[iamnotwhoiam]

It seems to me that it's basically like me (a non artist) drawing something I saw and handing it to a good artist and asking them to draw that but better. They aren't drawing what I saw, but they are drawing a better representation, so it can satisfy my need to see the thing in physical form, but it can never be a real replacement.

If you ever have something that you would be happy to substitute a very good painting for a blurry image then this is good. If you need to know what something actually looked like in high def (license plate numbers, micro tumors) this is useless, or worse than useless if it ever gets admitted in court.

[adius]

Not entirely true. The model can extract image information from the pixels a human might not be able to see. Like how you can enhance the colors in a video of a face in a way that it pulses red with your heartbeat. The information about your heartbeat was there all along, our eyes were just not able to extract / recognize it.