Artwork Authentication Using Unique Marker Placement

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for authenticating manually drawn images, such as art or tattoos, are inadequate due to the difficulty in reliably reproducing machine-readable codes and the undesirability of incorporating identifiers that may detract from the artwork's visual style or can be easily forged.

Innovation Solution

A system that applies visually differentiable markers to images, which are then used to authenticate the artwork by comparing their locations on the substrate with pre-determined sets, ensuring unique placement and application.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If machine-readable codes such as barcodes are used for authentication, then authentication reliability is improved, but ease of manual reproduction deteriorates because they are either too simple to be easily reproduced or too complex for artists to manually reproduce with sufficient precision

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveauthentication reliabilityVSAvoidease of manual reproduction
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameters of the authentication code by using base64 encoding instead of traditional barcode formats. This transformation allows the code to be represented as a sequence of characters that can be manually reproduced with reasonable precision while still maintaining high authentication reliability through the cryptographic hash function.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies local quality by making different parts of the authentication system have different properties. The visual representation (base64 string) is designed to be manually reproducible, while the underlying cryptographic mechanism remains complex and secure. This separation allows each part to optimize for its specific function.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Reliability

If machine-readable identifiers such as QR codes are incorporated into artwork, then authentication capability is improved, but visual style deteriorates because identifiers may detract from the aesthetic appearance

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveauthentication capabilityVSAvoidvisual style
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSShape

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses a cryptographic hash function to create a condensed representation (copy) of the entire artwork. This hash copy serves as the authentication identifier, replacing the need for separate visual identifiers like QR codes. The hash can be represented as a base64 string that integrates more seamlessly with the artwork's visual style.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

3Adaptability or versatility

If machine-readable identifiers are removably applied to artwork, then flexibility is improved, but reliability deteriorates because identifiers may be removed, altered, forged or otherwise be unfit for purpose

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveflexibilityVSAvoidauthentication reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges the authentication identifier with the artwork itself by using a hash of the artwork's image data. This integration ensures that the identifier cannot be separated, removed, or forged independently from the artwork, as any alteration to the artwork would change the hash value and invalidate the authentication.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentUS20260004600A1Image authentication
Publication Date: 2026.01.01 KELLER SERVICES FZCO
  • US20260004600A1 patent drawing
  • US20260004600A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A system for managing the application of artwork to a substrate, the system comprising one or more processors configured to: receive an indication of a graphic; generate a set of candidate locations for markers visually differentiable from the graphic; transmit the candidate locations to a graphic applicator; receive from the applicator an image of a target substrate region having visually differentiable markers applied thereto; and compare the locations of the markers in the image with the candidate locations.