Persistent Account Based Setting to Disable Generative AI?

[michaelm2239504]

Are there any plans in motion to set a flag within an Adobe User Profile to remove Generative AI from search results within Stock?

I am aware that a user can set a filter to remove Generative AI from the search results.  I also realize the usefulness of this depends on the quality of the image attributes (ie, Generative AI, yes or no). Garbage In = Garbage Out if the submission to Adobe's database has issues (e.g., contributor did not tell Adobe it was Generative AI) or if Adobe is unable to trap GIGO headed to its database. That's a big discussion though ... opportunistic types are sure to jump on the bandwagon of inappropriate submissions. Obviously, if generated content is high quality, then automated flagging of suspect submissions will not be easy.

My reason for this is two-fold:

1.  I sometimes forget to set this filter as I am in the habit of going into Adobe Stock and merrily searching.  I then end up with undesired items in my Favorites for subsequent review and licensing decisions. It then becomes a time-waster for me. But this also implies that my initial impression of the particular stock number was favorable. Which then leads me to point 2 ...

2.  As a matter of respect to creative individuals (real ones, not those putting forth work using Generative AI without disregard for artists).  Personally, I am not a fan of Generative AI due to the current (and potential) impact upon real artists. I also realize that with some value-add effort that it *might* be part of a creative process - I am in wait and see mode. It certainly has the potential for a lot of abuse.

A setting for this (Generative AI - Yes or No) in the Adobe User Profile would be appreciated. I have no problems with a non-invasive quarterly or annual popup saying something like this: "You presently have Generative AI turned off. Would you like to maintain this setting?"

As a paid suscriber to Adobe Stock, I have expectations of decent quality stock images curated (hopefully) by real people and artists-designers. The purchase transaction of Stock has an implied two-way aspect: Adobe takes my money, and as a licencing intermediate, they provide good content back from artists and designers. I did not contemplate Generative AI being a theoretical party to the transaction when I signed up.

Adobe should provide an Opt-Out setting for Generative AI.  In my mind, Generative AI becomes like a form of spam in my search results. "Your spam is not my spam" - some folks will want the Generative AI on by default. That is certainly not the case for all users. It is somewhat presumptuous on Adobe's part to presume I want it.

Thank you for consideration of this topic and feature.

[Philip22712894tooo]

In my opinion AI images are a clear violation of artists copyright and we should all be boycotting stock AI images. Some day the courts will sort that out but shame on Adobe. Not only that, most look fake and overdone — hopefully it's a fad that passes (kind of like gradient blends circa 1998).   

That said, more and more search results are AI: I want adobe to offer a DEFAULT where I can permanently toggle AI off in my search results. Adobe big brother: please make this change. 

[This idea was merged with another one by the moderator. Do not forget to vote on the idea. That is an important metric.]

[daniellei4510]

On the Search page, near the bottom.

[Jill_C]

There is a Filter to exclude Generative AI, as pointed out by @daniellei4510 however it doesn't seem to be permanent. You have to select it each time you go to the Buyers portal.

[Philip22712894tooo]

Thanks I am aware of the toogle, however I search hundreds of times a day. I am asking Adobe to allow us to permanently deactivate/activate. I don't want to see AI images.

[RyanLW]

Agreed. There should be a default and permanent off setting if you want it. I certainly don't want it.

There is also a glitch with the search + Generative AI setting also. If you select "Exclude Generative AI" while searching it works. If you open an image in a new window or even just open a new window and try to do another search. The settings default back to "Include Generative AI" even though you have the other window open.

It's a huge problem.

[daniellei4510]

Not sure if this helps much, but I believe you can also enter -ai (minus sign ai) in your search query to exclude generative AI. Also, don't get your hopes up that's it's a fad. It'll get better, but it's here to stay. 🙂

[Abambo]

@daniellei4510 wrote:
-ai (minus sign ai) in your search query to exclude generative AI

That works only on the keywords. The “ai” keyword is no more required. So that will be only a partial solution. The best solution would be to allow for sticky filer options, but also show the user, what filter options are currently used. Many will use a filter and, ten days later, wonder why stock only shows horizontal assets…

[Abambo]

The search parameters are not sticky. That is the problem. They should be sticky even after a current session closes. The user should have feedback on their settings.

[michaelm2239504]

Correct ... it's not persistent at all. I have had it drop the AI=OFF mid-session as well.  It's getting to be a real hassle.

[michaelm2239504]

Yep ... anything close to "another session" (e.g. - opening another window) means bye-bye AI=OFF for the remainder of the session.  They need to deal with this at a true persistence level (in another life I was a database architect ... so we are talking about a Profile Setting for this). Adobe's current approach is not working.

[michaelm2239504]

I agree 100%. True persistence for AI=OFF.

[Abambo]

@michaelm2239504,

Answering on an Ideas or Bug thread is not threaded, so, when you answer a certain person's entry, use please the @ to tag them. You can answer as that also in one message, which avoids clogging the discussion stream. (This is for eventually future remarks. It is not really a big deal, or a violation of some etiquette. It's just a matter of my experience, dealing with these fora)

[Luke34338499kvab]

I license dozens of images a day which remain licensed on our company account, and then get used by our designers. Accidentally licensing AI generated images results in those images being tied to our account and used by other employees. The ability to either unlicense images or add a sticky "AI=OFF" setting tied to our account would solve this issue for me.

[Jill_C]

This seems like a good idea. Be sure you vote on the original post. More votes means more likely to get the attention of the Adobe product manager who decides which features get implemented.

[philipk88448296]

I posted about this topic months ago. My client just licensed a stock image of doctors, and when we viewed the hi-res shot, one person had three eyes and it was HORRIBLE. Adobe needs to stop pushing the AI. Its wreaking havoc on my workflow as clients approve lo-res preview images under deadline and when we download the hi-res image, they are unusable. It makes our studio look bad. They push AI because they can make more money and do not have to pay (the pennies they do pay) to actual photographers. Adobe STOP. ALlow me to permanently toggle off the AI in my search options.

[michaelm2239504]

3 eyes ... unreal. Totally agree with your comments. Adobe needs to fix
this. Period.

[daniellei4510]

While the damage has been done, have you requested a refund on the purchase in question? If you post the asset number here, I'm sure you can get your credit restored.

[Abambo]

@philipk88448296 ,

Contributors get paid the same amount for photographs and generative AI. Even if I agree with you that the quality of (a lot of) generative AI assets is terrible, and that the moderation team really fails with those assets, generative AI seems to be a commercial success.

[Philip22712894tooo]

Generative AI scrubs OTHER photographers images to create a final image—quite possibly yours or mine. Those photographers (and models if people are included) are not getting reimbursed. I respectfully disagree with you and also find the legality of commercially licensed AI to be dubious. The Supreme Court, and EU copyright agencies, will hopefully crack down on this at some point. In the meantime my students who are illustrators and photographers and use Adobe products are demoralized by their employment prospects in the future. I don’t understand why Adobe pushes products and images that actually undermine the financial future of their paying subscriber base. Big brother, are you listening?

[daniellei4510]

AI is clearly here to stay. Artists complained when photography was invented. Photographers complained when Adobe Photoshop hit the scene. Everyone adapted and all are still thriving.

[philipk88448296]

Hi—“nothing to worry about” seems to be a common response, but I disagree. Photography replaced fine artists with PEOPLE and those people made money using their tools (the camera) to produce images, as well helped launch the camera, film, and motion picture industries— AI is replacing people with ALGORYTHMS. I find that to be a key difference. Technocrats writing the algorithms will benefit in the short term but eventually even their jobs can be replaced by AI. I work in Silicon Valley and am seeing this first hand. I encourage you to do some deep reading on the topic as it will be a defining one for creatives in the next decade.

[michaelm2239504]

@philipk88448296 <> ... I
agree. People vs algorithms is a key point of distinction between
historical labor patterns and what we see occuring now. While we see labor
role obsolescence in history, it did not occur at the theoretical scale
that AI can bring.

Back in Adobe Stock Images. I was searching for a particular topic image
and couldn't find what I was looking for. So I put in a temporary (with a
note to the reader that this was a temporary thing) image from the Gen AI
heap. Its lack of quality stood out compared to other stock images. The
topic was covered off reasonably well in support of my written text. But
the image quality was off. It lacked life and vitality somehow ... there
was an assemblage of little things that left it almost plastic looking.
Somewhat like artificial plastic laminate woods vs real wood ... that sort
of thing. The discerning eye will notice it. It is like those poor excuses
for chocolate bars or cookies - I am old enough to remember what they
tasted like "back in the day."

I would have preferred that Adobe put development dollars in AI towards
their search engine, manual categorization and refinement of taxonomies and
keywords, or good old-fashioned photographic curation. Perhaps additional $
towards photographers which would increase submissions of quality work.

[Marcus38147176cm9q]

Please Adobe, take heed! This is the single most frustrating thing when exploring Stock images!

Excluding AI as default (or at very least including an option to exclude as default in settings) needs to be a priority for user experience, not to mention artists' revenue. 

Please prioritise this ASAP!  

[Abambo]

@philipk88448296 

Hi—“nothing to worry about” seems to be a common response, but I disagree. Photography replaced fine artists with PEOPLE and those people made money using their tools (the camera) to produce images, as well helped launch the camera, film, and motion picture industries

You can't stop the progress. Best is to use it to its best. The history is full with people who feared that progress would cost them their jobs. Google "sabotage".

[daniellei4510]

Do you really think AI is not being used in the motion picture industry? Do you think Marvel and DC comics could come out with super hero movies every six or seven weeks without it? 😉 Yeah, I'm exaggerating, but still.