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!

One option is to use WIFI and Canon’s Canon Connect SW installed on your tablet or Laptop/computer. Not only will that allow real time live view, but it will provide camera control and image transfer. I have found the range to be somewhere in the 25-30’ region, but this will vary depending on your particular WiFi and any obstructions between the camera and the computer. Lot’s more convenient and safer (no chance of pulling the camera over tripping over the cable) than using an HDMI cable directly to a monitor from the camera. An HDMI cable from the camera’s HDMI port directly to the monitor (without a computer) will also work assuming your monitor (or TV) has an HDMI input, but you won’t be able to control the camera which could be important

I saw a deceptive video about the cost of charging an EV (electric vehicle). The woman said that the most economical place to charge is at home, which is true. She claimed to "fill" her Tesla for $4.36 @ $0.08/kWh. That is not a realistic cost per kWh. My electric company does the same thing. It lists a lost cost per kWh, but then it adds fee after fee until I actually pay $0.33 per kWh.

If someone thinks they can charge their car for under $5.00, that's a big incentive to buy an EV. At my house, that $4.36 would be almost $18.00. Charging at public stations is comparable to, or more expensive than, buying gasoline. That's according to YouTubers charging at various locations.