• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
1

Generative AI not working to generate guns?

Explorer ,
Jan 29, 2024 Jan 29, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi, I'm a photo editor and I'm currently working on a composite that features an "agent" character and I need to generate a gun lying on the floor.  The service just doesn't seem to work. 

Anybody facing the same issue? Is there a known reason for this?

TOPICS
macOS

Views

326

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 1 Correct answer

Community Expert , Jan 29, 2024 Jan 29, 2024

I would think generating guns would violate #2 of the Generative AI Guidelines:

 

You might try Adobe Stock (stock.adobe.com) including the Free Collection instead.

 

Votes

Translate

Translate
Adobe
Community Expert ,
Jan 29, 2024 Jan 29, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I would think generating guns would violate #2 of the Generative AI Guidelines:

 

You might try Adobe Stock (stock.adobe.com) including the Free Collection instead.

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 07, 2024 Mar 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Why is this marked as the "correct answer"?

Also, how so? A gun is not "violence". A gun is a gun.

It should also be noted that Photoshop will generate a sword, but not a dagger, knife, or even short sword. This is idiotic. A tool does not equal the potential misuse of a tool.

If this is because of a policy, then their policy is wrong and I want a full refund on my subscription. This is unacceptable and unprofessional on their part, if this is so.

At any rate, it certainly does not equate in any way to violating their rule #2. So no, this answer is not "correct" and is mis-marked as such.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Mar 07, 2024 Mar 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

quote

Why is this marked as the "correct answer"?

Also, how so? A gun is not "violence". A gun is a gun.

It should also be noted that Photoshop will generate a sword, but not a dagger, knife, or even short sword. This is idiotic. A tool does not equal the potential misuse of a tool.

If this is because of a policy, then their policy is wrong and I want a full refund on my subscription. This is unacceptable and unprofessional on their part, if this is so.

At any rate, it certainly does not equate in any way to violating their rule #2. So no, this answer is not "correct" and is mis-marked as such.


By @TheeDodger

You post seems improper in tone and lacking in other regards. 

 

Unless Adobe made the claim that you could use Generative Fill to create images of guns the inability to do so would seem to provide no grounds for a refund. 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Mar 07, 2024 Mar 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

While I agree on the tone part of your reply, I do not see why Adobe should claim that we could be able to create guns. Why not also disclose that we could make forks, knives, spoons, swords, brooms?

Guns are just as common and everyday, even more so in the world of art. 

 

In any case they should disclose why *not* and give a proper explanation for their reasons. 

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Mar 07, 2024 Mar 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

If someone wants to claim a refund about this issue the person should ask themselves: 

What were the actual claims Adobe made with regard to Generative Fill and how do they differ from the actual performance of the feature? 

https://www.adobe.com/legal/licenses-terms/adobe-gen-ai-user-guidelines.html

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Mar 21, 2024 Mar 21, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I agree with his outrage, this is a tool. Like a paint brush. It should not be limited by peoples narrow point of view as to what is acceptable. Art is subjective, it's literally the whole point. So you are telling me what art can be.

That is fine, plenty of better tools on the market that don't limit theirs uses with their own rediculous dogma.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Mar 21, 2024 Mar 21, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST
quote

So you are telling me what art can be.

I am not Adobe, I am not a member of the Photoshop development team, I am just another Photoshop user. 

If you think Adobe excluding certain subjects from their Firefly/Generative Fill-feature’s results means that it declares those subjects cannot be reperesented in works of art you may have jumped to a fallacious conclusion. 

 

And quite frankly you do not seem to do your argument much of a favour with the brush-analogy. 

Not every brush is equally fit to any painting task after all. 

 

But, as you indicated, there are other AI image creation options available and if they better meet your requirements then that’s great. 

The attempt to determine whether they violated intellectual property rights in accruing their training material will probably run into many billable hours for lawyers but what good that will do remains to be seen. 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jan 30, 2024 Jan 30, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You can only design in Walt Disney enchantered world mode with Adobe AI.

😉

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Jan 30, 2024 Jan 30, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

As long as they don't do what they did to the seven dwarves in the new Snow White movie....

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jan 30, 2024 Jan 30, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Adobe seems to be trying to play it very safe with its AI image generating features. 

That applies both to intellectual property and content. 

 

If that is too narrow for you you may have to try some of the other services. 

Those may meet your content-requirements better and with less (or no) regard for intellectual property they will probably have more training material … 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 07, 2024 Mar 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Training data has nothing to do with "regard for intellectual property".

As an artist, I, myself, was taught techniques by Keith Parkinson and Gerald Brom, and I once owned a book on painting techniques by Boris Vallejo. Does that mean I am limited to being influenced by only them?

Am I somehow a plagiarist or in breach of copyright because, when I was a kid, I copied images out of D&D books and comics to teach myself how to draw?

If not, why is there a double-standard on training an AI compared to training a natural "I"?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Mar 07, 2024 Mar 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

quote

Training data has nothing to do with "regard for intellectual property".

Why not? 

 

Would you definitely be fine with the images you have created being used as training material so that others can make money off of some AI image creation tool (both the makers/distributors of the software and the users who might compete with you for jobs)? 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jan 30, 2024 Jan 30, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

It's an interesting possibility that artists who create content in those restricted spaces may not have to worry about being replaced by AI.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines