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.

[Jumajan]

Large area on left side of photo I am trying to repair. PS won't do it as it "violates user guidelines.

[chi30563797hkql]

I have the same message that popped up when I was editing some family photos. I just uninstalled Ps beta 25

[chi30563797hkql]

I tried to remove a handicap sign and I got the violate message.

[daniellei4510]

Content Aware Fill would work here. Generative Fill, even when released, will never replace the traditional editing tools. 

[3Hounds]

I haven't had any use violations result in quite a while, but now I'm trying to turn a cloth couch into a leather one and GF insists on adding horribly monstrous people or dogs. Just updated this morning

[RLeintzPhotos]

So I tried to go back to  PS Beta  version 24.7 since I wasn't getting that violation as much. But now I can't use Gen Fill at all in the earlier version? It just says "this feature requires the latest updated version" So....what's the deal? 

[Vasyl31723622k0ht]

Hi! I've been trying to use generative fill in different contexts and one of the most useful one is when I use it to remove something from the photo. But somehow it's overly strict in following the guidelines even when they are obviously not violated. For example, if there is an adult clothed woman (!!! but what about professional work in future?) in a photo and I try to generative-fill a small region with a spot, in some images it shows a guideline violation error, but not in other with minimal differences in the subject.

I'm on desktop, Windows 11, Photoshop Beta 25.0.0

[JMDlugosz]

I want to remove a blob using Generative Fill.  I get an error that the generated image is removed because it violates user guidelines!  All I want is a fairly plain shaded background.

[lucidframe]

I tried to give my subject black combat boots using the lasso tool and generative fill. It said my prompt violated guidelines. How? How can I make black combat boots without violating something? It's irritating that it doesn't tell me which words are offensive. I'm assuming it's the word combat. But this is dumb. Sorry, but it is. I understand war is a no no, but combat boots? Really? You guys should let us know which words are offensive so we can tailor our prompts without getting violation strikes. Other than that, I'm loving PS Beta. But seriously, we need to know which words are offensive or all of us will keep inadvertently getting violations. Plus, it's like walking on eggshells. Never in a million years would I suspect combat boots would violate anything. My subject is a goth girl in a dress. I just want her to be wearing combat boots. She's not in a war. She's not in combat...she just needs to be wearing the boots. 

[nascimento0D44]

Depois de varias atualizações, está cada vez mais chato usar a ferramenta, toda hora quando fazemos uma seleção da um erro dizendo que viola as diretrizes de usuario, quando lancaram a versao estava melhor que hoje , parece que estão piorando envés de corrigir.

[Gixxxa75]

Army boots, big boots and Military boots all seem to work. Agree though the censorship is annoying. 

Bizarre thing is we were trying to generate a mermaid the other day, but everything came out way too sexual for the persons grandchild we were trying to wind up. Hes scarred for life now, believes T Rex's are running around but convinced mermaids dont exist.

[lucidframe]

Thank you, Gixxxa. I just tried black military boot and another violation thingy popped up. Interesting about the mermaid! So overly sexy mermaids are ok for an output, but "fashionable black Goth combat boots" are so offensive that the output very well may people's heads go 'splodey! I wonder what would happen if you tried a T-Rex mermaid? T-Rex top and fish bottom. If their algorithm finds a way to make a T-Rex sexy, then I'm both amused and pissed.

[LSDMT]

fix your garbage AI implementation, Adobe. name one freaking thing in this picture that violated ANYTHING. want to fix a little bit of hair in the corner - 'ThE gEnErAtEd ImAgEs WeRe ReMoVeD bEcAuSe ThEy ViOlAtE uSeR gUiDeLiNeS.'

and it happens ALL THE TIME. there's no nudity, there's no gore, there's no nothing but ineptitude on Adobe's part to fix something that's been REPEATELY brought up by users as a constant FAIL on Photohop's Generative AI 'feature'.

[rayek.elfin]

Note: you are not talking to Adobe here - we're all users like you. 🙂

I understand why Adobe's geenerative AI implementation is so strict/restrictive, because as a company they'd be opening themselves up to all sorts of litigation if the results would include even a smidgen of "sensitive" imagery.

So why not use one of the open source free solutions out there with no such limitations? And those will run on your local computer, so no need to rely on an external server. I do that myself, and have no issues with any restrictions. And arguably the generative AI models out there have improved so much that they now generate better looking imagery than Adobe's AI.

Do a quick Duckduckgo search to find out more. It takes a little more time to set up, but you'd gain access to generative AI imagery without the constant warnings.

[daniellei4510]

It's a bug and it has been well-documented here that entering a "." as a prompt will usually resolve the issue. But I'd rely on more traditional tools such as the Clone tool and perhaps the Content Aware tool. Even when officially released, Generative Fill will not be a cure-all for editing. 

[LSDMT]

i use Stable Diffusion almost entirely. that image was created by Stable Diffusion. but the inpaint options usually don't work as good to fix minor things as Photoshops. that in no way lets Adobe off the hook. if they want to nerf the AI into the ground, then why even implement it? it's just so they can say they've also tacked that on to their pre-existing apps in an effort to remain relevant. if they want to actually make it useful - then they have a LOOOOONG way to go because the super smart AI that generatively fills images in Photoshop is pretty freaking dumb and unable to distinguish much of anything. i even have it fail repeatedly on SCENERY pictures. it's... not really that good.

if you have another solution that isn't inpainting via SD - i'm all ears.

[lucidframe]

I gotchya'. Thank you!

[defaultyfp7chz9kt23]

With respect, we are not arguing whther or not generative fill will replace "traditional tools" were arguing that adobe's arbritary moral landscape is getting in the way of Creativity.

[rayek.elfin]

I use AI-Runner nowadays to avoid having to install and set up all the dependencies myself. Just run it and choose a Generative Model. Runs on Windows and Linux (Ubuntu compatible) from its folder. No Mac, unfortunately, though.

https://capsizegames.itch.io/ai-runner

This desktop application runs on your local machine rather than a server. No internet required, which I prefer. And I have far more control over the results this way. But it does require a beefy graphics card, of course.

AI-Runner's GUI is simple to operate, and all functionality is nicely organized in tabs: txt2img, img2img, inpaint/outpaint, depth2img, pix2pix, superresolution ai scaling, themes/styles, LoRa, etc.... And most importantly: no limits on output.

AI-Runner also loads other models (for example ones downloaded from https://civitai.com/), so it is relatively simple to find something a bit more original/different looking.

[daniellei4510]

But the guideline violation message is just a message, and a poorly drafted one at that under the circumstances. If it said something like, "Sorry, but the bot is having problems trying to determine the intent of your action or prompt. Please try again." Or whatever...then accusations of censorship or arguments against Adobe's moral landscape would be close to none and everyone would be getting frustrated for a whole different set of reasons. 🙂 Give it time. Yes...some of the issues may be directly related to censorship for now, but that seems understandable this early in the game. Even Midjourney has finally gotten around to adding an "Appeal" button that sends a questionable prompt to a "smarter" bot that can sort out the actual intent of the prompt in question. The majority of those appeals are approved.

[Jason Toemmes]

[Jason Toemmes]

It's been awhile since I posted on this violate guidlines error. Strange my orginal post has morphed in with everyone else problem. In general I see many are just as annoyed as I was over the idea being censored. I have been keeping up with the latest updates and overall when I ask the genernative fill to remove a object or fill in a empty space on my canvas it does a pretty good job 80% of the time. I really haven't had the time to sit down and push it's limits till last week.  I'm wrapping up this project without PS Beta, but I wanted to see how OR if it the AI bot would violate what I suspected would be a problem. One of my accounts makes high end wood and metal old model ships, WWI model aircraft, and artillary from the US civil war. The project invloved creating a print ad for a model of the 1850's Napolean Cannon that was used in the US civil war. I have uploaded the art without any of the overlying ad copy that would hide roughly 30% of the art. What I wanted Generative fill to do was add a war torn rebal flag in opposition to the Union flag flying over the canon in the background. Surprise, surprise, that request was violated. So I tried saying add a Confederate flag and that too was violated. So basically it's really cut and dry that I am going to be forced to use none Adobe software for some of my professional work on this account. This is just a prime example of what I was concerned about, of corprate nanny culture interfering with professionals like myself in doing their job. Like it or not history around the world wasn't pretty. Context for images created are very important, as was in this case the intent of this ad was to be educational and thought provoking. Most people including myself had no clue a French cannon was used on both sides of this important peice of US history.  In the end the confederate flag would mostly been hidden with text anyway. This censorship issue remains to be a problem. 

[ronaldr97793654]

AI is saying I'm violating user guidelines due to nudity

V 25.0

MacOS 12.6.8

[LSDMT]

that's just Stable Diffusuon in different clothing 

[J-D-F]

"it seems understandable" is as subjective as how and what to include in an overly-zealous censorship engine. "What" is understandable? Without answering the "what" it's all a matter of personal preference. Adobe isn't breaking any new ground here except with their legal wrangling.