Testing & Testing and... AI

How good is AI when it comes to providing information about art materials, their quality, how to use them, or, in short, simply looking up this information online?
On a scale of 1 to 10, Copilot scores about a 2. Most of the information is seriously out of date or makes absolutely no sense. Even when asked for links and related images, Copilot is usually way off the mark. For example, the image of a goldfish – you know, that sort of creature – is actually a picture of a packet of crisps with the word ‘goldfish’ printed on it. It also regularly mentions materials that haven’t existed for ages or for which Copilot makes up the method. As soon as I correct this, I get the standard line: ‘I’m going to tell you honestly how it is. 'Without beating about the bush, without any fluff.' Then it spouts the next load of nonsense or parrots what I’ve said, giving me a list of what I’ve already observed after using...
AI cannot even find the information provided by the manufacturer. As it itself admits, it simply draws its own conclusions and hides behind the claim that these comments and definitions are used in the art world. Well, they aren’t. AI is lying
As I mentioned earlier, I tested Fabriano’s paper, the Tiziano green embossed paper that barely holds soft pastels or pastel pencils, let alone allows the pastel to be blended. You can rub as much as you like, but the same result as with pastel mat or bamboo paper can never be achieved.
The so-called charm of this paper is precisely that you can still see the embossing – and thus the lines and colour of the paper – through the sketch. Indeed, Tiziano is intended for sketches or rougher work. You have to like that. It will never be possible to create truly finer paintings with it.
Something like the example below will be difficult.

The most I've managed to achieve so far is the parrot you can see in the next photo.

And where exactly does it go wrong?
The problem lies mainly with the paper.
The quality of the paper determines the end result.
I had previously asked in the painting group why certain soft pastel sticks and pastel pencils leave hardly any colour behind. The group never gave me an answer, but after watching several reviews on YouTube, I’ve come to the conclusion that if the paper is too smooth or untextured (which is the case with this embossed paper), the pastel simply doesn’t adhere. This is actually more common when harder soft pastels are used, including the pencils. It also tends to be more of an issue with certain colours.
This means, therefore, that virtually every type of paper requires its own specific type of pastel, or that only certain colours show up well on it, meaning you have to buy several different brands. Those who cannot afford this are better off working with charcoal and a bit of colour, or limiting the number of colours used.
The following is certainly too detailed, but I will try to find a way to blend the pastel or at least make the whole thing look better. Perhaps with water or alcohol, or all three.

18-5-2026
All photos/art plus experiences are mine
The parrot looks good, its green color catches my attention. I'd better not bother you with this topic, the green is in your head, and don't tell me it isn't, hahaha.
I'll have to dress like this so you'll miss me.
0.00 SBD,
0.14 STEEM,
0.14 SP
😆😆😆
You know what? I also paint blue. But for sure I will always think of you wearing that green suit! But hey, you should use a razor.
♥️🍀
0.00 SBD,
0.05 STEEM,
0.05 SP
The color green is the focus of attention here, don't try to change the subject, green, green, green 😆😆😆
So...no razor huh? How about visiting a barbershop? You can ask them to change that rediculious sign into green and blue. No one needs red. It reminds of blood, bad razors... Bad barbershops.
0.00 SBD,
0.04 STEEM,
0.04 SP
I look better without a beard, in fact I always shave
Very interesting post. I agree that AI can sometimes give very confusing or outdated information, especially about art materials. Real experience and testing teach much more than AI answers. Also, your parrot artwork looks really beautiful despite the paper limitations.
Thank you dear friend for checking on me. I doubt I will buy this paper again. After the green I should have some other colours I might try out (no point to save them or throw away).
If time I go try out to wet the soft pastels. Who knows it helps the blending unless the paper falls apart.
I don't think AI here is in competition with the real atrists. I mean painters who do oil, actilic, pastel, etc.
Rather, AI gives an opportunity to a regular Joe to envision (illustrate) whatever is in their mind. It is not ART per se. Just some image that embodies their internalized vision.
As I pointed it out, such capability has never been presented to an ordinary folk including me.
For example, yesterday I illustrated my voice over story "Picks and shovels".
The illustration I used are not "ART". But they are pretty close to how I imagined the charcters in my mind. So I am very thankful to AI for that. )))
But that’s not what I’m talking about, because I’ve been using it as a search engine! (Every search engine displays the AI’s answers first, above the websites, and these answers are conclusions that are incorrect or, worse still, calculated assumptions generated on the basis of certain outdated ideas used to create a ‘truth’. A ‘truth’ that is the opposite of what it really is. This poses a major danger and also wastes a lot of time if you do or try what the AI has suggested.)
I can imagine it was helpful in your situation, but what if there were no AI? Who knows, it might have motivated you to learn to draw and find different ways to be creative and find something suitable for your voice to film. These could also be clay animations like Chicken Run or puppets like in The Muppet Show, a shadow play, a play, you name it.
And what is your art? The use of your voice or the story you wrote?
I wonder if an audio drama with the appropriate sounds would really have been so bad. Just something you can listen to with your eyes closed instead of being distracted by AI-generated images and not paying attention to the text.
What AI productions generally lack is creativity and emotion. All the voices sound the same when it comes to intonation. It makes listening to the best content tedious (YouTube is the best example of this). The same goes for photos. You recognise them straight away.
Just look at how platforms like Pixabay have changed. Everyone has a phone with a camera, but good photos are becoming increasingly rare and are all being replaced by AI-generated images.
I could say that it doesn’t replace the real artist, but I’m already seeing digital oil paintings and I doubt anyone would spot the difference if this image were shown online.
Let’s be clear: the average person has no interest whatsoever in art and, even if they were interested, would happily hang any reproduction of a digital image on their wall.
There is also a good reason for digital art: buying something you cannot hold or touch. A kind of illusion where the digital artist is rarely motivated to put time into it, which to me is a good reason to say: it lacks personality, invested time, feelings and therefore it is not art.
I guess I am not familiar with the essence of your search efforts. Are you talking about the Google search engine? More importantly, if you are not satisfied with the quality of the results, can’t you search the good old-fashioned way, which, I presume, was more effective?
I use GPT for searching and am usually happy with the results. I also use it for programming and for creating still images with its image generator. These stills are necessary for a video generator, since it interpolates action between two stills based on your instructions.
Learning to draw is not something one can do easily. It takes years. And when you are working, it is practically impossible.
Writing stories has been my hobby for many years, and seeing them turned into a movie — or at least a voice-over — is very rewarding. In fact, I participate in a couple of literary contest sites where all the participants would be happy to have such a capability.
Right now, I am going through Aaron Sorkin’s MasterClass lessons on screenwriting. It is quite interesting.
As for digital art replacing real artists, it is hard to say. Every new technology carries some positive and some detrimental features. I am not sure whether I am right about this, but I think digital painting will evolve into its own art form, just as photography did in its time.