Photoshop Generative Fill AI

SDK^

SDK^

Messages
872
Edit My Images
No
This is impressive.
Changing photos using keyword searches, with auto blending, including variation options.

52920234218_df8b4111a4_w.jpg



 
I agree. It certainly is Beta software.
So I simply typed in "Two Elephants" this time to see what happens

Two-Elephants.jpg



A lot better, even got a new tree!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nog
We've ben given access to the BETA today.

Initial thoughts are that it's really useful for doing rough composites or to make quick edits, but so far not for final images.

I'd imagine it would also run into to the same issues that Dall-e and Midjourney do with copyright (though in the back of my mind I'm sure it uses Adobe Stock as ref, so maybe not).

But as a for instance, spent about an hour doing a rough retouch yesterday to extend the foreground in the image below and remove the logo. And a lot of that time was trying to find the correct pattern block work to extend the foreground.

a-man-with-a-shopping-trolley-and-a-dog-passes-by-the-ikea-shop-in-krakow-poland-on-november.jpg


My version

Retouch by Kell, on Flickr

Took about 2 minutes in the BETA version and was able to remove all the cars too.

Generative Retouch by Kell, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
I have just downloaded the beta, for me it is the canvas extending with Ai that is interesting as the current content aware though good with sky detail can not cope with things like paving stone pattern repeats.

Looking forward to trying it.
 
Tried it, don`t like anything it produced. Also messed up all my settings, so uninstalled it.
 
I think it’ll be good for my clients, maybe they need more space around an image for marketing text or to fit a certain size print or space without cropping off detail.

I saw something about this costing money per use, I hope not.
 
Photoshop is a compositing and manipulation tool. Manipulation of photographic images has always been around, since Julia Margaret Cameron's 'fairy' pictures, through myriad propaganda images, the moving of pyramids on the front cover of National Geographic, to today's AI generated stuff. Will it kill photography? I doubt it; photography never killed oil painting, which it was most definitely going to do according to early opponents. In terms of deception though; we are fed a constant stream of carefully selected and often manipulated images anyway, through our media, so that deception has been happening since long before Photoshop and AI.
 
I did consider it may evolve to automatically make photos better, it can take all the elements in the scene from a poor photo and recompose them, change angle, depth of field, expression even to make a better photo…

At that point I may be concerned about my job
 
Last edited:
I was watching a youtube video by a graphics professional / obviously very experienced photoshop user and teacher. He was absolutely blown away about what these new photoshop features can do.

Surely he must have reflected that he would soon be out of a job?

And that's only one part of it. As Abdi stated above manipulation has been part of photography since the very early days but it was originally very difficult to do. Since the onset of digital it has gradually been getting easier and most /all of the latest software now allows you to "swap skies" and all that sort of nonsense. One of them (I forget which) presented swapping skies as its main USP. But all the videos I've seen, and even just their titles, make it quite clear that this is a quantum leap for photography.

I know that we're being presented with highly manipulated and now entirely AI created images daily; I got them in my FB feed, flowers that look like cute animals, completely impossible cloudscapes and that sort of thing. And most viewers lap them. They are so gullible and so unaware of what reality actually looks like that they still believe every image they see is real. For the average photo enthusiast - which I'm sure most TP members are - photographs will usually be based in reality and integrity and they will carry on doing what they have always done.

But in the commercial world integrity has nothing to do with it. If you are selling something all you need is an image that gets your message across even if it is entirely fake. And remember those cases of "photoshopped" images winning competitions, being exposed and then disqualified? What hope is there that these new PS features will not make such things even easier to do and probably more difficult to identify?
 
Last edited:
As always, the tech isn’t the problem, it’s the idiots (present company obviously excluded) using it to manipulate and control us.
 
The23rdman said:
As always, the tech isn’t the problem, it’s the idiots (present company obviously excluded) using it to manipulate and control us.
Click to expand...


No, I disagree; in this case it IS the tech that's the problem. If it didn't exist, then no-one would be able to use it - for good or bad.
 
jerry12953 said:
No, I disagree; in this case it IS the tech that's the problem. If it didn't exist, then no-one would be able to use it - for good or bad.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but that statement makes no sense. If tech can be, as you said, used for good or bad then the problem is clearly that some people use it for bad. Doesn't that make the people the problem? If it was only used to further our evolution and solve real-world issues then the tech is good.
 
jerry12953 said:
Please see my post above....... :)
Click to expand...

Ah, you added most of that after I posted my post :)

For the popularity and like chasers these advances are ideal for them.

For people who photograph for the hobby of it and the enjoyment of it, I'd like to think things won't change much.

The most frustrating thing is, as you mentioned, how the general public lap these amazing 110% perfect images up! Completely unaware of the fact it isn't real. They are probably the same Joe Public who believe all the media they read and see too but that's going off on a tangent and not for this thread... ;)

There's a night sky photographer who is pretty popular on social media (not famous or professional) and he has on many occasions posted images of the Milky Way etc that are blatantly fake but the social media "Wow" "Amazing" comments just keep rolling in......

For me, some of it does make editing easier and more accurate. I have actually just started using sky replacement as an alternative to mask blending my tracked night sky images with my foreground images as an example.
 
The23rdman said:
I'm sorry, but that statement makes no sense. If tech can be, as you said, used for good or bad then the problem is clearly that some people use it for bad. Doesn't that make the people the problem? If it was only used to further our evolution and solve real-world issues then the tech is good.
Click to expand...


I think this is a bit of a blind alley, to be honest. We're talking about Photoshop here!
 
I think we need to be careful with this as some pictures are just so horrible it's difficult to unsee them. I suppose the tech will get better but at the mo and based just on what's in this thread I think you'd need to be a blind man on a galloping horse to think these are photographs you'd be happy with.

Just my vho :D
 
I have had a play and like it. I found it great for extending photographs that have lost space around the main subject during geometry corrections, yes it can be done with content aware fill but content aware only repeats adjacent pixels and can not do perspective on pavements or curtains.
Entirely Ai generated objects from the text field has in my opinion a way to go but it is still a first generation beta which can only get better the more it learns.
 
SFTPhotography said:
Are we photographers or digital artists. For the latter, this is exciting and makes the difficult much more "accessible". For photographers a little something gets lost. Particularly the compositional craft.
Click to expand...
I have put my head on the chopping block on numerous occasions at Club meets with this first-sentence statement. Sometimes it is borne from seeing competition winning images presented, other times it's just pulling the grenade pin and watching the ""Discussion"" unfold...
 
reheat module said:
I have put my head on the chopping block on numerous occasions at Club meets with this first-sentence statement. Sometimes it is borne from seeing competition winning images presented, other times it's just pulling the grenade pin and watching the ""Discussion"" unfold...
Click to expand...

I am good at pulling grenade pins...
 
reheat module said:
I have put my head on the chopping block on numerous occasions at Club meets with this first-sentence statement. Sometimes it is borne from seeing competition winning images presented, other times it's just pulling the grenade pin and watching the ""Discussion"" unfold...
Click to expand...
Reference Photographers or digital artists, well the lines are becoming increasingly blurred and I suspect the question may not even be asked in a few years!!
 
jerry12953 said:
I'd like to think the question will still be asked but where does it all leave the pure photographer?
Click to expand...
The human pure photographer or the ai that generated pure human photography:p

I think it’s going to get messy!!
 
Real life scenario...

Except what I actually did was tidied up the black shirt with the photoshop cloning tool

But out of interest.. what I could have done is regenerated his top :)

VP Ringo _ original (1 of 1) - A1205432-Enhanced-NR.jpg

photoshopAI_resize.jpg
 
jerry12953 said:
It looks like there is virtually no limit to the changes that could be made to images with very little effort or knowledge needed by the "photographer".
Click to expand...

Long gone are the days where I would repaint the walls, remove sockets and signs and offer up freshly ironed changes of clothes to subjects.
 
Been playing with this for few days, I find that it is really great at expanding images (landscapes at least) in a way that does look realistic.
But there are times when you think you are wanting to add something simple like a stack of pizza boxes.. and you get some really weird looking results.
Fun thing to play with - not sure it really comes into use for me as a sports photographer... but for some downtime and funny edits.. why not ;-)
 
GooGaBu said:
Been playing with this for few days, I find that it is really great at expanding images (landscapes at least) in a way that does look realistic.
But there are times when you think you are wanting to add something simple like a stack of pizza boxes.. and you get some really weird looking results.
Fun thing to play with - not sure it really comes into use for me as a sports photographer... but for some downtime and funny edits.. why not ;-)
Click to expand...

Amazing photo, sadly missing a ball? AI generate a random unofficial ball - but with correct direction of light :)

Ok the random bit is a bit annoying... perhaps that could change one day
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top