Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Comparison of CoModGANs, LaMa and GLIDE for Art Inpainting- Completing M.C Escher's Print Gallery

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2205.01741 v1 pith:KGXVMA3C submitted 2022-05-03 cs.CV

classification cs.CV
keywords inpaintingmissingcomodganscomparisoneschergalleryglidelama
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Digital art restoration has benefited from inpainting models to correct the degradation or missing sections of a painting. This work compares three current state-of-the art models for inpainting of large missing regions. We provide qualitative and quantitative comparison of the performance by CoModGANs, LaMa and GLIDE in inpainting of blurry and missing sections of images. We use Escher's incomplete painting Print Gallery as our test study since it presents several of the challenges commonly present in restorative inpainting.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools