I should clarify right away: this is not 'anti-AI' content. Ironic, I know: a video critiquing AI results, narrated by an AI voice (the script, however, is entirely human). As a non-native speaker, it helped me focus on the message rather than my pronunciation.
In this video, I examine a real-world case where a client accepted a restoration from someone relying entirely on AI. I’m not a Luddite (it would be a bit hypocritical to claim I'm 'anti-tech' while staring at a high-end monitor and a specialized workstation), and I have nothing against AI as just another tool in a minor role. In my own practice, results made entirely by hand are always included alongside any other options. However, AI as a one-click performer is something else entirely at this point in time. AI restorations often end up looking like distant cousins rather than the actual person, but there is a strange paradox: some nostalgic people like and accept such results because they are misled by their bright, polished appearance and the lack of a direct comparison between the original and the final image. This is especially true for those who never met the people in the portrait, or for whom the memory of their faces has begun to fade. They settle for a 'modernized' guess without realizing how much of their own history is being lost.