>Are you SURE your hand didn't have eyes a nose and a mouth back then?

Not anymore; There's photo EVIDENCE!

Also OP's account is literally called the same

The visualization is too chaotic for my taste.

Don't forget a big arrow pointing at nothing in particular

Or to expand a map it wouldn't

Looks good but it’s bit hard to navigate if you have to zoom that much

Yeah, especially considering that the linked app redirects to the site mentioned in the comment

This comment reads like a bot

Got a link to Superus?

This is the advice it gave me.

1/10 rating for a thumbnail with a 6.8% CTR & 43.9% average % viewed over 2 years.

Add expressive faces to the thumbnail. (It had 2 impossibly expressive faces)

The image needs to have good contrast and saturation in the colors (huge red & green highlights against a more dull BG)

Add short, bold and contrasted text on the thumbnail ( The text was "PROS" and CONS")

It's usually better to limit the number of elements in the thumbnail to a handful to make them more visible and eye-catchy (There was 2 people, a background image, 2 words, and a title.)

/uploads childhood photos for restoration

Program: No, your 70's childhood really was that beige and brown color.

cringe.

[deleted]

Obnoxious thumbnails are the worst. The work because dumb kids will tend to click on them unfortunately.

[deleted]

It actually only does anything of significance to faces. Bodies, backgrounds, sky etc are mostly just blurred or unsharpened. So it’s not looking to recognize a tree then improve it with a much clearer tree. But if it finds a face it can make assumptions about the eyes and replace them with supposedly exactly the same eyes that are much sharper.

Unfortunately the combination of “improving” the eyes, nose, ears, chin, and hair results in something that really isn’t the same person. But to a stranger, it would look like an improvement as they’d have no baseline expectations on what the person actually looks like.

I tried with a couple of photos I took with very old phones (10+ years). It did exactly what I could have done with photoshop, blow up the resolution smooth the picture, the artifacts are the same. I felt really disappointed. Was expecting something magical

I understand and share your cautioning. I literally reach out to these small projects devs and ask them about what & how they store it.

Upscaling compression is probably one of the easiest things to train, because you can run a lossy filter on high quality images you already have images. Same with colorizing.

The world does not need this.

[deleted]

If the service is free you’re the product

Are you SURE your hand didn't have eyes a nose and a mouth back then?

[deleted]

I mean it’s not really free per say… you are willfully feeding its algorithm with your data so it gets better