, for example) have been able to modify pictures with nudity, but I'm not sure we've proven that their success isn't yet another bug.  Clearly this problem exists outside of modifying nude pictures and I have seen the error when doing completely innocuous editing, but the fact that the feature exists to disallow some image editing is not in doubt.  The only question is which of us are going to be inconvenienced by Adobe pre-deciding what is appropriate and what is not.  

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@MontyWales You'll need to brush up on what is available and what isn't. Tardis and Doctor Who are copyritghted entities and would not be available in Gen Fill or Firefly. Try entering "police call box" or "british phone booth"

[David30122720qek7]

Kevin,
I have personal experience of spending ages stating "girl" and getting women along with violation errors when trying it. I've had multiple violation errors with "bikini" to the point where I gave up. I could add whelk, weed, grass, clam, rock and God knows how many other words that have generated violation errors too.

My entire post was based on MY experience. I asked for a night sky and got half a woman's head!. Please don't tell me I'm talking rubbish, even unintentionally. It's far from professional to tell a beta tester, giving honest feedback, that they are talking crap.

I genuinely want to know whether I'm going to be charged credits every time Photoshop gets it wrong like this .

[Gregusaurus]

It can take me many, many prompts to get something I like. For instance, if I want to change the background to something specific like a "city scene",  I will do that over and over, sometimes modifying the prompt to get closer to what I want. It's not like just putting in a prompt and being satisfied with the first results. That is rare. If no text prompt is entered, then it is almost always an error. I have to remember to at least add a "." period to get it to begin to work. If there is any flesh, I will need to invert the image, prompt, and then invert back to see the results. My use of credits will be over after only a few days. Credits ignores the actual process of artistic creation. Both the beta version,  Firefly and the updated Photoshop 2024 have errors, subpar results, ludicrouse creations, etc. It takes real commitment to get something extraordinary, which to my delight and surprise is possible.

[daniellei4510]

The "myth" I believe Kevin was referrring to was that GF guideline violations are somehow related to women, female skin, nudity, etc. As I menteioned in anothe post, I've often put clothing (swim tops and bottoms, for example) on nude models to make them acceptable for Facebook. So if you want to talk about nudity issues, take it up with Zuckerberg. 🙂

[David30122720qek7]

I see. I don't recall mentioning that they had a policy to do it, just that it does it. Thanks for the clarification, but in this instance my point was that *when*  it does it , it seems that we will be charged for it despite a bug being responsible. Myth or not, I can't see how it's moral or sensible for us to pay when the software isn't up to the job. I'm hoping for clarification on the topic, but honestly doubt that I'll get it.

[omnius42]

This is one of my images where the model is naked, so I thought I would try what 3Hounds was trying.  I tried the obvious things (bikini, bandau top, bodice) and got errors, but then I started trying non-obvious things.  I got all three of these alternatives with the prompt, "chain mail".  I also got some more consistent results by being less specific, "swimsuit" or "add top" for example (see below).

Here is the best example from "Swimsuit":

Here is the best from "add top":

This image shows my selection for all above images.  I had selected only the area in question and I wasn't very precise about it.  :

Since I was just playing I used a fairly low-res image, but it is one that I own.  

The weirdest thing is that except for "chain mail" and "swimsuit" it only gave me one image per Generate, not three like most prompts.  It makes me wonder if the second generated image didn't throw the error, but instead of displaying the error for me it only stopped generating options.  So, most of these (and several total failures) happened one at a time.  It makes me wonder if they are only showing the error if the first image is bad, and they could continue to generate the second and third images?

[omnius42]

I should have mentioned that these were done with the latest 25.1 beta, not the 25.0 production.

[3Hounds]

Here's a result I just did. Fully nude model. 2 seperate generative fills. 1 prompt was Orange bikin bottom, the next Orange bikini top. No errors or morality police anywhere to be found. Not an actual project, so I didn't complete the blending.

[gadget13769]

Not bad for a very quick subject selection, reverse selection and the prompt "Inside a space craft, photorealistic". Obviusly, I could have worked with the masking to clean it up, but this was 15 seconds.

[daniellei4510]

"It makes me wonder if they are only showing the error if the first image is bad, and they could continue to generate the second and third images?"

That might be what's going on. But I get single examples often, even with images that include no people at all.  Fortunately, the single examples more often than not give me what I'm looking for, though I'm usually removing things rather than adding them.

[MontyWales]

well thats nothing like the Tradis, but it even stuggles with non copywrite 'British' things

This is a Typical British Police Officer   LOL the others where even worse   It needs to get less American

[Graham24508943nobd]

I've had the same problem, try leanardo for generating a tardis and importing the image to the background you want

[daze507]

I do fashion photography and I have tried to add tights to a model in skirt with the prompt "opaque tights" and there's nothing to do, I always get the community guideline message. That filter seems to be a bit too sensitive in my humble opinion.

[CShubert]

Hi @daze507 curious if you are seeing the same issue with prompts and errors in the release version of Ps: Adobe Photoshop Version: 25.0.0 20230906.r.37 b14e317 x64

[daze507]

Hi @CShubert 

Yes, Adobe Photoshop Version: 25.0.0 20230906.r.37 b14e317 x64, I did not try the beta so cannot tell if there's a difference.
It's extremely sensitive, I made other tests trying to change the colour of a swimsuit, same, 90% resulted in this guideline message.

[J E L]

@daze507, did you try changing up the prompt a bit? I was successful out of the gate in this quick test using “solid white stockings” and “dark nylon stockings.”

[CShubert]

@daze507 Ok, this is the Ps beta forum so any questions and issues you see should be posted in the release version of Ps forum to keep things clear and for the team to understand where the issues are.

[daniellei4510]

It's a bug. As I've mentioned elsewhere, I put swimsuit tops and bottoms on nude models quite often to make them suitable for uploading to Facebook. Very few if any issues. Try use just a '.' as a prompt to see if Generative Fill can figure out on it's own what you are attempting to do, or put a '.' at the end of your prompt. That can sometimes help.

[daze507]

@J E L 
So that's funny, with "nylon stockings" it works almost all the time, you would have thought the opposite was true.
The result is very meh though...

[daze507]

@CShubertWill do.

[Graham24508943nobd]

I tried dark tights and got refused.   So typed in Dark nylons using '.' and got this result. Was quite surprised at the matching colour result. 

 

[daniellei4510]

Yes, I highly suspect that the AI bot gives first consideration to the original photo before it starts to rely on the work of others. In that sense, it works like Content Aware Fill.