A Swiss company has used artificial intelligence (AI) to authenticate a version of one of the most famous works of Peter Paul Rubens. Diana bath (Around 1635), It was a long time ago that it was a copy.
Carina Popovici, General Manager of Art of Zurich-based art, introduced research on the painting at the Art Business Conference of Tefaf Maastricht this month. The work of a private French collection is the version of the artist’s painting, the original is not known.
How does AI authentication work?
The art recognition, which was created six years ago, has a AI system, “offers a real and objective assessment of a work of art.” On his website, the company has said that it has completed more than 500 actual evaluations, and 1889 Vincent van Gogh, the National Museum of Oslo, verifies the 1988 self-portrait.
After recent research, they concluded that the recognition of Popovici and art was painted while not original Diana bathIt is the real version of the work. “We concluded that Rubens is partially. Our AI cannot know who made the rest, but it would be a possible interpretation [artist’s] The contribution of the workshop “, says Popovici.
In the presentation of Tefaf, Popovici explained that the company used his AI system, trained in data taken from the autograph work carried out by Rubens, to study the work of the box.
“In addition to accepted autograph, images, images, marbles, etc. Of these training images, AI studied a special style of rubens, but also to distinguish real works from good imitation,” says Popovici.
“A total of 29 patches were clearly identified, more than 80% of probabilities; eight of eight% were classified, between 60% and 80%.” Seven patches fell into the interval between 50% -60%, AOK could not determine Rubens or not. Four patches were taken with probabilities that were below 50%, clearly not real.
In tests made with wise rubens
Nils Büttner, president of the center Rubenium, the main authority of the organization behind Rubens authentication and the Rubens catalog that tells Rubens Art diary The work investigated by art statements does not believe that the original Rubens.
He explained: “The report of a condition does not clearly. I think the AI and the art declaration software is good, but the results are not according to the wise rubbies.”
Popovici, NOWER, tells Art diary: “It is interesting to see what experts say about this case … Among the many versions of this box, only two are potentially real. Aside from the French collection, it was the subject of [investigation]There is another stored in the Boijmans van Beuningen of the Rotterdam Museum. “
To question authenticity
Boijmans painting is not a full job but the part, he thought the rest was destroyed in a fire. According to Popovici, Rubenianum fragmented this division in the 90s, but then questioned the attribution in a 2016 publication. XI Part, mythological subjects, aciles for grace, 1. Volume “It seems” seems that the painting does not have the essential distinctions of a labor autograph by Rubens. “
Even the Museum Boijmans website describes its Diana bath Like Rubens, Bütter also emphasized that the work cannot be produced by the painter. “No part of the main version. There may be artist links with pre-prepared rubens canvases and products sold [such as this] He explained in his studio.
Popovic said to create a tool for historical art, collectors and decision-informed decision-making decisions, which means that systems like AI will not represent human expert, but it can be an additional analytical tool. It tells Art diary“Today, there are a part of the seemingly changing part. The question is, if the rubenianum was confirmed in parts, would change that version that would change the version in the French collection?”
The Museum contacted Boijmans van Beuningen for comments.
