You may try: https://you.com/search
(It's free and does not need signup as long as you always go back to the search site linked above) Type in a search term and then click on "Images" like with google. It has access to the web, unlike chat gpt.
https://you.com/?chatMode=default
this is the chatbot (free)
I have not driven deeper into it, but it has many options to customise searches/bots, but one needs signup for this...

Ummm... what exactly do you mean by this?

I'm presuming you are merely suggesting that in science, one can't have a subjective interpretation of data.

Firstly, that's actually not the case. It may be true for the 'hard' sciences like physics, chemistry and biology (and add to that mathematics), but the other sciences are quite happy with it to some extent. Any time someone uses on particular set of criteria or type of analysis, there's some amount of subjectivity involved (even if it's fully explained, and accepted).

Secondly, it's still very much 'science' if someone or some thing is judging (for example) blue as being blue. (rather than, by your comment, not saying it's detected as being of wavelength between 450–485 nm).

Thirdly, the 'judge''s role is simply to determine if the data in session A accurately (and precisely) describes the target(s) in photograph B. This should be no different to determining if Column A matches the data in Column B. the fun side gets to be when some more nebulous data comes through in the session - such as emotions, or when the RVer gets data from a different time period (still directly relating to the target - e.g., your target is the space shuttle Challenger. The photo is of it on the launch pad, but you mention explosions and deaths... Or the WTC buildings in the in50s, and your data includes planes and destruction).

"what exactly do you mean by this?"

A judge is someone who is expected to make a decision in any case. He is not allowed to not decide, even if the given data is insufficient. So, when having a judge, you could create the situation in which insufficient data leads to a judgement as if the data was sufficient.

"Thirdly, the 'judge''s role is simply to determine if the data in session A accurately (and precisely) describes the target(s) in photograph B."

Why do you need a judge to do something everybody can do? I don't get why you want to feed back a judgement back to the RVer rather than the image itself. What's the benefit?

Well, this I don't think is really an issue (and not the issue I'm having). Getting images isn't the problem...

The AI programs I've been trying to use can't access *any* images....