Artificial intelligence increasingly performs roles in the art sector: generating images, imitating styles, gathering information and comparing prices. Yet many in the trade maintain that the market’s foundations cannot be fully digitized. Dealer and gallery owner Korani Eleni told a podcast audience that the art market is still held together by people, personal relationships and the story that accompanies an object.
For an artwork, visual appearance alone is not enough: it matters who made it, how it reached the market, what materials were used, the chain of ownership and the reasons someone wants to acquire it. These elements — personal memories, expert judgment, physical materials and historical context — are components the profession views as difficult to replace with an algorithm.
AI as an “artist” and the economic questions
According to Korani Eleni, one of the central issues around AI-made art is economic rather than purely aesthetic: who profits from AI artworks and where does the income go? She draws a parallel with the earlier rise of NFTs, when many people made substantial returns on a digital novelty before the market corrected. AI will likely serve mass production well — producing décor, quickly consumable digital content and similar items — but the picture changes on markets where quality, materiality, authenticity and provenance matter.
The discussion also raised the question of on whose behalf the AI “creates”: the platform, the developer, the user, or someone else. That attribution affects legal, commercial and ethical accountability.
Gaps in digitization and the danger of false information
Much art-historical knowledge is not available digitally: it resides in old books, catalogues, private collections, the memories of experts and personal experience. If an AI lacks access to high-quality, reliable sources, it cannot provide dependable answers. Equally risky is the digitization of incorrect or fraudulent information: a past newspaper article about a forgery can later appear as an authoritative source, and once incorporated into databases an AI may treat it as evidence, perpetuating an old error.
Korani therefore argues it is crucial that AI outputs are accompanied by visible references: the system should not only assert facts but show what sources those assertions rely on.
Online auctions and transparency around bidding
The conversation also addressed the risks of online auctions. Bidding on the internet can feel convenient and anonymous, but that anonymity is illusory: platform owners can see not only who bought an item but how far a bidder was willing to go on price. That is sensitive financial information, and the online environment also lacks the personal dynamics of a physical auction room.
From Korani’s perspective, these factors mean the art market continues to cling to materiality, hands-on experience and authenticity: canvas, paint, period and the artist’s hand remain important aspects that data alone cannot replace.
The role of human presence
For many collectors of contemporary art, meeting the artist and understanding their thinking and personal reflections is important. Behind a work there is not only form or composition but human experience, life situation and personal assertion. Korani Eleni says the art world contains an internal human compass — perception, taste, relationship and an orientation toward truth — that cannot be overridden by a system without feelings or embodied perception.
Key segments of the podcast (timestamps)
- The role of the person, the object and the story in art dealing (01:07)
- AI as artist: making money, platforms and NFTs (04:12)
- ChatGPT, misleading answers and risks for provenance research (09:53)
- Why “everything is on the internet” is not enough (12:56)
- Who counts as an expert in the digital art space? (18:49)
- Object, secrecy, ownership and human relation (21:27)
- AI, mass culture and disposable decoration (24:15)
- Online auctions and bidding (28:29)
- Why art can remain human in the AI era (41:57)
The podcast’s full episode contains a more detailed discussion of these points. Photo credit: Jirsak.
