Ai-Powered Image correction and extension are a disaster

[waldemarker]

Image correction and extensions seems to work very good, the result is quick and can handle a lot of issues. This works fine if you do not investigate a bit more. See example, if you check it on the original white/patterned background you hardly can see the AI-retouching.

Also with my manual edits I make an inspection changing curves to check how perfect the edit is. And so I discovered that in this case the Ai-Powered Image correction and extension are a disaster, I am very disappointed seeing this result.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

It seems impossible to know what the extended part actually is or what the image’s pixel dimensions are. 

Could you please post screenshots taken at View > 100% with the pertinent Panels (Toolbar, Layers, Options Bar, …) visible? 

[waldemarker]

Hi, find enclosed bigger images. Here you can see clearly that it was not generated/replaced with the paper pattern background, but a very blurred background, visible good ad 200%

[c.pfaffenbichler]

I asked for »screenshots taken at View > 100% with the pertinent Panels (Toolbar, Layers, Options Bar, …)«. 

One issue that may influence the result here is that Generative Fill only creates up to 1024px x 1024px and upsamples if the area needs to be bigger. 

But even aside from that a perfect match may prove elusive and additional filtering/adjusting might be necessary. 

[waldemarker]

.

[Trevor.Dennis]

I have been superimpressed with Ai can do now.  Especially with image enhancement.

Click on this to see the full scale image.

This is the original.  It's 800 X 500 pixels

This is enhanced and upscaled to 3200 X 2320 pixel with Topaz Photo Ai, and scratch removal with Photoshop Neural filter.

girl camera right has been over done (I have only been using the plugin for a few days) but check out the hair detail.  This is light years ahead of what could be done just a few years ago.

[EDIT] The image widget wouldn't let me add the image as iit was too big, so I had to downsize to 3000 pixels on the long side.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

Topaz indeed seems to offer some functionality that Photoshop is »lacking«. 

We’ll have to wait and see how that develops in the future. 

[Earth Oliver]

Sorry, but those results are pretty terrible and there actually were better offerings a few years ago and Adobe is still trying to catch up.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

By the way: The Remove Tool also utilizes AI, though a local and smaller model, if I understand correctly. 

[waldemarker]

Yes, the remove tool uses learned models since 3-4 years, getting better year over year

[waldemarker]

My 'annoyance' was that the result seemed to be ok and I discovered it randomly checking the curves.

In other cases (see 2 screenshots at 100%) the very bad and/or low res result was immediately clear and so I extended the background pattern 'old style' manually, photoshop AI did not help. That where 2 cases where I think the AI-Power could resolve it in just some clicks. I was shocked seeing the undefined (globe) or blurry (sunglasses) images.

[c.pfaffenbichler]

Well, the 1024px limitation is something to keep in mind for now. 

But for what amounts to regular Patterns anyway I would assume Generative Fill is something of a gamble at current and other options (like Library Pattern extraction) seem preferable. 

[Lumigraphics]

You could, of course, learn how to use Photoshop and do this editing manually. Right now, AI is an additional tool and not a standalone solution. Just saying.

[waldemarker]

Hands and Brain are always better then AI 😉 

[c.pfaffenbichler]

Well, in other fields AI actually does seem to make a positive difference; AlphaFold has apparently provided a huge boost for medicine/biochemistry/… but that is obviously a »different beast«. 

[Earth Oliver]

The problem here isn't the tool, it's your expectations. Adobe never claimed it produces "perfect" results, so i'm unsure why that was your expectation?

[waldemarker]

I am building a car, but I do not claim that it will perfect, it could also drive you out of the street.

We do not use Phoshop for joke/fun, but for (faster) image editing.

And not for beta testing Adobe Software.