Adobe 的生成式 AI 平台是问题的完美提炼

去年，Adobe 多次更新了 Firefly 生成式 AI 平台，最近一次更新是在 9 月份。在那段时间里，依赖该技术的 Lightroom 和 Photoshop 工具变得越来越糟糕，系统选择在海鸥照片上添加比特币徽标是问题的完美升华。

Adobe updated its Firefly generative AI platform multiple times last year, the most recent coming in September. Over that time, the Lightroom and Photoshop tools that rely on the technology have gotten steadily worse and the system’s choice to add a Bitcoin logo to a photo of a seagull is a perfect distillation of the problem.

Adobe 去年多次更新了 Firefly 生成式 AI 平台，最近一次更新是在 9 月份。在那段时间里，依赖该技术的 Lightroom 和 Photoshop 工具变得越来越糟糕，系统选择在海鸥照片上添加比特币徽标是问题的完美升华。

Last week, I struggled to get any of Adobe’s generative or content-aware tools to extend a background and cover an area for a thumbnail I was working on for our YouTube channel. Previous to the updates last year, the tasks I asked Photoshop to handle were done quickly and without issue. Since, however, it’s been a rocky road.

上周，我努力使用 Adob​​e 的生成工具或内容感知工具来扩展背景并覆盖我正在为 YouTube 频道制作的缩略图的区域。在去年的更新之前，我要求 Photoshop 处理的任务很快就完成了，没有任何问题。然而，从那时起，这条路就崎岖不平。

All I was trying to do was make a little bit more room on that side of the frame so I could reposition the camera and lens Chris was using.

我想做的就是在框架的那一侧留出更多的空间，这样我就可以重新定位克里斯正在使用的相机和镜头。

Eventually had to resort to the old-fashioned way of doing this and manually cloned out the area to produce the thumbnail we eventually published:

最终不得不诉诸老式的方法来执行此操作并手动克隆该区域以生成我们最终发布的缩略图：

The issue with my request is apparently known by Adobe. When I reached out to the company for comment, a company representative pointed me to an article on Lightroom Queen where it says asking Generative Remove or Generative Fill to work in a space requires that the entire subject and anything related to it be selected or else it will try and replace it with something.

Adobe 显然已经知道我的请求存在问题。当我联系该公司征求意见时，一位公司代表向我指出了 Lightroom Queen 上的一篇文章，其中提到要求生成删除或生成填充在空间中工作需要选择整个主题以及与之相关的任何内容，否则它会被删除。会尝试用一些东西代替它。

“Select the entire object/person, including its shadow, reflection, and any disconnected parts (such as a hand on someone else’s shoulder). Otherwise, the AI tries to rebuild the object based on what’s left behind. For example, if you select a person and miss their feet, Lightroom tries to rebuild a new person to fit the feet,” the article reads.

“选择整个物体/人，包括它的阴影、反射和任何断开的部分（例如放在别人肩膀上的手）。否则，人工智能会尝试根据留下的内容重建对象。例如，如果您选择一个人但错过了他们的脚，Lightroom 会尝试重建一个新的人以适合脚，”文章中写道。

While this kind of makes sense if you don’t think about it too hard, it also is completely counterintuitive to the concept of the name of the tool and the result an editor is expecting.

虽然如果你不仔细思考的话这是有道理的，但它也与工具名称的概念和编辑器期望的结果完全违反直觉。

If I am selecting a body part and asking a tool to fill or remove that space, zero percent of the time would I want it to replace my selection with its eldritch nightmare version of that exact same thing. What I, and any editor doing this, want is for what is selected to be removed as seamlessly as possible.

如果我选择一个身体部位并要求一个工具来填充或删除该空间，那么我希望它用完全相同的东西的可怕噩梦版本替换我的选择的可能性为零。我和任何这样做的编辑都希望尽可能无缝地删除所选内容。

Also, this method does not always work, as I demonstrated last year:

此外，正如我去年所演示的那样，这种方法并不总是有效：

This is a repeat of the problem I showcased last fall when I pitted Apple’s Clean Up tool against Adobe Generative tools. Multiple times, Adobe’s tool wanted to add things into a shot and did so even if an entire subject was selected — which runs counter to the instructions Adobe pointed me to in the Lightroom Queen article.

这是我去年秋天将 Apple 的清理工具与 Adob​​e 生成工具进行比较时所展示的问题的重复。 Adobe 的工具多次想要将内容添加到镜头中，即使选择了整个主题，也会这样做 - 这与 Adob​​e 在 Lightroom Queen 文章中向我指出的说明背道而驰。

Adobe also pointed me to an Adobe Community post that has some tips for getting better results out of its generative tools, and while I can confirm these do help, we’re still seeing weird results even if we follow the instructions to the letter.

Adobe 还向我推荐了一篇 Adob​​e 社区帖子，其中提供了一些利用其生成工具获得更好结果的提示，虽然我可以确认这些确实有帮助，但即使我们严格按照说明进行操作，我们仍然会看到奇怪的结果。

This loops us back to the Bitcoin situation. Yesterday, photographer Matthew Raifman shared a bizarre result Adobe’s Generative AI produced in Lightroom. The Generative Remove tool saw a selection of a reflection and decided to replace it with a Bitcoin logo.

这让我们回到了比特币的情况。昨天，摄影师 Matthew Raifman 分享了 Adob​​e 的 Generative AI 在 Lightroom 中生成的奇怪结果。生成删除工具看到了一个反射选择，并决定将其替换为比特币徽标。

“Adobe has officially jumped the shark. Their AI remove feature in lightroom just added a bitcoin to my gull bird in flight photo,” he shared on Bluesky. “A bitcoin!?!”

“Adobe 已正式跃跃欲试。他们在 Lightroom 中的人工智能删除功能刚刚为我的海鸥飞行照片添加了比特币，”他在 Bluesky 上分享道。 “比特币！？！”

Raifman shared a screen recording with PetaPixel that verifies this wasn’t added on purpose and was the first suggestion from Adobe’s AI.

Raifman 与 PetaPixel 分享了一段屏幕录像，证实这不是故意添加的，并且是 Adob​​e AI 的第一个建议。

To its credit, two of the three options Generative Remove suggested did provide usable alternatives. Unfortunately, the Bitcoin option was the first one, which (whether Adobe intends this or not) tells an editor that it is what the platform feels is the best result.

值得赞扬的是，生成删除建议的三个选项中的两个确实提供了可用的替代方案。不幸的是，比特币选项是第一个，它（无论 Adob​​e 是否有意）告诉编辑，这是平台认为最好的结果。

It’s not so much that Adobe’s tools don’t work well, it’s more the manner of how they’re not working well — if we weren’t trying to get work done, some of these results would be really funny. In the case of the Bitcoin thing, it just seems like it’s trying to replace the painted pixels with something similar in shape to the detected “object” the user is trying to remove. But that doesn’t make any sense in how editors would expect the tool to perform.

与其说 Adob​​e 的工具不能很好地工作，不如说是它们不能很好地工作的方式——如果我们不努力完成工作，其中一些结果将会非常有趣。就比特币而言，它似乎试图用与用户试图删除的检测到的“对象”形状相似的东西来替换绘制的像素。但这对于编辑者期望该工具的执行方式没有任何意义。

Editors don’t want something replaced with an object akin to what they select to remove, they want it replaced with what is around it. But, somehow, Adobe’s AI just isn’t coded to understand this and it repeatedly generates the weirdest stuff because of it.

编辑者不希望用与他们选择删除的对象类似的对象替换某些内容，他们希望用其周围的对象替换它。但是，不知何故，Adobe 的人工智能的编码无法理解这一点，因此它不断地生成最奇怪的东西。

Generative Remove and Generative Fill have become so unreliable that some members of the PetaPixel staff have stopped using it entirely. As I pointed out, I had to go back to the manual clone stamp method to get the task I wanted completed.

生成删除和生成填充变得非常不可靠，以至于 PetaPixel 员工的一些成员已经完全停止使用它。正如我所指出的，我必须回到手动克隆印章方法才能完成我想要的任务。

“Overall, Adobe is aware and actively working to resolve,” Adobe tells PetaPixel.

Adobe 告诉 PetaPixel：“总的来说，Adobe 已经意识到并积极努力解决这个问题。”

When Adobe is pushing AI as the biggest value proposition in its updates

当 Adob​​e 将人工智能作为其更新中最大的价值主张时