I'm not really "nail in the coffin" convinced. Is there a process that does something akin to identifying the moon, and selecting a special filter for that? I'

I'm not really "nail in the coffin" convinced. Is there a process that does something akin to identifying the moon, and selecting a special filter for that? I'm pretty convinced of this. (Both by the evidence and also it's apparently advertised as such?) What is that filter? I don't know, and the answer to this would inform "how fake" I think these images are. It does seem to be a moon-specific treatment. It doesn't seem to be pasting a JPG of the moon and it doesn't seem to be generating the moon. How fake it is, is, I think a measure of how dependent the result is on the specific sensor data, and how localized the changes are. If there's a moon-specific filter that's excellent at filling in data "between" sensed pixels without looking at any pixels far away (beyond, perhaps, the initial categorization as a photo of the moon where this filter would be good), that's not very fake to me. If there was suddenly a new structure on the moon visible to the sensors, I'd want it reflected in the photo. I would consider the process very fake if it couldn't do that at all, and not very fake if it could do it reliably.