Rejection rate increases, especially for Midjourney and others. Is Firefly preferred?

[MustafaKawa]

same experiencing here

can anyone help me what is wrong with the attached pictures

[Abambo]

Your first has several errors. In addition, the eyes are not great.

The scarf has two different textures. The chin has a mark, like an accidental correcting pen in Photoshop. I even did check twice that it wasn't my error. The left side of the corner of the mouth is strange. The lower eye lids (also the right one that I have not marked), have pixel errors.

[Abambo]

Fastcheck on the second: 

The hair does not blend nicely into the background and contains artefacts (right upper corner). The arm has a dark stripe, like some hair leftover. The AI didn't know what to do with that.

In this case, it is worth taking a look at the blouse. The AI still doesn't make buttons correctly.

There is a line on the chin, the eyes are not good, the iris should be round and not so glassy. The eyelash area is bad and in the corners are make-up residue, or whatever.

Earrring or not earring, that is the question, because this is not good.

[Abambo]

Last, your Dr.:

I can only repeat: check the eyes. Real eyes don't look like marbles. Check the earrings, and then, the woman has teeth like a shark, not as sharp, but in double rows. Etc.

The blurred puctures on the wall contain, barely visible, squares. That's an error, I wouldn't expect anymore.

[Jill_C]

Here's another drawing error in the first image

[daniellei4510]

In addition to @Abambo's observations. Some wrinkles to attend to, straw-like patches of hair, rudimentary teeth. As I've recommended in the past, facial restoration software can solve many of these issues if used correctly.

https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1sVsoBd9AjckIXThgtZhGrHRfFI6UUYOo#scrollTo=zuBCgeH08tdn

This software was originally designed to fix blurry or old photographs, but also works well with fixing AI issues.

[daniellei4510]

I ran this through facial restoration software to provide an example. I also ran it though PortraitPro to soften the hair, but that's an expense you may not want to invest in, unless you're really serious about creating people with AI. I only had it myself from my photograph days. 

[daniellei4510]

I probably should clarify about the use of photo restoration software. Since it wasn't created specifically for fixing issues with AI. It is only good for eyes, nostrils, lips/teeth, and sometimes ears, so some time spent masking is required. It over-corrects all other features, and it works best if the subject is facing more or less head on. It is useless with three-quarter or full profiles. 

[oleschwander]

I don't think the reviewers can see where the files derives from. I think your images look good overall - except for the buttons and missing earring as Abambo mention. I've had experience with the fact that one thing to be very careful of is that Adobe reviewers don't like big, wild flowing hair...! I think that is the biggest issue ik these images.

[Jill_C]

It's not that they don't "like" big, wild flowing hair, it's that the AI engines don't do a good job of rendering such hair without multiple flaws...

[daniellei4510]

Very true. Correcting issues with "big" hair is extremely time-consuming, so much so that for a brief period I was prompting specifically for short hair or even shaved heads. 🙂 Since gen fill, however, it became somewhat easier, as it can sometimes replace problematic areas or remove extreme fly-aways without spending time cloning out or removing hair manually.