*Can you see yourself using Photoshop Generative Fill to help improve your wildlife photos (or any other genres)?*

That is a Black-bellied Whistling Duck. They are one of the few tree ducks and they do make a whistling sound. I have been photographing wildlife for over 20 years and the only place I have seen them is in Florida.

There is a fourth, very important, use of generative fill that I haven't seen talked about - and that is recovering blown highlights. Use the "magic wand tool" with a low threshold to select the blown highlight area. Then expand the selection about 3-5 pixels and feather the selection by the same amount. Hit generative fill with no prompts and PShop will generate the blown highlight detail. You can then adjust its transparency for a smooth blend into the surrounding area.

I've used it to finish a wing or tail that just happened to be too close the edge of the frame. It doesn't do too bad and can definitely be an image saver if everything else is what you want.

Hi Brian. I am Competition Secretary of Stroud Camera Club in UK. Much debate is taking place about Generative Fill and the temptation to use it in photographs entered into club competitions. Because it is almost undetectable this is a strong temptation! To do as you are demonstrating here and use generative fill to transform an otherwise unusable wildlife image into something which could possibly be entered into a wildlife/nature competition is a huge temptation but one which could, if discovered, result in the entrant being disqualified from their camera club or at the worst, disqualified and banned from organisations such as FIAP, PSA, PAGB etc., where the rules state that all elements of an image must be created by the photographic process and also must be entirely the work of the author. Personally, I love generative fill and the possibilities it opens up but at the same time it represents a significant headache for Camera Clubs. It would be very helpful if all demonstrators, such as yourself, could strongly make the point that use of generative fill and/or similar products in images submitted into competitions at all levels could result in serious damage to the reputation of the author. National and international competition rules may change in the future but for now, use of this type of content generation within competition entries is forbidden but difficult to detect, meaning we are reliant upon the personal integrity of the author.

Over the last 20 or so years, I can't even imagine how many other wise terrific photos I've had to trash, because of framing. This is a great addition to our editing arsenal. Thanks

I have used the beta AI Generative Fill occasionally for the last month primarily to remove distractions, which it does brilliantly. Using AI GF will vary from minimal distraction removal up to the extreme, which is more like creating art. Once you add a castle, hippo, or dog, that was not originally in the photograph, I think you are creating art. Nothing wrong with that, but it is no longer a photograph.

This is cool technology. Makes so many clean up jobs easy. Adds creative latitude to those who desire it. I do not think anyone needs to caveat the use. Keep the creative examples coming Brian.

Very informative Brian … we’ve all had these situations where we didn’t quite get the shot no matter how experienced we are!

I probably wouldn't try it on the break, but I have a few clipped wingtips that could be fixed. Hopefully.

Thanks for another helpful vid. I like where you are going with these and why you are ok using this AI. I tried example 1 on a plane pic with sky. Most of the ones were not bad but the 3rd try got a pretty good one except for brightness and a noticeable line. Fixable and not surprising since its beta.

Now that little tit bit you give about increasing the canvas just blew my mind. Thanks you Brian. Well you got me looking back at some of my old files. Thanks again B

Great video lesson, 😎

Hi Brian, great video. I'm having so much fun messing around with GF. Your words at 1:06 made me feel less guilty about it too😉

Thanks Brian, very useful and generative fill and expand is going to be a definite add on to my workflow - when you draw do recommend that we use a pen or a mouse? Cheers ColinW from Oz

Good point about limited "resolution" and how when it comes to out of focus areas its less noticeable. While there are some workarounds with going section by section for better resolvable details, its still some of hit and miss and takes lot of time. There are some images where you can upscale with Topaz GigaPixal AI or something to compensate a bit, but this still needs work to be usable for larger prints. Also the less advertised aspect of this type of technology is all the problems it has with some type of objects. From fingers, to sometimes perspective, to symmetry etc.

Great video. I like your commentary about the "morality" issues some people have with this editing. For a while I naively thought these issues were resolved 20plus years ago when PS first came out and to "Photoshop" became a verb. Like you I want to do whatever I can to improve my images and make them look good; I'm not purporting to be a photojournalist or documentarian. I think everyone should develop their own individual standards or "lines" on what they will or will not do. To me it's based on how much time I want to spend and frankly, how much of the image I want to be "completely" mine. For example in your video, I would *not* have used AI to fill in the bill of the black-bellied whistling duck. But I don't judge what you did. It's just my own convention. A few years ago I started using Topaz Sky Replacement to add clouds etc. At first I only used "my clouds" that I had in my files. Some folks had a hissy fit when I told them. Now, FYI, I use Generative fill to fix ugly plain gray skies and I don't care whose clouds they are as long as they look good. I think your comments capture the spirit of having fun and enjoying creating your vision with your images and whatever tools are available vs obsessing on what others think.

Extending the duck’s bill saved the photo, BUT, was the complete bill fully representative of the species? Two of the generated alternatives were not interchangeable. One bill was longer than the other and not representative of the species and would be unacceptable for publication in a wildlife journal. The Heron looked a little lost in the image and a tighter crop would have deleted the boathouse without the need for Generative Fill and perhaps provided a better composition. I appreciate you were demonstrating a process and would not necessarily have produced the same composition using conventional photographic editing. Please accept my submission as comment and not as criticism.

I got 95% of the big but the big had too much sunlight on it how can I fix it with Photoshop 2024

I see you moving that contextual thing out of the way. Don't you find that annoying? I had to shut that off the first day I saw it. Instead I right-click on the selection to bring up all the options available, or click on the properties panel. I also set a keyboard shortcut to bring up generative fill. Maybe you love it. I don't.