I find it somewhat more than disappointing that you chose to implement the “California” AI blurb the way you did. At least in Apple, it says “Content Creator: Edited with generative AI”. Quite the contrary, I am the content creator. I only used Topaz for editing like sharpening and denoise. Why give the impression the entire photo is created by AI?
This is a HORRIBLE and misleading implementation. Please find another EXIF field to use. At this point, I am seriously considering NOT renewing my Topaz subscriptions. I find it egregious you chose Content Creator as the field to do this with. Shameful.
I have EXIF editing tools, the key is I shouldn’t have to resort to that for a piece of software I purchased and “rent” through subscriptions. I understand they have to do something to be in compliance with some law in California. However, 1) I don’t live in California, and 2) why did they choose a field named “Content Creator” to put edited by AI? It makes it apparent as if my photograph that I used Topaz Photo to sharpen or denoise was not my photo but some AI generated photo. It is very misleading for someone looking at the EXIF data. These are my photos, I shot the photo and I am both the content creator and the copyright holder. I don’t object to Topaz (Adobe now) complying with some crazy California law, I do object to them making my photos look like they were AI generated and not my original work.
I have serious concerns about this too. I only noticed it today, just before sending photos off for my club’s competition. I can’t send a file that says ‘Content creator: Edited with generative AI’, and I’m not about to strip tags either because that can also be problematic. For now I just have to not use Topaz for anything I’m going to enter into a competition, which somewhat defeats the purpose of using the software (and paying for it). Like Jeff, I am not in California (I’m in Australia) so I object to the choice of a Californian standard being applied to my images. The better alternative would be to at least find another field to enter the data.
But there’s another problem here. Are we to understand that even the most basic sharpening and denoising operation in Topaz is using AI generated content to achieve its ends – it’s not just using AI to make selections and target the process? That had always been my understanding, rightly or wrongly. If every Topaz edited image contains AI generated content, that quickly becomes another concern entirely.
