AI Generative Fill resolution and commercial use

[Ron in IL]

Hey, so I'm reading now that AI Generative Fill allows for commercial use.  However, it's very low resolution, so it's not actually applicable to commercial use images as they tend to be high resolution.  Does anyone know anything about when AI Generative Fill will fill the space in 300 dpi resolution.   I'm attaching a pic to show a small part of my image and then you can see where the AI Generative Fill expansion starts.  It's clearly not ready for full resolution images. 

[kevin stohlmeyer]

Hi @Ron in IL please read the FAQ on size limitations and any current bugs:

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/generative-ai-faqs-photoshop.html

[Ron in IL]

thanks  Unless I missed it, I just looked and there's nothing said about resolution/size limitations.

[Lumigraphics]

He sent you the wrong place.

https://helpx.adobe.com/firefly/using/generative-credits-faq.html

2000 x 2000 pixels. Stated multiple times.

[kevin stohlmeyer]

Thanks @Lumigraphics Ive asked the team to include this in the FAQ page.

[AKS666]

Same here. Today I installed version 25 of Photoshop with generative fill officially open for commercial use.

Still the generated images are blurry and of low resolution. Not really of any use...

So when is there gonna be high resolution support coming?

[RonnieB83]

If you use the fill tool for small areas I've found that I can get really HQ images, talking really nice at 4-6k res.  It's a patience game.  If I'm understanding your problem, if its an export thing, I have no idea, havent ran into that issue.  Hope it helps.

[anitao36423279]

That doesn't work at all well if you are extending an image. Using 1024x1024 sections, it doesn't have enough information to complete the image seamlessly. The image below looks ok, but when i tried to upres the extension, Photoshop could not complete the line of the slate curve at the bottom. PLEASE improve the resolution in generative fill. I wouldn't mind waiting for it to render if it matched the resolution of the rest of my image!

[Trevor.Dennis]

From watching a lot of the MAX sessions on Ai from the last couple of days, they were talking about Generative Fill and Firefly as variations of the same thing.  Firefly 2 (beta) is now available as an option, and my understanding is that this is the same as Generative Fill after we start using Generative Credits in November.

If you use Firefly 2 beta and chose to download or copy one of the images.

The image size is a much more healthy 1792 x 2304 pixels with this particular aspect ratio.

I tried a square aspect ratio, for my own interest as well as yours and it came out as 2048 x 2048.

The bottom line here is that we can break the image up into manageable tile sizes.  In fact Colin Smith showed how to automate that process in one of his PhotoshopCafe videos.

[default2rkbo39it64o]

I completely agree with you, the resolution and quality of the AI results are of no use for anyone who designs for print. It is poor quality retouching at a low resolution. Commercial use of this function is not up to scratch.

[Jack22021508v80g]

I think they should delete generative fill. And also Creative Cloud.

[default2rkbo39it64o]

I agree,  get rid of all instances of AI or stop trading as a software company that is suppposed to help creatives. This needs to stop now, generative AI is hurting the creative industry and will in the end destroy human creativity and originality. Stop this now Adobe, look at the backlash you are getting and do the decent thing. 

[D Fosse]

I happen to agree. AI is a Pandora's box. It can be used for good purposes, but it will inevitably undermine creativity, truth and trust. We can already see it. The concepts "fake" and "genuine" no longer have any meaning.

It should be said that Adobe have done the right thing with Content Credentials as part of the Content Authenticity Initiative, along with other major players like the BBC, NYT etc. This way, provenance can always be traced, and makes it impossible to pass off AI-generated content as genuine.

So everybody should be aware that if you use Photoshop to make AI content, it is traceable. And that can't be tampered with.

Personally, I don't touch generative fill with the proverbial pole. I want no part of this. In my book, it's cheating.

[Lumigraphics]

I don't care one way or another but its not something I have much use for. In the end, talented creatives will learn to use it and continue to put out good work. Talentless hacks will continue to produce garbage regardless of how much technical help is available. How many terrible photos do you see every day, even with computational photography that handles much of the work?