They mention in the video that they could ask a person to make the changes with Photoshop, but the reason they give is: "Then it would be that artist's work, no

They mention in the video that they could ask a person to make the changes with Photoshop, but the reason they give is: "Then it would be that artist's work, not Rembrandt". That statement rubs me the wrong way a bit though, because whether you ask a person or a computer model to copy Rembrandt's style, in each case it's still a copy, and I would argue in each case there's still a(n) artist(s) mimicking Rembrandt, just using different tools. > My guess, even that I hope not, is that people thinks that AI is going to be more impartial, more accurate, less biased. The reality is that an AI, as used in this example, is going to be over-fitting. > Cool project, but a dangerous precedent if people thinks that AI provides unbiased reality, that using AI you can show "how it really looked" as something more accurate that any human con achieve. Constructing something from missing data is always guesswork, whenever the intelligence is natural or artificial. I think this is an excellent take.