That's more related to a problem known as infilling. Generally throwing out information is a lot easier than generating it. You can do some statistical things by sampling other points of the image into newly created "gap" but it will probably look bad if fully automated, at least on big changes.

There's an obvious version of the algorithm in that direction. For one line "seam", it's easy enough, you just pull data from either side. But repeatedly applying it the more often your new "seams" end up next to something already estimated, the less real information there is - I suspect this becomes visually noticeable pretty fast.