The global art market is booming. According to Art Basel and UBS, sales reached 67.8 billion dollars in 2022 with auction records falling one after another. But behind these figures lies a growing vulnerability. «The human factor has become a direct threat to multi-billion-dollar assets,» warns Dmitriy Skripachev, CEO of the technology firm AO «Navigator». For him, the era when authenticity relied only on the trained eye of a connoisseur is over. The future belongs to artificial intelligence, capable of seeing what humans cannot.
For centuries, the art world trusted the judgment of a handful of experts. Yet history is full of cases when forged works were displayed in leading museums for decades and collectors paid fortunes for fakes. Even the most seasoned historian cannot reliably detect the chemical makeup of pigments or the microscopic features of a brushstroke.
AI, in contrast, gives the art market what DNA testing gave to forensics: an objective and verifiable standard. It can examine a canvas at the micro level, compare it against thousands of authenticated works, and identify anomalies invisible to the human eye. But as Skripachev stresses, the strongest case for AI is not only technical. It is economic. In a market built entirely on trust, credibility is currency.
Inside the AI toolkit
Modern systems analyze paintings on several levels. They break down each brushstroke, studying its pressure, direction, and texture to create a digital signature unique to the artist. They test pigments and simulate how they should have aged, revealing canvases that look «too perfect» or chemically inconsistent with their supposed time. And they cross-check works against vast databases of authenticated paintings to confirm stylistic continuity or expose discrepancies, even when a forgery is skillfully executed.
What about the artist’s soul?
Critics often say: «Art is about emotion, not data. A machine cannot feel.» Skripachev responds that AI is not meant to replace the historian. It does not interpret cultural meaning or artistic genius. Its role is narrower but essential: to provide a precise answer to a single question, «Is this object genuine?» By taking over routine verification, AI allows experts to focus on the story, context, and meaning of the work.
AO «Navigator»’s experience with advanced analytical systems shows that the best results come from combining human judgment with machine accuracy. And as Skripachev notes, the choice facing the art world is clear. Should we continue to rely only on human eyes that can make mistakes, or should we reinforce them with tools that cannot be deceived?
For him the answer is obvious. The debate is no longer about whether technology should be part of art authentication. The real question is whether the market, with billions at stake and priceless cultural heritage on the line, can afford to do without it.
