[JabavuAdams]

> And for what? We know that these techniques simply do not produce computer-generated videos that a human will identify as a real-life image.

This is actually testable. Some archviz images are indistinguishable from reality for non-graphics experts.

> Get a camera. Take photos. Compare these photos to the results of the algorithms you write. Iterate on your algorithms until they are producing results that match something that already captures nature, not our beliefs about how we ought to be able to capture nature.

Yes, very important. Art teachers try to reinforce this by saying "seek reference". It's true for graphics as well, and it's possible to be more empirical.

[sillysaurus3]

Some archviz images are indistinguishable from reality for non-graphics experts.

Photos, yes. Not video. It's an important distinction because the path to photorealistic video won't pass through impressive-looking still frames. Visual processing of movement is quite different.