Ah yes, common sense, science and facts - they don’t listen and do not believe -

“Never argue with an idiot they’ll drag you down to their level and beat you through experience.” – Mark Twain

Recognizing a fool is a bold step toward saving yourself an argument with such people and walking away.
It does good to remember:
*Fools have a fixed mindset
*They always bring up stupid logic to support their theory
*Despite what you mention or say, they will always try to bring you down to their playing field
*They believe their ways to be correct, and they are the only ways that will work for anyone
*They are never open to new ideas
*They will go to any level to prove their point

The source of this information is The University of Texas, MD Anderson Tumor and Cancer Research Center in Houston Texas. I worked there in Medical Communications/Dept. Pathology. It is known as MD Anderson Hospital.

Some statistics would come across our desks all the time. One of great interest to anyone is that best recovery rate for a patent is to be with in a 1/10 of a mile of a hospital, the worst recovery rate is to be IN the hospital. The recovery rate drops as you get away from the hospital until you reach a point hundreds of miles when the rate reaches the same rate of recovery as being in the hospital.

Here goes with temperature. Women's vaginas are different temperatures at rest. African American temperature are lower than Caucasian women by 2 degrees F. In Caucasian women, women with dark hair (natural color) were et as a base line, where blonds were an average of one degree of F higher. It was the natural carrot top women where their vaginal temperature was 2.5 to 3.5 F higher than dark haired Caucasian women.

Native American and Hispanic women, were also found to have elevated temperatures for the vagina of from 1 to 3 degrees F, compared with the average dark haired Caucasian women.

In addition, a foot note observed that natural red heads have an elevated acidity in their vaginas higher than other women who were part of the test group.

The research was to find information that might find conditions in women and conditions related to cervical cancer.

When you say "remote viewing," how remote do you mean? Will you be near the camera to frequently guide it and just look at the image on a notebook computer while sitting in the shade, or stay back in the house with the camera some distance away?

Some issues:

(1) The solar filter is only good for before and after totality. For the four minutes of totality, you'll have to remove the solar filter, and may also need to refocus.

(2) If you want a decent view of the corona during totality, you'll need at least a 300mm lens for a full-frame camera, or better a 500mm or 600mm lens. With the same lens you plan to use, try taking a photo of the moon, which is about the same apparent size as the sun, to see how big the sun will appear in your photo. During totality, the corona may extend over one solar diameter or more on each side.

Alternatively, you could use a wide angle lens -- say 35mm -- to take a series of photos with the camera on the tripod, and let the sun move across the frame over the couple of hours of the whole eclipse, then make a composite to see all of the eclipse from first contact to totality through last contact. Practice this several days beforehand, just to see how to angle the camera frame along the sun's path. In two hours, the sun moves about 30°.

(3) For remote viewing where you are not present to guide the camera, it needs to be on a sturdy tripod and a tracking mount, to follow the sun because of Earth's rotation. The sun moves about ½° (its own diameter) every two minutes. The tracker needs to be set up with its rotational axis parallel to Earth's axis (pointing near the star Polaris). Difficult to do in the daytime. You could set it up at night, cover it, and then use it in the daytime. If you get a tracking mount (several hundred $), practice a lot before the big event.

Some examples:
https://www.moveshootmove.com/collections/move-shoot-move-rotator/products/msm-rotator-for-star-tracking-time-lapse-panorama-photography?variant=21144679022669&aff=198
The Move-Shoot-Move tracker is good for shorter focal-length lenses, but inaccurate or slips for long (heavy) focal-length lenses

Better for a heavier camera/lens: https://www.skywatcherusa.com/products/star-adventurer-mini-pro-pack

(4) During totality, there is a huge variation in brightness from the little pink prominences on the sun's limb, to the inner corona, to the outer corona. You'll need several exposures at different durations to capture all parts of it. For example, a series of seven exposures from 1/500 sec. at f/11 to ¼ sec. at f/11, at ISO 1200 could get all the parts. You could then combine the series into a composite. To do that remotely, you'd need software that controls the camera.

If you are not planning to take photos, but just watch the eclipse on the remote computer, you'll still need some way to guide the camera and remove the solar filter during totality, and change the exposure for the live view. If there is any way you could be outside on the center line during totality, maybe with binoculars, that will give you by far the best view and experience. There are many things that go on during an eclipse, from the darkening of the sky, to stars and planets coming out, to crescent-shaped images projected on the ground through tree leaves, to strange moving shadows, to quieting of animal noises. It can be an emotional experience.

Good luck.

I spent nearly my entire adult life working in the computer software field and AI is simply a logical next step. And it's only as good as the programmers who write it. An earlier concept was known as "machine learning." Unlike many, I don't find it threatening. It is, after all, only as good as the people who wrote it.

It isn't perfect. I've seen plenty of examples of rendered images that, while impressive, aren't real-looking. Nearly all photo editing software from the "big guys" (Adobe, Luminar, ON1) are using AI to enhance images. But keep in mind that the control is still under human management.

Jim, your images are yours, not AI's. You are using AI as a photo-enhancement tool, and I see nothing wrong with that. If you had used AI to create images out of whole cloth, I think many of us would complain that it isn't "photography" (and strictly speaking, it isn't. "Photography" = "the art or process of producing images by the action of radiant energy and especially light on a sensitive surface (such as film or an optical sensor)" - Webster).

Your images you've posted here have shown your progress in using new tools and capabilities. I give you much credit for that!