• 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
2

Feature Request: Premium License for Generative-Fill

Community Beginner ,
Nov 29, 2023 Nov 29, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

As a professional boudoir photographer, with a large following and hundreds of raving reviews and positive feedback, the limits on the Generative Fill for nudity is (while understandable) a bit frustrating. I know it's a difficult workaround but I'm wondering if the following idea could gain any traction for my fellow boudoir photographers.

 

I'm proposing photographers' ability to apply for an Adobe approved professionally licensed use of the AI functions by submitting a body of work, alongside testimonials of clients, as well as reviews. Maybe even proof of the success of the business and it's ethical practices.

 

Based on the limited language of the Generative Fill's guidelines, we don't actually violate them. But the simple nature of the nudity we sometimes have in individual photos, has continuously blocked my ability to lighten the load of manual retouching. There is no generating nudity or "p0rn" or violence or anything. But even using GF to smooth out distractions on our sometimes messy backdrop and floor, gets blocked because of nudity elsewhere in the photo. 

 

We've been a long established, ethical and empowering business for individuals and couples and have been categorized as "p0rn" by more than this particular function. (Stripe kicked us off of their platform citing similar issues with our work.) We would like to be able to take advantage of this growing technology but can't with these restrictions that lump us in with a lot of actually harmful and unethical users.

Idea No status
TOPICS
Actions and scripting , macOS , Windows

Views

416

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
18 Comments
Community Expert ,
Nov 29, 2023 Nov 29, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@MikeAllebach your theory is flawed - Generative Fill does not give violations due to the content of your image. More likely it's either the "false-flag" violation by not entering a prompt or the prompt is actually violating the terms.

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Beginner ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Not according to Adobe after an hour long chat with them. I was told specifically that the violation notices I get are because of the content of our work. 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Beginner ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Not according to Adobe after an hour long chat with them. I was told specifically that the violation notices I get are because of the content of our work. 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Beginner ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@kevin stohlmeyer for example, they told me to avoid the violations, I could make a new layer select the background to remove the subject (ie the nudity) and retouch whatever I was trying to retouch out using GF. Then photoshop the subject back in.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@MikeAllebach who specifically did you talk with? Online chat?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Beginner ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@kevin stohlmeyer Honestly, I'm not sure how to go about finding the name of the person I was chatting with. 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@MikeAllebach name doesnt matter but was this through online chat on Adobe.com?

The reason I ask is this is completely opposite of what has been discussed with the internal teams and in this community.

 

We have many other boudoir and other fashion photographers that have shown they are using without issue if using prompts no matter the image content.

 

Here are some publicly posted resrouces:

https://helpx.adobe.com/manage-account/using/machine-learning-faq.html - "We don't analyze content processed or stored locally on your device."

https://techcrunch.com/2023/01/06/is-adobe-using-your-photos-to-train-its-ai-its-complicated/

 

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Beginner ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@kevin stohlmeyer It was through the online chat and they were VERY specific about the reasons and how to get around it. They were the one who suggested I post here about this idea. I asked in several different ways and they said that the AI can't differentiate between what is acceptable nudity and unacceptable. What's weird is most of them are fine but then some aren't and get the violation. The prompts are almost always "remove" because I'm taking out things that are distracting in the background that I usually would work with content aware to fix. But this function is much more accurate in replicating the patterns and gradations. 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

There's a bit of meta-irony here...online chat is probably AI. I don't know specifically about Adobe, but it is everywhere else now.

 

I think I'd take Kevin's word over an algorithm any day 😉

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Beginner ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@D Fosse Totally get that. It's just the prompt of either "remove" or even just a . which was suggested in FB groups, still prompts violations that I can't quite figure out. And, not every time either. I did an image today that I took out a lightswitch and outlet. As soon as I went to remove some varicose veins (using remove then . ) gave me a violation. I did chat with 2 people by the way. The first disconnected and the second I asked if they could read my past one so I didn't have to go through it all again and they were able to. So maybe that was still AI... Idk. It's so frustrating!

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

 

@MikeAllebach 

 

How did you remove varicose veins before the days of Generative Fill?

 

Jane

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Beginner ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@jane-e Oh, I'd use content aware or the clone stamp. I just keep playing around and testing it to see if I can detect any pattern at all in the violations. Everthing I'm using it for is stuff I've been doing without it. But I'd love to be able to use it to speed some things up. I most certainly don't "need" it but it's nice to use for some of my more annoying and time consuming work. 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@MikeAllebach I can say that the violations are becoming less frequent as the AI learns and Adobe pivots on the back end. The latest release to the algorithm was this month and I've been told saw significant reduction in posted violations. Reporting "false flags" when you get them helps the team and AI learn from mistakes and improves as a whole.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@MikeAllebach Ive also been told the period trick may no longer work as the AI learns. You may have to be descriptive in your prompts to avoid violations. This alone is a new frontier for most creative people - learning how to be eloquent in their descriptions to get more accurate and expected results.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Beginner ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@kevin stohlmeyer Yea, that all makes a lot of sense. Although, when I use specific prompts besides "remove" or "." I sometimes get the weirdest results. For example, a client had a bandaid on his knee. I prompted "remove the bandaid" and it came up with an eyeball lol

 

Anyway, thank you so much for your insight. This is clearly not a suggestion that is necessary. Based on my conversation with an Adobe rep, it appears I was misinformed. 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@MikeAllebach I keep using remove no matter what the little dialog box says. It works!

Besides the good discussion - I wouldn't dimsiss your original request at all - there may still be some validation in a tiered format as this evolves. I focused on the violations not your premium point.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Beginner ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@kevin stohlmeyer Much appreciated!! 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Explorer ,
Nov 30, 2023 Nov 30, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

One trick that might help is to make a new temporary layer and roughly paint in some "clothing" on your subject. It wouldn't help if you are trying to generate certain body parts, but it should reduce the violations for other things as the AI would see this temp layer.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report