P: Generated images violate user guidelines

[Hematita]

So as you can see, it's a PG-13 relatively inoffensive image of a woman in a bunny outfit. The top worked fine, and I was able to complete the top ear, which is cool. When I tried to extend the bottom with generative fill, though, I got this warning. They're just a pair of legs wearing stockings, and I wanted to extend it.

It feels like a false flag - though I could be wrong? I find myself thinking it would do the same for women in swimsuits.

Figured I'd share here.

[J E L]

@daniellei4510, re: Have you tried going to firefly.adobe.com to accomplish what you are trying to do?

One reason might be because creations made with Firefly Beta are watermarked and can not be used commercially yet.

[daniellei4510]

But neither can images made with generative fill, since the results are firefly based and generative fill is still in beta. 

[J E L]

Yes, that's correct, and it's spelled out in the terms of use. https://www.adobe.com/legal/licenses-terms/adobe-gen-ai-user-guidelines.html, But there isn't a watermark in Photoshop Beta creations, so I imagine that some users are trying to get around the rules.

[maximeb98570593]

Totally agree. Firefly is becoming completely useless with those rules. I was attempting to extend up a picture of a DJ I'm working for (he gives me the right to modifies his pictures in order to create flyers and other visuals). The problem with the picture of him, is that the top of his head was missing. I wanted to use generative extend to add the top of his head and continue up the background. Blocked by "against user guidelines". No sex, no violence, no nothing.

By the way, the funniest thing is that Adobe software is likely to be used by the whole adult industry. Hey Adobe: aren't you being a little hypocritical?

[maximeb98570593]

This last sentence I wrote regarding the adult industry litterally scares me. In the future, if generative AI progresses allow it, would Adobe use it to control the kind of content we are currently editing using their software? Could you imagine Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects, etc. refusing to execute an operation because it is against "User Guidelines", after automatically scanning text, graphic assets, etc.? 

[G Barry5CCE]

Photoshop: Using generative expand:
Image is flagged as violating safe use guidelines when it clearly is not.

[joee1020930]

If you try to use generative AI with 'Elk' as a prompt, it will trigger the "this violates guidelines..." warning. This happens 100% of the time for me. 

[The Dungen]

If it indentifies a woman in the picture generative fill with no prompt considers everyhing in breach of the user guidelines.

[The Dungen]

This is how I think it works. It's a two tier system, first is a keyword system. It's somehwta intelligent for an example allows swimsuit and woman but not woman in swimsuit, it gets a lot more restivtive soon as it catches a female pronoun or anything that identifies the subject as a woman.

The second layer is it generates the outputs and scans them, my guess is they use a pcuture interpretor AI for this, turning it back into text and then it goes back into the same keyword system as the first layer.
I would guess that if there is a prompt only the returned layer is scanned, if there is no prompt the entire picture is scanned. No idea why.

[defaultv0ebunsxbki0]

I find that 90% of images that have an above average amount of skin showing gets flagged...  I am a fashion and glamour photographer and this tool is pretty much usless to me... it is to bad because it would save me time in certain situations.

[Olivier2023242526]

misogyny

[JULIO CESAR HERRERA PEÑA]

LAS FOTOGRAFIAS DE PERSONAS AL HACER RELLENO GENERATIVO CONTINUAMENTE ME MANDA EL MENSAJE DE QUE VIOLA LAS NORMAS COMO SI FUERA UNA FOTOGRAFIA CON POCA ROPA ME IMAGINO Y NADA QUE VER ES FRUSTRANTE.  ADJUNTO LA IMAGEN SOBRE LA CUAL ME MANDA EL MENSAJE 

[Caity.psd]

@JULIO CESAR HERRERA PEÑA what is the selection you are making or trying to add or remove?

I tested with the latest 25.1 build (release today) and had no issues.

Thank you,

Caity

[Gregusaurus]

I updated this morning to the new version of Photoshop Beta 25.1. A  new alert now pops up when the  generated  image seemingly conflicts with the guidelines. We can now "request a review". I have not seen this before. See the image attached.

 

[yarivYO]

Hello. I'm just trying to extend the floor in a blurry office photo and I get an orange message that I violate user guideline.

very strange

thank you

Yariv

[joee1020930]

If you try to use generative AI with 'Elk' as a prompt, it will trigger the "this violates guidelines..." warning. This happens 100% of the time for me. 

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@joee1020930 I get the same trying to enter "elk" but I can get a "moose". I think the AI has it in for the Elk population or is moose-biased. lol.

[J E L]

@joee1020930, maybe 99.9 percent of the time?

[joee1020930]

Lol. I tried yours and it did work. I will agree it's < 100%.

[J E L]

Love it, lol, no charge. Note that short prompts (especially single words) are often a problem. I find the wordier I get, the better chance something will go through without the violation error.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@J E L mine also only worked with your specifc prompt - the minute I tried something different it failed lol

[Caity.psd]

Hi everyone, quick update :sparkles:

With Photoshop (beta) app version 25.1, we have added the ability to request a review for false violations. You may choose to include the image in your review by checking the box "Include image and layer data with your feedback" and attach a note with your review request.

This will help us improve the experience for everyone. Thank you all!

Caity

[Programmierung98A6]

Retouching a birthmark on the cheek? Violates user guidelines!

Changing my beard to be a clean shave? Violates user guidelines!

Repearing my cats foot, which was just out of frame? Violates user guidelines!

Removing the print on my shirt? Violates user guidelines!

Generating an axe? Violates user guidelines!

Generating a cats body, just from its head as a source? Violates user guidelines!

Fixing a house flies wings in a macro shot, which are partially out of frame? Violates user guidelines!

Fixing a butterflies wings, which are just out of frame? Violates user guidelines aswell!

About 15-25% of all my generative expands end up being blocked as false-positives.

It's really disappointing seeing the new Photoshop being so capable, yet straight up refusing its service, because of distrust in me, the user. Either make the "user guideline violation" classifier a LOT more lax, or provide the user with an option to "continue anyway" at the users descretion of staying within user guidelines.

I've had it happen multiple times since using the beta that I had to put an image out now, and it was just missing one last detail, but Photoshop refused to do it, because it falsely thought it violated user guidelines. This is an absolute no-go. I am the user, I know better what I'm working with. So let me decide and let me take responsibility!

[The Dungen]

The AI can take inputs in a bunch oof languages so my guess is elk means something flaggable in some other language.

[Jim319775500hsf]

I tried to remove a cigarette from a woman's fingers on a wedding photo and because she was holding a wine glass with the same hand, next to her cleavage, Firefly branded me a pornographer. If we can't be treated like adults when testing a tool we're literally paying good money for, I'd prefer not to have it at all. Relase it when it's caught up to 21st century attitudes to a women's right to wear whatever she wants and then let me know - but until then it's just not ready for serious use in portrait photography. 99% of my clients want items removed from the background. If I can't make a selection around these areas without Firefly also detecting what's outside of the selection, then imposing some sort of Irainian style censorship on them, I won't use it at all. I expect better than this from Adobe. Just not cool at all.