Meta tags images as "Made with AI" if You Use Gen Fill

[SK321]

So, apparently Adobe has begun adding metadata to images that says they were made with AI (or at the very least, that AI was used) if you used Gen Fill at all. I realized this because some websites, such as Instagram, have begun automatically labeling any images I had used Gen Fill on as "Made with AI" based on the metadata Photoshop had added, without the option for me to remove the label.

I use Gen Fill to expand backgrounds a bit when I need to change the aspect ratio of an image (4x5 from a 2x3 for Instagram), or to more quickly and easily remove an unwanted object or blemish in photo I took and spent a lot of time and effort taking. I don't use it to create entirely made-up backgrounds or people. If I'd known my long hours setting up photo shoots, purchasing supplies, props, and more would all be given the label of "Made with AI" making my clients and other people think I'm just generating my photography, I would never have used Gen Fill in the first place. To me it's just been a quicker and better version of Content Aware Fill. 

So, for those of you who have had the same experience and, like me, don't want your work labeled as "Made with AI" when you've maybe used Gen Fill to remove a beer can from a photo, just export your photos as a bitmap, open them with Microsoft Paint and save them as a JPEG from there. It will remove the relevant metadata.

(subject edited by moderator to remove false information and replace it with correct information. Meta is adding that tag, not Photoshop, and they say  so in their help pages.)

Edit by OP: I appreciate the moderators not simply deleting this thread, because I do think this is a good discussion to have. I do believe my post clearly stated that the tag of "Made with AI" was created by Instagram (Meta) and that Photoshop was simply including an indicator (metadata/Content Credentials) with the image when it's saved out of Photoshop that showed some sort of AI was used. If the mods felt my original subject was false information, I can assure them that it was not intended to be.

I have also simply stopped using any AI tools in Photoshop for any photos I intend to post online. I'd rather take the extra time to edit my photos the way I have been for the last 25+ years than have my clients mistakenly think my photography is completely AI generated.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

The Adobe part of this is nuanced as explained in the article - however the Meta is on or off (and wrong most times). That could be handled a lot better with phrases like "contains AI" or something less full throated as "Made with AI" which is not accurate at all.

[SK321]

@Kevin Stohlmeyer agreed.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer · Accepted solution]

https://petapixel.com/2024/07/01/instagram-changes-made-with-ai-label-to-ai-info-after-widespread-ba...

Meta has updated their AI notifications.

[SK321]

@Kevin Stohlmeyer well, that's good to hear. It's an improvement, even if it's not a perfect solution. Apparently the folks who commented on this thread weren't the only ones bothered by this, by far. I do find this part of the article interesting:
"There are a host of tools inside of Adobe Photoshop that will generate the “Made with AI” tag even though the final image may be 99% or more untouched by AI."

So, Meta was definately using Photoshop's tag to justify labeling images with the "Made with AI" label. I wonder if Adobe will add aditional tags that might indicate either what tools specifically were used (as I don't believe the Remove Tool is nearly as deserving of an AI label as the Gen Fill tool) or perhaps indicate the percentage of the image that has AI generated content. 

It'll be interesting, going forward, to see how this all shakes out.

[Stuk van Staal]

Thank you SK321 for posting this. I had the same unpleasant surprise. Recently I shared photos on Facebook to promote my handmade products. Providing a realistic, honest image in these photos is important. Just like you, I use the AI function in Photoshop to remove distracting elements in the background or to enlarge the background a bit to achieve a better composition. The AI label that Facebook applied, forced me to remove my post immediately. It would make my customers suspicious. It's only logical that we talk about this. Fortunately, there is a workaround to remove the metadata, as you wrote. Photoshop's AI function is actually very handy.

[D Fosse]

remove distracting elements in the background or to enlarge the background a bit to achieve a better composition. 

By @Stuk van Staal

Just use the patch tool or content-aware fill, which not only are easier to control, but usually give a better result.

There is really no reason to use AI for what you describe.

[Lumigraphics]

Perhaps you should remove distracting background elements before you take the picture. Just a thought.

[Stephen_A_Marsh]

Perhaps you should remove distracting background elements before you take the picture. Just a thought.

By @Lumigraphics

Are you suggesting to get it right straight out of the camera? 😁 

[Lumigraphics]

It should be right for the next step which is post-processing. 🙂 With product photos in studio there is no excuse for bad images.

[vanillalily]

I know this thread is a few months old but I agree that a distinction should be made. If a photographer uses a tool to remove a small spot, it's not MADE with AI, it's been EDITED with AI. That distinction should 100% be made. T

he biggest thing I don't get is why some features are tagged and many aren't. Content awareness fill is 100% AI as well, but that is not being tagged in metadata, why? What is the difference? Maybe PS needs to leave this up to the morals of those creating art instead. Those that are being shady will just use a workaround. Those that aren't being shady shouldn't have to. 

[QINGCHARLES]

I just strip all the tags from all my files now with exiftool. It's really frustrating that we own the software but we can't turn this feature off. I wish I could find a way to patch the code out of Photoshop, but I think the binaries are signed, so I don't know what happens if you edit them.

I had to write an app that scans my files before I upload them to social media and warns me if I forgot to strip the tags because I've messed up a couple of times lately. I only use GenAI for tiny little background edits.

90% of the time GenAI won't even make an edit anyway, though, because I'm mostly editing pics of my girlfriend and if her arms and legs aren't 100% covered (e.g. she's wearing a tank top or a skirt) it pops up a puritanical box that gives me a moral lecture on my life choices. It won't even remove the tiniest things from the background because she is showing too much skin. Forget trying to edit any beach photos😂

[D Fosse]

I only use GenAI for tiny little background edits.😂

By @QINGCHARLES

If they are tiny, you don't need to use generative ai. The traditional tools will be more than effective enough.

[QINGCHARLES]

They're often not, though. It depends how busy or complicated the background behind the thing you're removing is. 90% of the time GenAI will do a better job in a lot less time. This problem should not exist.

[SK321]

---

@D Fosse wrote:

If they are tiny, you don't need to use generative ai. The traditional tools will be more than effective enough.

Yeah, it just depends. If it's something with some basic texture I can pull from elsewhere in the photo, yes, the traditional tools would be fine. I could probably even do a lot of the more complex things with the traditional tools that the AI could do, but the AI can be quicker when it involves adding proper shadows, changing perspectives, or extending someithing with a lot of curvy lines to it. Sure, you can do those things with the traditional tools, but if the AI can do it faster, why not use it, even if it's just a small fix? Isn't that the point of AI, to help artists and creators do their work faster and easier. I would consider that editing using AI and not completely creating the whole photo using AI. 

Sometimes using AI doesn't work well at all, and the traditional tools are the best option. For instance, I find that the GenAI tool does a terrible job with mouths and teeth, as well as eyes. I can almost always make adjustments to those things using the traditional tools that looks better and achieves what I want quicker than trying to use the GenAI, and just refreshing it over and over, hoping to get the result I'm looking for. For me, the GenAI is good a specific tasks, like the ones I mentioned above.

[D Fosse]

-

[SK321]

Yeah.

This thread is mainly about people complaining that their images are ai-tagged. They don't like that.

My answer to that is: If you use ai, own it. It's your choice.

By @D Fosse

Do you label every image you retouch with Photoshop, in any way, as "Made with Photoshop"? I'm assuming you don't. Why not? Because Photoshop is just a tool that you've used to improve or enhance the photo you took the time and effort to take, probably with years of honing your skills. Just because you used a tool, like Photoshop, to improve that image doesn't mean that the entire image was "Made with Photoshop". It's the same with the "Made with AI" moniker except that the implication is even worse, because there are AI generators out there that you type in a prompt and it will spit out an entire image, which you have put absolutely 0 effort into yourself. A lot of people would assume if your photo says "Made with AI" that is what is meant. You can see the reason that a lot of photographers would like some nuance applied.

Does every piece of equipment you used to capture and produce that photo need credit as well? Do we need to always add "Made with Canon" or "Made with Godox" when we use their products to capture or enhance our photos? If not, then why do we have to announce that we used a tool like AI to make some adjustments to our photo?

[jane-e]

Do you label every image you retouch with Photoshop, in any way, as "Made with Photoshop"?

By @SK321

Hi SK

I have two questions for you.

• Have you read the answers on this thread telling you that Meta is applying the tag and not Adobe?
• Are you still getting a "Made with AI" tag when you post to Meta? Because Meta has stated that they listened to those who complained to them and are now using "AI info".

From Meta:

• We are making changes to the way we handle manipulated media based on feedback from the Oversight Board and our policy review process with public opinion surveys and expert consultations.
• We will begin adding “AI info” labels to a wider range of video, audio and image content when we detect industry standard AI image indicators or when people disclose that they’re uploading AI-generated content.
  (Updated on July 1, 2024 to reflect the revised label)

https://about.fb.com/news/2024/04/metas-approach-to-labeling-ai-generated-content-and-manipulated-me...

If you still have concerns, you really need to take them up with Meta. I expect this thread has run its course and needs to be locked. We can't help you with this. We can only explain how things work and I think the volunteers who have been answering you have done that.

Jane

Forum volunteer

[SK321]

It won't even remove the tiniest things from the background because she is showing too much skin. Forget trying to edit any beach photos

By @QINGCHARLES

I do some model photography from time-to-time and there are ways around this issue as well. If you need to use the Gen Fill, create a single, merged, layer copy of your image and turn off all the other layers. Then erase some of the body until Gen Fill stops giving you the warning. Hopefully whatever you're needing to remove or change isn't too close to the model's skin, because it can be more difficult in that case. But also, if you select a very small area, it tends to be less strict as well. I believe it only uploads and evaluates the area right around what you've selected, so if it's small enough, it just appears abstract and it won't ding you.

Once you have the Gen Fill layer(s), you can delete the single, merged copy and turn all your adjustment layers and background layer back on. At any rate, that's what's worked for me when it thinks the image is a bit too spicy.

[QINGCHARLES]

Thank you. I have to do exactly that right now. You're right it only seems to use content within a certain distance from the area you're trying to edit; you can definitely get lucky sometimes.

GenAI is sometimes so much better than Content-Aware Fill that it's incredibly frustrating to spend all this extra time to just do my job using a piece of software I pay for. Then having to strip all the tags out afterwards too.

I asked the Luminar guys if their GenAI is picky with females and they confirmed it has the same puritanical flaws.

[QINGCHARLES]

Funnily enough I just tested to see if GenAI would let me edit the Pioneer spaceprobe plaque or it would get upset by the man and woman, but it let me give her shoes😂

[SK321]

Funnily enough I just tested to see if GenAI would let me edit the Pioneer spaceprobe plaque or it would get upset by the man and woman, but it let me give her shoes😂

By @QINGCHARLES

Likely because it's a drawing. I think the AI is pretty good at detecting when it's a real person vs a drawing most of the time. Now, had it been a painting that was very photo real, you may have gotten different results.

[jay fresno]

I don't look at retouching with AI any differently than retouching with any other tool in Photoshop. That is, if it is used as a simple touchup, not a full bloon major change. So I don't think that an image should be tagged as AI unless the photo was fully created in AI or major additions and major editing was done with AI.