Critique

Critique from Gudbrand:

Interesting topic and a good start. I don't think you're quite finished, but I'll give you my input now anyway.. - You're missing the abstract/related work/builds on section. - The sentence "generating a hallucinating..." doesn't parse. Do you mean "or"? - "Graphic experts" -> "Graphics experts"? - "easier for human" -> "easier for humans?" - I believe the term "image colourization" should not be capitalized. - You introduce several colour spaces without really explaining what they are. Perhaps have blue links to them? - To me it's not exactly clear what CIELAB/CIE really is. It seems it's a colour space with some nice properties, but how does it work? - You keep referring to "these works" or "this paper" without having mentioned that you are reviewing papers. - Can you explain what the "a" and "b" channels are? - What you call "architecture 1" should really be called "figure 1", no? - You mention CNN without explaining what it is. Ok, so everyone in the course knows what you mean, but perhaps use a blue link or write out the full term "convolutional ... " - You completely lost me at the "Q=313/in-gamut" part. Do not expect that your reader has read the paper! - Lightness and Light, etc. should not be capitalized - Perhaps make more explicit the comparison/deltas between the two papers? Is it just SOMs or what?

Generally I'd like to see some more explanatory details. Also more references and links, if it can be useful.