HISTORY OF GENERATIVE ART - cyberfeminism

In today’s History of Generative Art, we introduce cyberfeminism, which emerged in the early 1990s alongside the rise of the internet, drawing from third-wave feminism, postmodernism, and media theory. It represents an international group of female thinkers, coders, and media artists who critique, theorize, and reshape digital spaces, new media technologies and explore how technology can challenge existing power structures.

VNS Matrix, A Cyberfeminist Manifesto for the 21st Century, 1991, Source: vnsmatrix.net

In the 1990s, the term cyberfeminism was independently coined by British theorist Sadie Plant and the Australian artist collective VNS Matrix. VNS Matrix combined art with French feminist theory to challenge the male-dominated internet. They published the Cyberfeminist Manifesto for the 21st Century as a statement against traditional norms. Meanwhile, Plant explored how digital technology could shape feminist theory, describing the internet as an inherently feminine, non-linear, and self-replicating space.

Before the term was coined, feminist theorists and artists were already examining the relationship between gender and technology. One of the most significant early influences was Donna Haraway’s 1985 essay, A Cyborg Manifesto, which contributed to the development of cyberfeminism. In this work, Haraway explores the cyborg—a hybrid of machine and organism—as a figure that transcends gender and race. She argues that cyborgs challenge traditional hierarchies and offer a future for overcoming biological determinism while promoting androgyny as an ideal.

Donna Haraway, A Cyborg Manifesto, 1985, Source: Macat Library

Old Boys Network, First Cyberfeminist International, 1997, Source: monoskop.org

Cyberfeminism grew in prominence throughout the 1990s, influencing artists and theorists from North America, Australia, Germany, and the UK. A key moment in its history was the 1997 First Cyberfeminist International, organized by the Berlin-based collective Old Boys Network. Held at Documenta X in Kassel, Germany, the event brought together 38 women from 12 countries.

An important artist in the movement is Linda Dement, who challenges gender norms in her artwork Cyberflesh Girlmonster (1995), where she created interactive bodies from scanned female body parts that viewers could engage with, triggering sounds, videos, and texts. Faith Wilding, an American artist, created the Recombinants (1992-1996) collage series, featuring hybrid compositions of machines, plants, humans, and animals, exploring their interconnectedness with technology.

Linda Dement, Cyberflesh Girlmonster, 1995, Source: lindadement.com

Cornelia Sollfrank, Female Extension, 1997, Source: medienkunstnetz.de

Lynn Hershman Leeson, a multimedia artist who often uses interactive technology and film, challenges traditional notions of gender in her work. One of her most iconic projects, CyberRoberta (1996), features a doll with cameras embedded in its eyes, live-streaming its perspective to a website. By seeing through the doll’s eyes, viewers are extending their vision through a technological surrogate.

Cornelia Sollfrank, a member of the Old Boys Network, subverted the Hamburger Kunsthalle’s 1997 Net art competition with the project “Female Extension”. She created 288 fictional female artists with unique identities and submitted them as participants. Using an algorithm, she generated 127 Net art pieces by recombining HTML material from the web. Even though there was a “high number” of female applicants, the prizes ultimately went to male artists. Sollfrank later revealed her intervention, exposing gender bias in digital art.

Lynn Hershman Leeson, CybeRoberta, 1996, Source: altmansiegel.com

By the end of the decade, several critical issues within cyberfeminism emerged. The early optimism that the internet would become a universally liberating space was seen as overly idealistic. In response, in the 2000s, Technofeminism emerged as an evolution of cyberfeminism, integrating science and technology studies with feminist theory to examine gendered aspects of technology beyond the digital world.

COLLECTOR’S CHOICE - Learning Nature by David Young

“Learning Nature” (2018–2020) by David Young challenges common perceptions of AI by prioritizing aesthetics over efficiency and large-scale data processing. Using his own photographs of flowers as training data, Young observes AI’s behavior and how the system interprets visual elements. The resulting images reflect AI’s own way of interpreting natural forms.

Learning Nature (b63e,4400-19,4,10 ,12,44,30), 2019 by David Young

David Young is a New York-based artist and designer who works with technologies such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing. He has a background in computer science, visual studies, and design. Although he experimented with AI as early as the 1980s, he began working with it more seriously in 2016.

Portrait of David Young

He has always been interested in understanding AI—how it works and what it can be—while also addressing common misconceptions. To explore this, he created a course called Designing AI at Parsons School of Design in New York. In the course, he brought together students from different backgrounds who had no technical knowledge of AI to see if they could develop a more accessible way to discuss the subject. The course also influenced his own approach.

Learning Nature (z14,cr,A), 2018 by David Young

To make AI more approachable, he wanted to move away from the usual applications of this technology, which are often focused on optimization, efficiency, and large datasets. Instead, he considered focusing on beauty and aesthetics and starting the training on a smaller, more personal scale. This approach allowed him to study how AI works in a different way.

‘Learning Nature’ book by David Young

One of his early series, which led to his “Learning Nature” series, was called “Flowers”. These images were created using GANs trained on a small dataset of photographs he took of flowers at his farm in Bovina, Upstate New York. He deliberately chose this subject to differentiate his work from conventional AI applications and to reference the artistic history of the region, including the Hudson River School.

Flowers (b22,1582,2), 2018 by David Young

Later, he refined his method by photographing flowers against a neutral background so that the AI would focus on the subject rather than the entire scene. This process led to the “Learning Nature” series, created between 2018 and 2020 which allowed him to examined how AI learns and behaves.

Learning Nature (b63f,2600-19,4,9,1 0,27,44), 2019 by David Young

He noticed that its learning process sometimes resembled human creativity, particularly in how it repeated patterns and struggled with certain aspects. However, he also observed that the system lacked the ability to understand and complete fine details. The images it produced were not accurate but reflected AI’s own way of interpreting natural forms.

Learning Nature (b63e,4400,19,1,29 ,16, 54,11), 2019 by David Young

The creation of images that do not precisely reflect reality has a long history. Young’s series can be compared to 17th- and 18th-century Dutch flower paintings, where floral arrangements included species that would not have bloomed at the same time.

A Vase with Flowers, 1613 by Jacob Vosmaer, Source: metmuseum.org

Similarly, the AI-generated images in Learning Nature depict flowers that could not exist in nature, combining elements in ways that are visually convincing but not botanically possible.

The Learning Nature series can be found in many esteemed private collections, such as:

Jediwolf, Delronde, SeedPhrase, @NGMIoutalive and many more.

HISTORY OF GENERATIVE ART - Cybernetics

In our History of Generative Art series, we focus on cybernetics, which emerged as an interdisciplinary field in the mid-20th century. Cybernetics, developed by Norbert Wiener, studies how systems regulate themselves through feedback and communication. Its principles have been applied in various areas, from governance to artificial intelligence, architecture, and design. The field also influenced art, inspiring interactive and generative works, especially the cybernetic sculptures of Nicolas Schöffer.

Norbert Wiener at MIT, Source: researchgate.net

McCulloch (right) and Pitts (left) in 1949, Source: Semantic Scholar

Cybernetics is the study of systems that regulate and communicate within themselves and their environment through feedback loops. It examines how information is processed, controlled, and transmitted in both living organisms and machines. It began with the publication of Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine by American computer scientist, mathematician, and philosopher Norbert Wiener in 1948. However, before Wiener’s book, key ideas had already been explored by Warren McCulloch and Arturo Rosenblueth, whose contributions are often overlooked.

In 1943, McCulloch and Walter Pitts introduced a theoretical model of neural network in their paper A Logical Calculus of the Ideas Immanent in Nervous Activity, showing how neurons process information using binary logic. Around the same time, Rosenblueth, working with Wiener and Julian Bigelow, studied purposive behavior and feedback mechanisms in both biological and artificial systems.

The Macy Conferences 1946–1953, Source: press.uchicago.ed

Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine by Norbert Wiener, Source: sciencebookaday.com

Cybernetics was further developed at the Macy Conferences, held between 1946 and 1953. These conferences brought together researchers from various disciplines, including biology, psychology, and engineering. Participants such as Warren McCulloch, John von Neumann, and Norbert Wiener, explored commonalities in feedback mechanisms across different systems.

 The term  “cybernetics” was chosen by Wiener and his colleagues from Ancient Greek kubernētikē, meaning "steersmanship" or "governance." The term appears in Plato’s Republic and Alcibiades, where the metaphor of a steersman is used to signify the governance of people.

Project Cybersyn Operations Room, Source: mitpress.mit.edu

This idea of control and regulation was soon extended to governance, urban planning, and social organization, particularly during the second wave of cybernetics, which emerged in the late 1960s and 1970s and emphasized self-organization and adaptive systems. One of the most well-known projects was Chile's Project Cybersyn in the early 1970s, an ambitious plan to use cybernetic methods to manage the national economy. The system aimed to optimize decision-making through real-time data analysis and feedback loops. The project was discontinued after the 1973 military coup.

Nicolas Schöffer, CYSP1, 1956, © Adagp, Paris – Éléonore de Lavandeyra-Schöffer

Cybernetics also influenced the arts. Nicolas Schöffer was one of the first artists to integrated it into his work. In the 1950s, he created cybernetic sculptures equipped with sensors that allowed them to react to sound, movement, light, or even meteorological phenomena in their environment. Schöffer saw his works as living systems that constantly moved, changed, and adapted to their surroundings.

Contemporary art continues to be influenced by the legacy of cybernetics. In 2024, the French creative studio u2p050 created Action Reaction, a work exploring cybernetics and the role of machines in shaping the world. The piece reflects on the dual nature of cybernetics: how it can be used for control and regulation, but also for creativity, efficiency, and artistic expression. The work is currently on view at our Interthinking exhibition at Budapest Art Factory.

Studio u2p050, Action｜Reaction, 2024

 Cybernetic principles have influenced many other fields. In the 1950s and 60s, they helped shape systems theory, informing models of complex interactions in ecosystems and organizational structures. In medicine, biofeedback techniques were developed to help people control bodily functions like heart rate and muscle tension. Cybernetics also played a key role in early AI research, contributing to the development of neural networks.

COLLECTOR’S CHOICE - Excessize by Roope Rainisto

"Excessize", by Finnish AI artist Roope Rainisto, is a critical exploration of American consumerism and fast food culture. Created in 2022, the series serves as a precursor to his renowned “Life in West America”. By blending the visual style of vintage Americana photography with AI technology, Rainisto contrasts the once-idealized golden age of American fast food with its later-recognized negative consequences.

Frozen Fresh (from Excessize series), 2022 by Roope Rainisto

Roope Rainisto has worked as a designer, specializing in UX, for years while also pursuing photography as a hobby. He began working with AI in 2021 and has since been experimenting with the combination of photography and AI technology to create post-photographic artworks.

Portrait of Roope Rainisto

In 2023, he created his renowned “Life in West America” series, which introduced a new visual language that was unprecedented at the time. Influenced by early American vintage color photography, he used custom diffusion models to combine the aesthetics of the traditional medium with AI. The series focuses on individuals living in rural America, exploring their hopes, dreams, lives, and aspirations.

The Gathering (from Life in West America), 2023 by Roope Rainisto

The precursor to this series is “Excessize”, created in 2022 as both a study and an exploration. Compared to Life in West America, which takes on a more optimistic tone, Excessize presents a more critical perspective. Here, Roope Rainisto also employs the visual style of vintage Americana photography alongside AI to capture the post-war United States atmosphere—a time marked by a significant rise in food production following years of rationing.

Emergent Culture (from Excessize series), 2022 by Roope Rainisto

Fast food restaurants, which began to expand in the 1950s, catered to individuals across all socioeconomic levels, from presidents to the working class, promoting values of efficiency and uniformity. Many pop artists, such as Andy Warhol, Claes Oldenburg, and Roy Lichtenstein, depicted fast food culture as a symbol of mass consumption and commercialism, often emphasizing its ubiquity and cultural significance.

French Fries and Ketchup, 1963 by Claes Oldenburg, Source: whitney.org

Rainisto’s Excessize captures both the celebration of post-war economic growth and a critique of its negative societal impacts. Through repetition and uniformity in the images, Rainisto highlights the consequences of global cultural homogenization, focusing on its role in eroding local traditions.

Service Culture (from Excessize series), 2022 by Roope Rainisto

This theme mirrors the ongoing expansion of AI, which moves towards automation, affecting authenticity and individuality. Just as the mass production of fast food promotes uniformity, the use of AI in the corporate sector prioritizes efficiency and scalability, potentially leading to similar homogenization in content and product creation.

Days Of Meat (from Excessize series), 2022 by Roope Rainisto

This series urges a reconsideration of how mass production and AI shape our society and cultural heritage.

The works from Excessize can be found in prestigious collections such as those of @RaoulGMI, @balon_art, @maxkarlan, and many more.

HISTORY OF GENERATIVE ART - Processing

In our History of Generative Art series, we would like to spotlight Processing. Developed in 2001 by Casey Reas and Ben Fry, it was founded on a revolutionary idea: making programming accessible to artists and designers to create visuals, animations, and interactive works with code. This tool has influenced a generation of generative artists, shaping the way code is used as a medium for artistic expression.

Casey Reas, Process 14 (Software 2), 2012

The early goal of Processing was to make coding accessible to artists, architects, and designers, while also providing a platform for those already proficient in programming to create images. Casey Reas and Ben Fry envisioned Processing as a bridge between graphic design and computer science, allowing people to sketch ideas using code in the same way an artist sketches with a pencil.

The duo drew significant inspiration from earlier work at the MIT Medialab, especially from the Visual Language Workshop (VLW) and Design By Numbers (DBN), both led by John Maeda. While DBN provided a minimalist coding environment, its fixed canvas size and grayscale output were limiting.

Jared S Tarbell, Happy Place, 2004

Casey Rheas, Process Compendium, 2004 - 2010

 Processing built on DBN’s strengths while eliminating its limitations, allowing users to work with color, larger canvases, and even 3D graphics. It simplified many of the complexities that often make traditional coding daunting for beginners, offering a minimalistic interface that encouraged users to start coding without being overwhelmed by technical details. This simplicity contributed significantly to its popularity.

 Besides its simplicity, another important element was that it was completely open-source and free to use. The developers encouraged sharing of the software and the works created with it through the internet. While it initially attracted a relatively small group of users, its community grew rapidly as various forums and platforms emerged, providing spaces for users to discuss their work, seek help, and share creations. 

Manoloide, aaaaa, 2018

Many prominent generative artists began their art careers using Processing. Its developer, Casey Reas, became a leading artist, creating intricate abstract works through code. His project “Process Compendium” (2004-2010) explores generative art by defining simple elements and behaviors that interact to produce dynamic, evolving visuals. A descriptive text guides the software, leaving space for interpretation.

One of the most important artists using processing after its launch is Manoloide. The Argentinian visual artist and talented coder, Manoloide has been using Processing since the early 2010s. Exploring the intersection of organic and artificial elements in his art, he created his most iconic works, rich in variety and vibrant colors. One of the early works like Mantel Blue or ‘aaaaa’, 2018, was exhibited at ‘Automat und Mensch’ in Zurich in 2019. His ‘Last Flowers’ series (2021), is an excellent example of how a Processing masterpiece emerges.

Manoloide, Last Flowers Red, 2021

Jared S. Tarbell began working with Processing in the early 2000s. Using the software, he developed numerous abstract, geometric artworks that blend mathematical elegance with artistic precision, making each piece feel like a spiritual experience generated by a computer. Last year, he presented his “Substrate Subcenter” (2024), building on his famous “Substrate series” from 2003, which he created using an early version of Processing.

The list of artists who have worked with Processing is extensive. Numerous books delve into this topic, such as “Processing: A Programming Handbook for Visual Designers and Artists” by Casey Reas and Ben Fry, published by MIT Press or the “20th Anniversary Community Catalog”, released in 2022, which highlights the community-building aspect of the software, to name a few.

COLLECTOR’S CHOICE - PAL by Marcelo Soria-Rodríguez and Iskra Velitchkova

PAL is an early conceptual work created in 2022 by Marcelo Soria-Rodríguez and Iskra Velitchkova, using a generative system to explore love—its origins, roots, and the consequences of how we navigate its inescapable flaws. While relationships are often marked by unpredictability and vulnerability, these very qualities make them valuable and deeply human. In our constant pursuit of the ideal, PAL raises a question: can a generative system, designed for perfection, ever truly capture the essence and richness of imperfect love?

PAL, 2022 trailer by Marcelo Soria-Rodríguez and Iskra Velitchkova

PAL is the first collaborative project between Marcelo Soria-Rodríguez and Iskra Velitchkova, two generative artists from Spain. In their art, both focus on the relationship between humans and machines and how this interaction affects our understanding of ourselves. Instead of just using technology as a tool, they work with it as a collaborator to explore human perception, emotions, and limitations.

PAL, 2022 trailer by Marcelo Soria-Rodríguez and Iskra Velitchkova

The project began as a performance at the 2023 Art SG in Singapore. The artists developed a generative system that produced video works, which were then transferred onto a VHS tape, bringing the digital outputs into a physical medium. The tape was played on an analog TV in a continuous loop for four days. To introduce external interference, the artists placed a small neodymium magnet inside the media player.

PAL, 2022 trailer by Marcelo Soria-Rodríguez and Iskra Velitchkova

The video on the VHS tape was built around a circle—a fundamental shape representing unity, an idealized union, and the concept of perfection. These circular compositions, created by a generative system, symbolized the human pursuit of balance, harmony, and the idea of a perfect relationship.

PAL #7, 2022 by Marcelo Soria-Rodríguez and Iskra Velitchkova

Over four days, as the video played, the magnet gradually distorted and erased parts of the visuals, replacing them with static and glitches. Unlike a digitally programmed effect, this interference was unpredictable and irreversible. The fact that the distortion came from the physical world further emphasized the contrast between the controlled precision of generative systems and the uncertainty of real life. This transformation mirrored the imperfections that shape human relationships—unpredictable, evolving, and beyond control—highlighting that their beauty lies not in perfection, but in the very flaws, changes, and uncertainties that make them real.

The entire performance was recorded on the VHS tape, which the artists digitized to create 100 unique digital pieces.

PAL can be found in many esteemed private collections such as Karatekid, TheFunnyGuys, Lemonde2d, iki_jima, Kate Vass Galerie and many more.

HISTORY OF GENERATIVE ART - Quantum Art

David Young, Quantum Drawings, 2021

In this History of Generative Art series, we explore the fascinating emergence of quantum generative art. While generative art has long been powered by classical computing, quantum computing offers entirely new possibilities, opening a new chapter in the evolution of generative art, where the principles of quantum mechanics become both a tool and an inspiration for artists.

Quantum computing is a revolutionary paradigm in computation that uses quantum mechanics to process information in fundamentally different ways from classical computers. It started in the 1980s, when Richard Feynman and Yuri Manin proposed the idea of using quantum mechanical principles to build more powerful computational models.

Interior of an IBM Quantum Computer, Source: IBM

Unlike classical computers, which use bits (0 or 1), quantum computers use qubits, which can exist in a state of 0, 1, or both simultaneously due to superposition. They also exploit entanglement, where qubits become interconnected, allowing changes in one qubit to instantly affect another, regardless of distance. These properties enable quantum computers to solve complex problems at speeds far beyond classical computers.

Antony Gormley, Quantum Clouds, 1999, Source: wikipedia.org

Jonathon Keats, Quantum Entanglements, 2011 © Jonathon Keats

Since the 1980s, major tech companies and research institutions such as IBM Quantum and Google’s Sycamore have been working on building and improving quantum computing technology. Even though these machines are still in the early stages, many artists are exploring how quantum principles can be applied to create innovative artworks.

Artists first focused on visualizing quantum physics concepts rather than directly using quantum mechanisms. Works such as “Quantum Man” (2007) and the “Buckyball Series” (2009) by Julian Voss-Andreae explored ideas like wave-particle duality, entanglement, and the ephemeral nature of matter. Other important examples include Antony Gormley’s “Quantum Clouds” (1999) and Jonathon Keats’s “Quantum Entanglements” (2011), both of which draw inspiration from quantum mechanics and translate these concepts into physical forms.

Libby Heaney, Ent-, 2022, Source: libbyheaney.com

Libby Heaney is among the first artists to directly incorporate quantum computing into her art since 2019. Her Lumen Prize winning piece “Ent-“ (2022) is a 360-degree immersive installation where she reinterprets the central panel of Hieronymus Bosch’s The Garden of Earthly Delights by animating her scanned watercolor paintings using her custom quantum code.

Another early adopter is David Young, who began exploring the field of quantum computing in 2021, focusing on understanding how this technology works. He started the project using quantum computers from IBM Quantum to produce outputs that were processed through his custom code, presented as “Quantum Drawings” (2021).

David Young, Q 7, 2021 (From Quantum Drawings series)

Pindar Van Arman collaborated with quantum computing researcher Russell Huffman on “Quantum Skull” (2022), combining AI-generated art with a quantum computing technique. The process involved mapping qubits to pixels, encoding color values via qubit rotations, and recycling qubits across circuits due to hardware limitations. 

Quantum computers are still in their early stages of development, and access to them is limited. Creating quantum algorithms for artistic purposes requires a deep understanding of both quantum mechanics and programming, making this a highly specialized field.

Pindar Van Arman and Russell Huffman, Quantum Skull, 2022, Source: vanarman.com

COLLECTOR’S CHOICE - Alternatives by Espen Kluge

Alternatives by Espen Kluge is a generative portrait series created through custom code and data collected from photographs. It employs algorithmic processes to reinterpret human faces, focusing on individuality, structure, and improvisation. The work represents a key moment where traditional portraiture meets contemporary, generative digital methods.

Espen Kluge, she really thinks about it, 2019

The Norwegian-born composer, visual artist, and creative coder Espen Kluge has always been interested in the inward, exploratory, and meditative yet chaotic, qualities of the creative process. This sensibility is reflected in his approach to portraiture, where the human face becomes a surface to explore inner states, emotional mapping, and algorithmic interpretation.

Portraiture has a long and complex history in art. Traditionally, it has served to record, idealize, or convey the status of its subjects. In the 20th century, artists began to challenge the idea of likeness, exploring how form and abstraction could also express inner character. This shift is especially evident in the works of Russian Constructivist artists like Naum Gabo, who emphasized structure, geometry, and the dynamic use of space. The influence is reflected in Kluge’s portraits.

Naum Gabo, Head No. 2, 1916 (enlarged version 1964), Source: tate.org.uk

Kluge’s renowned Alternatives portrait project began in 2013 while he was working on an interactive portrait logo for his website and developed a piece of JavaScript code that transformed photographs into colorful, vector-based images. He returned to this idea later, in 2019, refining the code, which works by looping through image pixels, selecting some semi-randomly, and connecting them with lines. The final result depended on the source image, so he selected portraits with expressive features, strong lighting, and rich skin tones.

Espen Kluge, slowly passing, 2019

The final series comprises 100 unique portraits, each of which feels emotive, especially when compared to traditional generative art, which can often be cold, geometric, and repetitive. The images draw from both figurative and abstract traditions, emphasizing form and rhythm. Vibrant colors and compositional geometry convey a sense of motion and psychological depth. The works were first exhibited in 2019 at Kate Vass Galerie in Zurich, curated by ArtNome. It was one of the early shows to present NFTs alongside physical artworks in a gallery context.

Espen Kluge, little ability, 2019

Three years later, in 2022, he revisited the same dataset with a new algorithm, resulting in the Lyrical Convergence series. Shown for the first time at the “Dear Machine, Paint for Me” exhibition in Zurich, this new body of work moved further into abstraction, translating facial data into forms that suggest emotional states and the inner nature of these figures rather than specific human features.

Espen Kluge, Lyrical Convergence #50, 2022

While Alternatives retained a visual link to portraiture, Lyrical Convergence introduced more abstract, fluid, and centralized forms. The compositions focus on organic shapes, monochrome backgrounds, soft color palettes, and unified line structures, drawing on the aesthetics of lyrical abstraction, especially the works of Georges Mathieu. 

8/ The two series form a conceptual and technical pair. They explore how the same data can yield different outcomes through changes in algorithmic structure. This transformation from Alternatives' structured figurative forms to the abstractions of Lyrical Convergence illustrates Kluge’s interest in the mechanics behind how we perceive images and how they are constructed through generative processes.

Pieces from Kluge’s Alternatives series are part of the collection of Bharat Krymo, Museum of Crypto Art, WangXiang, and many more.

Espen Kluge, Lyrical Convergence #49, 2022

COLLECTOR’S CHOICE - Five Self-Portraits at Ages 18, 30, 45, 60, and 70 by Nancy burson

"Five Self-Portraits at Ages 18, 30, 45, 60, and 70" by Nancy Burson is a conceptual study of identity and aging. Created in collaboration with MIT in the late 1970s, the series presents five portraits of Burson, in which she envisioned how her face might change at different ages. This work laid the conceptual groundwork for her pioneering age-morphing technology, influencing both her own artistic practice and the development of facial manipulation techniques used today.

Aging at 18, 30, 45, 60, and 70, 1976, video work

Motion pictures and animations often use morphing techniques to create seamless transitions between images. This geometric interpolation method has existed for centuries, with early examples like tabula scalata and mechanical transformations. One of the earliest and most effective techniques was “dissolving,” developed in the 19th century, where images gradually transitioned, for example, a landscape shifting from day to night.

Aging at 18, 30, 45, 60, and 70, 1976, fine art prints

A pioneering figure in this field was Nancy Burson, an American artist and photographer born in 1948, who was the first artist to use digital morphing technology in art. Burson became interested in digital technology in the 1970s after visiting the 1968 exhibition “The Machine as Seen at the End of the Mechanical Age” at Museum of ModernArt. The show inspired her to explore technological processes in her own practice.

Portrait of Nancy Burson

During this time, Nancy Burson envisioned software that could age a user's face. In 1976, she contacted Nicholas Negroponte at MIT, where she began working with the Architecture Machine Group. At MIT, researchers had recently developed a rudimentary digitizer that allowed a computer to process and manipulate facial images, and with Thomas Schneider, they started working on Nancy’s idea.

The set up at MIT which was their first version of a digitizer

The foundation for this pioneering age-morphing technology was laid with the work “Five Self-Portraits at Ages 18, 30, 45, 60, and 70”. Created in 1976, this piece features five portraits of Nancy Burson at different ages. For this series, Burson worked together with a makeup artist to envision how she might appear in the future.

Documentation of the Aging Self Portraits, 1976, vintage mounted photograph

This work, along with other studies she created of herself, allowed her to explore the aging process and contributed to the development of the software, which she patented in 1981 as “The Method and Apparatus for Producing an Image of a Person’s Face at a Different Age”.

Aging Study, 1976, drawing

The software simulated the aging process by scanning the viewer’s face, allowing them to interactively adjust data points for features such as the eyes, nose, and mouth. An aging template would then apply transformations corresponding to the viewer’s facial structure. This triangular grid remains the standard morphing grid in the industry today, used in AI software and applications like Snapchat.

Original Morphing Grid, 1981

Using this software, Nancy Burson altered the faces of celebrities, models, and even a Barbie doll to address broader social and political themes. She later created the “Age Machine”, an interactive work where visitors could see future versions of themselves. Her research had implications beyond the art world. Law enforcement agencies adopted her technology to create age-progressed images of missing children, aiding in their identification and recovery.

 Her work has been exhibited in major institutions, including the Museum of Modern Art, the MET Museum, the Whitney Museum, the V&A Museum, and the Centre Pompidou. Currently, pieces from her oeuvre are on view in LACMA’s exhibition “Digital Witness”

HISTORY OF GENERATIVE ART - Generative Music

Aaron Penne and Boreta, Rituals - Venice #874 & #384, 2021, Source: ritualsalbum.xyz

In today’s History of Generative Art series, we explore a fascinating genre, generative music. Unlike traditional composition, generative music is created through algorithmic or rule-based systems that enable continuous variation and non-repetitive structures. Its development has closely followed technological advancements, from early computer music experiments to contemporary AI-generated works.

The tables of Wolfgang Mozart's 'Musikalisches Würfelspiel’, Source: ai.gopubby.com

Max Mathews, Pioneer in Making Computer Music, Source: nytimes.com

The idea of musical randomization dates back to the 18th century with the Musikalisches Würfelspiel, which allowed composers to create pieces by rolling dice. As technology advanced, music’s mathematical nature made it ideal for computational approaches. Unlike visual media, audio data requires significantly less computational power, enabling digital manipulation well before real-time video processing became feasible.

The first breakthrough came in 1956, when Max V. Mathews developed MUSIC I, the first digital audio synthesis program at Bell Laboratories. In the 1980s and 1990s, David Cope created Experiments in Musical Intelligence (EMI), a system that analyzed and recomposed music in the styles of Bach, Mozart, and Rachmaninov. The results were so convincing that some listeners mistook them for human compositions.

Lejaren Hiller at the Experimental Music Studio, Source: burchfieldpenney.org

While scientists were developing computational approaches, several composers had already begun experimenting with algorithmic and self-generating musical processes. Lejaren Hiller composed the “Illiac Suite” (1957), the first complete work generated by a computer algorithm, using stochastic methods and rule-based selection.

The term “generative music” was popularized by Brian Eno in 1995, when he collaborated with SSEYO’s Koan software to create music that continuously evolved based on predefined rules. Eno described this genre as an ever-changing system rather than a fixed composition. His 1996 release “Generative Music 1” demonstrated these principles, by showcasing tracks generated using the software. In 2024, a documentary about him, Eno, was released, following a similar approach, it uniquely re-edits itself for each screening. Trailer.

Brian Eno, Generative Music 1, 1996, Source: progarchives.com

Artists now use programming languages and algorithms to create rule-based systems, sometimes combining their generative visuals with generative sound. “Rituals – Venice” (2021) is an audiovisual work that merges Aaron Penne's visuals with Boreta's meditative music. The calming, immersive experience was released on Art Blocks. Its code generates a continuous, non-repeating output for over 9 million years.

AI has also influenced generative music. Deep learning techniques, such as those used in DeepMind WaveNet (2016), have enabled realistic neural synthesis of sound. In 2023, Patten released “Mirage FM”, one of the first full-length albums composed entirely with Riffusion, a new advanced technology. The album transforms written descriptions into dreamlike compositions that blend pop, techno, hip-hop, R&B, and ambient.

AI and blockchain have enabled new methods of composition, distribution, and interaction in generative music. While the field faces challenges in areas such as creative control, authorship, and long-term viability, the genre remains a subject of study and experimentation in both artistic and technological contexts.

COLLECTOR’S CHOICE - Mistaken Identity by Mario Klingemann

Mistaken Identity by Mario Klingemann represents a complex exploration of neural networks through the deliberate manipulation of their internal structures. This work consists of three videos created using generative adversarial networks (GANs) and neural networks. Exhibited at the ZKM in Karlsruhe during the Beyond Festival in October 2018, the triptych investigates how neural networks interpret visual information.

Mario Klingemann, Mistaken Identity, 2018, a video triptych

Mario Klingemann is known for his pioneering work in generative and AI art, with preferred tools including neural networks, code, and algorithms. His artistic practice reflects a systematic approach and curiosity about understanding complex systems. Klingemann often dissects systems such as neural networks, analyzes their components, and reconstructs them to explore patterns and to recreate and understand the system’s behaviors.

Portrait of Mario Klingemann

The approach of deconstructing and reconstructing forms to understand underlying structures and patterns has historical precedents in art. Classical painters such as Leonardo da Vinci conducted anatomical dissections to gain a deeper understanding of the human form. Similarly, Cubist artists such as Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque fragmented objects into geometric components, breaking them down and reassembling the forms to depict multiple perspectives.

Mistaken Identity, 2018 at ZKM in Karlsruhe during the Beyond Festival in October 2018

To understand how AI functions and perceives human forms, Klingemann developed a method called "neural glitch”. This technique involves deliberately introducing errors into fully trained GAN models. Initially, GANs are trained to generate realistic human faces. Once the models achieve a near-perfect state, Klingemann disrupts key neural components.

Mario Klingemann, Mistaken Identity – Chapter #1, 2018

These disruptions include small changes, such as altering, deleting, or exchanging the training weights, which impact the numerical values that determine how the model synthesizes images. These changes result in significant and often unpredictable alterations to the output.

Mistaken Identity, 2018 at ZKM in Karlsruhe during the Beyond Festival in October 2018

They affect both texture and semantic levels, changing the arrangement of facial features and altering finer details, such as skin tone or shading. These changes produce outputs ranging from slightly altered portraits to entirely abstract forms. This process represents how neural networks work, interpreting and perceiving human faces differently than humans.

Mistaken Identity, 2018 at Future U exhibition at RMIT Gallery, Swanston Street, Melbourne, Australia in 2021

The final result consists of three nearly two-hour-long videos, presented as a triptych for the first time at ZKM in Karlsruhe in 2018 and the Future U exhibition at RMIT Gallery, Swanston Street, Melbourne, Australia in 2021

The first chapter of the series, Mistaken Identity - Chapter #1, is part of the Seedphrase collection.

HISTORY OF GENERATIVE ART - Metaverse

Krista Kim, Mars House, 2020, Source: sothebys.com

The concept of virtual worlds and digital identities existed long before the term 'metaverse' became widely recognized. The origins can be traced back to early science fiction, which later inspired practical applications like gaming, virtual reality, and social digital spaces. Today, the rise of Web3 culture, including decentralized platforms, blockchain-based digital assets, and interactive virtual experiences, further integrates these virtual worlds into everyday life.

The metaverse refers to a network of virtual spaces where users interact through digital avatars. These environments support social interaction, digital economies, gaming, education, and more. It incorporates technologies such as virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), blockchain, and traditional online platforms to create digital worlds.

Ivan Sutherland, Sword of Damocles, 1968, Source: researchgate.net

The foundations of virtual reality were laid in the 19th and 20th centuries with early discussions about immersive artificial environments. In 1938, French playwright Antonin Artaud described the illusory nature of theater as 'virtual reality' in his collection of essays, “The Theater and Its Double”. Another early theoretical concept is found in the writings of Stanley G. Weinbaum, whose 1935 short story “Pygmalion’s Spectacles” envisioned a pair of goggles that could transport users into an interactive world.

Stanley G. Weinbaum, Pygmalion’s Spectacles, 1935, Source: sothebys.com

By the 1960s, technology began catching up with these ideas. In 1962, Morton Heilig developed the Sensorama, an early immersive multimedia machine simulating a motorcycle ride with 3D visuals, sound, vibrations, and scents.. Later, in the 1960s, Ivan Sutherland created the first VR headset, the "Sword of Damocles", which featured mechanical tracking and wireframe graphics.

Morton Heilig, Sensorama, 1962, Source: historyofinformation.com

Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash, 1992, Source: goodreads.com

In the 1980s, the idea of simulated realities appeared more frequently in literature. In 1981, Vernor Vinge’s novella "True Names" introduced a virtual world accessible through a computer interface. In 1984, William Gibson’s "Neuromancer" described a digital space called "The Matrix", where users could navigate a connected network. These books, along with films like "Tron" (1982), and "Ready Player One" (2018) further explored these themes.

 The term "metaverse" was first introduced in Neal Stephenson’s 1992 novel, "Snow Crash”. In this book, the metaverse was a virtual space where people could escape from reality and interact in a 3D environment using avatars.

As virtual worlds evolved, artists and scientists explored their artistic potential. Active Worlds, launched in 1995, was an early online 3D platform where users could navigate virtual spaces, interact through avatars, and build their own environments. In 2005, @HerbertWFranke created the Z-Galaxy within Active Worlds. Unlike most virtual spaces, it featured mathematically generated structures, galleries, and a sculpture park. It first showcased Franke’s own work but later included exhibitions by other artists and scientists.

Herbert W. Franke, Z-Galaxy, 2005, Source: art-meets-science.io

Around the same time, video game developers experimented with multiplayer virtual spaces. In 1986, LucasArts released "Habitat", an early example of a graphical multiplayer virtual world that allowed users to interact using digital avatars. In 2003, the launch of "Second Life" brought the metaverse concept closer to reality. Users could create digital identities, purchase virtual land, and engage in social and economic activities.

Linden Lab, Second Life, 2003, Source: indiatimes.com

Steven Lisberger, Tron, 1982, Source: theguardian.com

The industry gained new momentum in the 2010s, with advances in computing power and graphics. In 2011, Palmer Luckey developed the Oculus Rift prototype, reigniting interest in VR. Companies like Oculus, Microsoft, Sony, and HTC introduced VR headsets that expanded the use of virtual reality beyond gaming, including business, education, and industry applications.

In 2021, Facebook rebranded as Meta to focus on metaverse development. Around the same time, Web3 technologies like decentralized finance (DeFi), NFTs, and blockchain governance were gaining traction. Companies and creators explored NFT-based digital ownership, driving interest in virtual land and new digital economies.

As technology advances, the metaverse has the potential to reshape how we connect, create, and experience digital life.

COLLECTOR’S CHOICE - Early AI video Works by Memo Akten

“We are all connected. To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.” – Neil deGrasse Tyson

Between 2018 and 2020, Memo Akten produced two early AI series: the "BigGAN Study" and "We Are All Connected", both representing his early explorations with generative adversarial networks. Both series feature audio-reactive visual compositions that respond to original music composed by the artist himself without the use of AI. The work reflects the interconnectedness of all forms of life and matter, from microcosm to macrocosm.

We are all connected #04 - Underworld, 2018-2020 by Memo Akten

For more than a decade, Memo Akten has been working with various AI models in his art. His works often focus on intelligence in nature, intelligence in machines, perception, consciousness, neuroscience, ritual, and religion. This interdisciplinary approach allows him to connect technology, science, and spirituality in his moving images, sounds, large-scale responsive installations, performances and audio-reactive visual compositions.

Portrait of Memo Akten

The history of audio-reactive visuals originates in the early 20th century, when experimental filmmakers began exploring methods to visually represent sound. Oskar Fischinger and Mary Ellen Bute developed early abstract animations synchronized with classical and experimental music. In the 1960s and 1970s, John Whitney further pioneered this field through the use of analog and digital computers to generate real-time synchronized visuals, where visual patterns corresponded directly to sound input.

BigGAN Study #2 - It's more fun to compute, 2018 by Memo Akten

Memo Akten’s practice builds on this tradition. "BigGAN Study" is one of his first projects where he combined video with audio, producing audio-reactive visual compositions. Akten began working on this series in 2018, using an AI model known as BigGAN, developed by Google DeepMind. Compared to earlier GAN models, BigGAN had the capability to generate more detailed and diverse images due to its use of larger datasets and high-dimensional latent spaces.

BigGAN Study #4 - BigGAN Madness, 2018 by Memo Akten

BigGAN had the downside of relying on a large-scale dataset sourced from the internet. As Memo Akten became concerned about the legal and ethical implications of using inputs without consent, he began building and training his own AI models in 2017, sourcing images from the public domain, CC0 licenses, and his personal archive to ensure compliance with ethical standards. His second series, “We Are All Connected”, was created using this custom model between 2018 and 2020.

We are all connected #05 - Mad World, 2018-2020 by Memo Akten

The uniqueness of these series is that Memo Akten later revisited the videos, dubbing the visuals with original music he composed. For some of the videos, he created the music in the 1990s as a teenager using a 486 or Pentium computer, a 14-inch CRT monitor, FX pedals, an electric guitar, and Cakewalk software. The moving images in the works are synchronized to match the tempo and feel of these compositions.

We are all connected #06 - Plug me in, 2018-2020 by Memo Akten 

Both series reflect Memo Akten’s philosophical concerns, emphasizing the interconnectedness of all forms of life and matter, from microbes to galaxies. The works are presented as continuously evolving images accompanied by Akten's own music. In both series, rather than relying on random latent walks, he employed deliberate, controlled explorations of the latent space.

We are all connected #08 - Avril 14, 2018-2020 by Memo Akten

The resulting works serve as meditative audiovisual experiences, that reflect the complex, interconnected nature of existence.

We are all connected #05 – Mad World is part of the Delronde collection.

COLLECTOR’S CHOICE: Letter Readers by Osinachi

Letter Readers (2024) by Osinachi is the artist's first-ever triptych, a choice that adds further significance to the piece, examining the transformation of communication and reading in the digital era.

The work reflects on both the advancements and the losses that have emerged from the shift from handwritten letters to instantaneous digital messaging. By selecting this format, Osinachi underscores the importance of the message and enhances its thematic weight, drawing on the triptych's historical and symbolic associations.

Historically, the triptych format was widely used in Christian art, particularly for altarpieces during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Triptychs often carry deep symbolic meaning, with the number three representing the Holy Trinity in Christian theology—symbolizing divine harmony and completeness. It is also seen as a representation of the passage of time—past, present, and future—or as a metaphor for the stages of existence: birth, life, and death. Through this format, Osinachi invites viewers to consider the enduring relevance of communication in all its forms.

Robert Campin, The Merode Altarpiece, c. 1427–32, Source: metmuseum.org

By reinterpreting the traditional three-paneled layout, Osinachi’s work reflects on the fading tradition of reading in the digital age. The triptych connects the past, when reading was a focused, tangible act, with our present and future, when these practices are slowly disappearing. Each panel shows an individual figure seated on a bench, absorbed in reading a long letter, evoking a quiet moment of attention that contrasts with today’s fast-paced, image-driven communication. Like many medieval triptychs, the work incorporates symbolism: the scroll-like letters, the repeated gestures, and the shared background all serve as visual metaphors.

 Antonello da Messina, Saint Jerome in His Study, 1474–1474, Source: nationalgallery.org.uk

The long letters held by each figure resemble historical scrolls or parchment, suggesting a form of communication that requires focused attention. This stands in contrast to contemporary modes of information consumption, which prioritize speed and visual content over extended text. The format of the letter may also allude to the long threads we encounter while scrolling on social media. Despite the formal similarity, the experience is different: engaging with physical letters or books encourages sustained focus, while digital scrolling often results in fragmented attention.

Osinachi, Letter Readers 1, 2024

Although the figures are physically separated across the panels, the shared background and unified activity establish a visual and thematic connection. This shared focus highlights the complex relationship between connection and loneliness in modern life, where individuals are often alone yet continuously connected through the digital world. The natural surroundings, with its trimmed hedges and a clear blue sky, reflects how we are not only moving away from the tangible world, from analog communication and from reading but also from direct engagement with nature.

 Osinachi, Letter Readers 2, 2024

Elements of Nigerian cultural heritage are also present in the work. While Osinachi’s figures represent contemporary individuals, dressed in hoodies, backpacks, sunglasses, and sneakers, the use of bold, patterned trousers draws on African textile traditions. This stylistic choice adds another layer to the narrative between past and present, connecting tradition with contemporary identity.

  Osinachi, Letter Readers 3, 2024

The work makes use of the traditional triptych format in a contemporary context while also encouraging a slower, more intentional form of engagement. As the figures are shown absorbed in reading, the viewer is similarly invited to pause, take in the details, and reflect on the composition and its underlying themes.

Osinachi’s works can be found in the collections of museums such as Buffalo AKG Art Museum and Museum of Art + Light, as well as in private collections including Colborn Bell, SuperRareJohn, TokenAngels, and many others.

 Osinachi, Letter Readers, 2024

The Interview I Art Collector @NGMIoutalive

"If you don't enjoy making your own decisions, you're never going to be much of a collector." – Charles Saatchi

Kate Vass continues her exploration of the perspectives of a new generation of art collectors. During our interview with @NGMIoutalive, the above quote came to mind, as it resonated with our conversation. Our guest reflects on how digital art connects to his values, lifestyle, and taste, emphasizing that for him, collecting is primarily about "having fun."

The conversation explores further the importance of community, with Bright Moments playing a significant role in merging digital and physical experiences, as well as the evolution of trends in digital art and the most cherished artworks from the collection.

It’s truly impressive that, through this playful approach, our guest has built a remarkable collection, including early GAN works, pieces from iconic artists, and captivating works by XCOPY. Perhaps "having fun" and "enjoying making your own decisions" are the secrets to staying perpetually connected to and excited about your collection.

We hope this interview provides further insight into @NGMIoutalive's journey. We hope you enjoy reading it as much as we enjoyed conducting the conversation.

Artonymous, ON FIRE, 2020

KV: Can you tell us a bit about your background? How did you first get into collecting digital art? Were you already involved in art collecting before discovering digital art?

N: I have been involved with blockchains on the infrastructure side and try to balance that by building things with my hands that might actually be useful to someone. For the most part I have lived a nomadic lifestyle going back to my early childhood. My parents had a small art collection which they took along wherever we moved. So, although I grew up around art, it was not until my early thirties that I became interested in collecting myself. Discovering NFTs played well into my lifestyle preferences, as I really enjoy being able to own something without having to amass physical items. That being said, my desire for more physical art and the concordant wish for having more wall space to enjoy it have unfortunately also increased since I have grown older.  

Robbie Barrat and Ronan Barrot, Infinite Skulls, 2019

KV: Your collection includes crypto art, generative art, and AI art. Do you find yourself drawn to one of these more than the others?

N: I don’t have any preferences there. However, I do recognize that they each have their own narratives to which I relate in a particular way. I love generative art because I can appreciate how difficult it is for a computational system to creatively explore the randomness and grit inherent in the natural world. I love crypto art for introducing an emotive and human connection aspect to sovereign digital ownership, that was hitherto unimaginable in the digital asset context and I love AI art for challenging our ideas around aesthetics and what is considered to be “real”.

William Mapan, Naufrage II, 2022

KV: What do you look for when deciding to acquire a new piece?

N: I think the main underlying thing I am looking for when buying art is a connection. An aesthetic connection, a connection to the story of a particular work, or of a particular artist, and now with digital collecting also the connection to a particular community. I don’t have a specific strategy or end game in my mind when I buy art. It is an evolving process where I often end up surprising myself. I kind of hope it will always stay that way.

Max Osiris, Point of Contact, 2020

KV: You mentioned that, at first, you didn’t quite understand the appeal of GAN art but eventually grew to appreciate it. What was the turning point for you?

N: I guess the real turning point came with me spending more time reading about the ideas and processes behind how these works were created.  Looking purely at the aesthetics, I often found them tough to swallow.  They didn’t readily fit into my pre-conceived ideas of what art is or should be. They rubbed me up the wrong way if you will, and I wanted to understand why that was the case. When I realized the major technical breakthrough behind them, I became fascinated. People had created a synthetic neural network that was able to represent categories through an abstraction, rather than images themselves and utilized this as an artistic tool. It was a very brief moment in time that is somehow appreciated by a few for its significance.

DeepBlack #5388, 2019

KV: You now own quite a few AI-generated works, including early pieces by David Young, which often feature elements from nature. What is it about GANs’ interpretation of nature that resonates with you? Do you think AI can enhance our perception of the natural world?

N: The reason I like GAN art is because it often highlights a lack or “misinterprets” something that our visual conditioning would ordinarily take for granted to be represented in a particular way. Nothing is so close and familiar to us as the random complexity of the natural world.  Experiencing a disruption of that can make us take a step back and re-evaluate our point of view. We are generally very quick to think that we have understood something or know something, but if we get a chance to take a different perspective, we can discover worlds hidden within worlds. So, what I think we can say is that the alchemical process of dissolving and coagulating that happens in machine learning is ultimately a diminished reflection of our own neural processes and can give us some interesting clues about how we operate.  

David Young, Learning Nature (b63h,4000-19,4,9,8,16,17), 2019

KV: You also own several pieces by XCOPY. What is it about his work that stands out to you?

N: I think XCOPY understood very early on how powerful memes can be. His decision to store and proliferate his work, in what back then was still a very much anarchic and disintermediated context of the blockchain, was nothing short of revolutionary. His brilliance lies in capturing some of the ideas that users of a highly interconnected, online-society mutually believe in, while simultaneously putting them up on the stake. The hypnotic loops hold a mirror to our face and say: “Take a look”, without necessarily passing judgment and it is hard to look away when we find ourselves reflected so clearly in our wanton state. Besides all that, I just find the aesthetics of much of his work incredibly captivating and unique.

XCOPY, Deathless, 2020

KV: You’ve been part of TheDoomed DAO. How has participating in these communities, as well as engaging with other collectors or figures in the space, shaped your perspective on digital art and collecting?

N: I think one of the key differentiators with digital art is the networked aspect. Although I have collected physical work by well known artists, I do not know anyone else who has, let alone have any insight into what other art they have collected, what interests them, for what particular reasons, etc. Even being loosely part of a community, like this one, creates the sense of sharing a passion or interest that appears hard to replicate in a trad art context.

XCOPY, Grifter #400, 2021

KV: How important is the physical aspect of blockchain-based art to you? Do you see a growing role for hybrid experiences in digital art collecting? Have you collected physical works alongside digital ones?

N: If I am perfectly honest a lot of my favorite pieces that I collected during the last years sit somewhere at the crossroads of digital and physical art. That has perhaps also something to do with the fact that I truly enjoy creating physical objects myself. In terms of blockchain-based hybrid experiences, Bright Moments has done some pioneering work, which I was lucky enough to attend on several occasions, at some truly spectacular locations around the world. I think there is still a lot more potential to create a unique sense of value for people, by combining the excitement of digital ownership with physical pieces and extraordinary IRL experiences.

OxDEAFBEEF, Hashmarks #90, 2023

KV: You're quite active on X, sharing your thoughts on art and the pieces in your collection. Do you think collectors play a broader role in shaping the digital art space?

N: I do find it very special to engage with other collectors on socials and feel that the public forum represents a great opportunity for sharing the stories of art, artists and collectors in a defining way. On the flip side, that can also accentuate the same social power laws under which we are used to operate IRL, where influential figures are able to dictate tastes and preferences. While there is nothing unusual in that per se, the nature and speed with which socials operate can make people vulnerable to manipulation and impulsiveness and I am not one to be immune to that myself.    

Harvey Rayner, Fontana #128, 2022

KV: Which artworks in your collection do you consider the most iconic, and why?

N: If I had to pick three it would probably have to be:

1. NO FAVOUR (COLD) by XCOPY

2. Meridian #87 by Matt des Lauriers

3. Head in the Metaverse by Popwonder

The first, because it is such a quintessential example of XCOPY’s work that has its origin in the Tumblr days and has 1/1 incarnation on Superrare. The second, because Meridians to me are just one of the most beautiful examples of blockchain-based generative art and this particular one has been featured at several Exhibitions in London and Taipei, and finally the Popwonder piece because it captures the vibes of JPEG summer like a few other pieces out there.

Matt des Lauriers, Meridian #87, 2021

KV: If you had to describe your collection in three words, what would they be?

N: Me having fun.

***

*The responses provided in this interview have been preserved in their original form, with no alterations to the interviewee's stylistic choices or grammar. - Kate Vass

@NGMIoutalive on X: @NGMIoutalive

@NGMIoutalive’s collection link: https://opensea.io/0x5078d1e25a84a3aa133c9c5de5c46c84384ddd93

The Interview I Art Collector Coldie

In the latest edition of our ongoing interview series with art collectors, Kate Vass had the opportunity to speak with Coldie, an artist and a collector who has become an influential figure in the space. As both a creator and a collector, Coldie offers a unique perspective on the intersection of art, technology, and the crypto space. Over the years, he has amassed a collection that not only represents the early days of blockchain-based art but also reflects his personal evolution as a collector. Coldie has been involved with the scene since 2018, and his approach to collecting is driven by more than just financial gain—it’s about supporting fellow artists, nurturing the growth of digital art, and contributing to the broader cultural conversation within the crypto community.

In this conversation, Coldie shares insights into his philosophy on collecting, the artists and works that have shaped his journey, and the transformative role of blockchain technology in the art world.

We hope you enjoy the conversation and find inspiration in Coldie’s approach to both collecting and creating art.

KV: In the early days of blockchain art, did you feel like you were part of something revolutionary, a new model challenging the traditional art world? How did that sense of pioneering shape your approach to collecting?

C: I knew that what I was getting into was going to be important for digital artists. As an artist, I was minting my artworks that I had been showing at regional art galleries, but now I was able to share them globally 24/7. 

Soon after minting my own art and seeing what the market was offering for works, I knew that my art was worth more than what I was selling it for, but that wasn’t up to me to decide what ‘market rate’ was at the time. With this thought, I realized that early collectors with a savvy eye were going to be the big winners. I began taking 30% of my art sales and reinvesting in digital art. I was only spending about $30 per piece, but looking at what I have collected in that period 2018-2020, I am quite proud of.

Larva Labs, CryptoPunk #7933, 2017

KV: Do you relate to the expression by Andy Warhol - "Being good in business is the most fascinating kind of art." Warhol saw business as a kind of art. Do you see this in crypto art, where art, value, and market overlap? How much does the business side shape your collecting? 

C: I believe there are different reasons that each collector aligns with art. Some are gravitated to the image alone. Others are looking for a deep story. Others want to be part of a larger ecosystem or community. Others want to play games. 

When I examine art that I am considering collecting, my first gut check is the “ok, so what?” test. Does this artwork strike me in a special way? Is there a message that I pull from it? Is it just a neat ‘3D bouncing ball’ or is there context and thought that adds to the artwork? Is this a business with the intent on maximum revenue generation, but lacking in artistic merit? What do I think this artist will be doing in 20 years? My time horizon for art collecting is multiple years, some pieces forever. Trying to figure out if I can 2x in a month is not the way I operate with collecting. If I wanted that, I would just shitcoin.

Osinachi, A Taxi Driver on a Sunday, 2020

KV: Can you tell us about your very first acquisition? How did you decide it was worth collecting? Was a support to your fellow artist or someone you came across for the first time and felt compelled to collect the work?

C: Pinpointing my VERY first token collected is easier said than done. I have looked back at my earliest SuperRare collected pieces and one that is in the ballpark  “The unknowns 6.9” by artonymousartifakt. Collected on November 9, 2018.

It took me a few months to collect my first piece, but I remember instantly being interested in AI art, especially because it was so abstract but able to hold deep meaning. This piece in particular struck me because I felt like the top left person was Mark Twain, but at the same time, it could be anyone. Each character “could be” a certain person from history, but that is also the point of it, to me, was that these general portraits are in fact any number of people throughout history. That self-created narrative is what drove my purchase.

Artonymousartifakt, The unknowns 6.9, 2018

KV: How has your collecting philosophy evolved since you began? Have certain experiences or trends influenced the way you approach collecting now?

C: When collecting an artwork, especially a 1/1, it needs to have the ‘it’ factor. That factor can be from any and all styles of art. I have surprised myself when I am struck by an artwork I never would have expected to collect. 

With so many options of art to collect, it is impossible to buy it all as I am an artist and not running a hedge fund. The discerning eye is my secret weapon that has pulled my interest in areas that were not where ‘the herd’ was collecting at the time. I was very interested in AI art. Got a bunch of really great pieces. I was into metaverse wearables. Got some legendary pieces. Early ArtBlocks was magical and I snagged some amazing pieces. 

My tastes are always evolving. AI art is everywhere, so for an AI piece to have ‘it’ there needs to be narrative and meaning that pushes it above the rest.

MaxOsiris, Right Click Save as "Right-Click-Save-As-Space-Lasagna-Guy.gif”, 2023

KV: Your “Decentral Eyes” series features key figures from the crypto world. What draws you to these individuals, and how do you decide who to represent in the series? Are there specific qualities or contributions you look for when choosing subjects?

C: Decentral Eyes was born out of the goal to contextualize the faces that were shaping the crypto space in real time. I wanted each portrait to be a timely reference to where and what was going on at the time. I have a stance that each person featured ‘raises their own hand’ by doing something noteworthy that is historically relevant to the progress of the space. Vitalik made perfect sense to be the first featured because his technology was powering the very token the art is minted on. Others like Warren Buffett whose statements against crypto were just as crucial at the time. I enjoy taking Warren Buffett’s negative stance and using their wide recognition to start a conversation with those not aware of what crypto is about. This series is meant to be educational and historical by nature so that in 10 years when we look back, we have a visual scrapbook of these influential people. There have also been A LOT of people I chose not to include in the series because I also feel that doing a portrait of someone personifies that energy into the universal consciousness and I do not want to give them that power.

Coldie, DEyes #083, 2021 

KV: How important is the artist's story, process, or connection to the crypto space in your decision to collect a work?

C: It is very important. In a space full of grifting and artists who disappear except for when the market gets hot, having a deeper connneciton to the overal digital art space is important not only for those I support, but also for the investment of what I hope they do over the span of their artistic career.

XCOPY, No Favour (cold), 2019

KV: The early space has seen explosive growth—are there artists or artworks you feel are often overlooked or misunderstood? And why? if you can give an example of any now? 

C: Explosive growth has a way of pushing a select few to the top, while most are buried in the noise. The jury is still out on a lot of art I have purchased between 2021-now. Many of the artists and projects are early in their journey. I will keep watching for these artists to grow and evolve. Art is a forever journey. Putting in the time and creating art and being experimental to grow is a key distinguishing factor to pieces I collect. I love seeing artists take risks outside of what they are expected to create. Through this process there is huge growth.

Helena Sarin, an eternal tangle of what ifs, 2018

KV: What were the early days of blockchain art collecting like? Any particularly unforgettable moments or surprise stories?

C: The early days were a lot more holistic. Collectors had an understanding back then to allow others to get pieces and not hoard them for themselves. It was smart because it created a larger varied collector base. One of the most heartwarming experiences was when Tokenangels and I were in a bidding war for a Robbie Barrat AI Generated Nude as part of a charity art auction by XCopy. TA obviously had a lot more money than me to bid. I had saved up 6 months worth of sales and went all in. After a manual bidding war held by XCopy, I placed a bid at the exact moment that XCopy and TA thought was final and TA would win. When he clicked the button intending for TA to win, my bid slid in, and was awarded the art. I had a call with TA and told him that I was a man and would forfeit the token to him. He told me that he was willing to have bid a lot more for the piece, but also he was OK with me winning the piece as he held another in his collection. I will never forget that kind gesture.  

This is a screenshot that was taken of me while gazing at the Robbie that I would later win. These metaverse memories are just as real as real life.

Screenshot of Robbie Barrat, AI Generated Nude Portrait #7 Frame #153, 2018 in the metaverse

KV: Are there artworks you own that have become especially meaningful or valuable over time, both personally and in terms of market significance?

C: One of my favorite series that I minted was Matt Kane’s Gazers. I have always been a huge supporter of Matt’s creativity and minted based on what I know about him as a very thoughtful artist, not fully understanding the depth of the series until later. The RNG gods were on my side when I minted (Gazer #812) and turns out to be one of the Gazers that is often spoken about as one of the most sought-after.

Matt Kane, Gazers #812, 2021

KV: What do you think the future holds for blockchain-based art? Where do you see this movement in five or ten years for you as collector and artist?

C: In time the world will more and more be turned into a society that inherently values and holds assets that are digital. I believe this will start with a broad understanding of Bitcoin’s value proposition and will extend into rare digital assets including art. While not every art piece will be deemed ‘valuable’ there are artists who have been minting over the past 10+ years as well as art being minted moving forward that will capture the collecting communities psyche as being truely rare and value will be derived from that. There are thesis that today will grow in understanding as well as many that will prove to not stand the test of time. In the end, it is the collective demand for rare assets that will drive price discovery.

It is equally interesting to watch those who have deep conviction for artworks and artists and how this plays out over time. I believe all art has different horizons of realization and it’s fascinating to see how time affects the demand for artworks and when each collector decides to make artworks available for purchase.

Beeple, BULL RUN #105/271, 2020

KV: Do you believe that digital art can only stay digital, or how do you display works from your collection at home? (any artifacts, prints or else)

C: Digital art is digital by nature. I think there are ways to collect digital pieces in physical form if the artist created a physical version that is signed/numbered. I have some physical counterparts that I love, including my “Baby Maker” Ringer #997 print I purchased from Dmitri Cherniak.

Over the years I have come up on some amazing artifacts from my journey. Many of them are physical pieces that were gifts from artists and I love displaying them around my studio and at home. They mean so much to me as they are relics of a time and place that I was directly connected to. 

I also have several digital screens that I have the cycle artworks at home. Its wonderful when a cool piece pops us and my family asks more about it. That is what its about. So much more rewarding than doom scrolling my wallet. That is not how art is supposed to be experienced.

Dmitri Cherniak, Ringers #997, 2021

KV: How do you see the role of DAOs or community initiatives in the future of digital art collecting?

C: I believe community is the lifeblood of all cultural movements. There are any number of ways to harness this collective energy. I have seen some beautiful initiatives happen in my own community by collectors who have ideas and get excited to take my artworks and get them out into the larger world around us. 

As a collector, I appreciate the ability to have a direct contact with artists. Often times its just cool to say “what’s up” in a group chat and to tell them how their art affects me. Paying it forward is a highly under utilized energy in society and I have seen first hand how a kind gesture or words of encouragement can really help someone. Sometimes it hits so hard for reasons unknown and it propels them to break through to their next big idea. That is what we can do for those around us, whether it is here in the crypto art community, or in our daily lives with people we interact with. 

Espen Kluge, cruise ships and police cars, 2019

***

*The responses provided in this interview have been preserved in their original form, with no alterations to the interviewee's stylistic choices or grammar. - Kate Vass

Coldie on X: @Coldie

Coldie’s collection link: https://opensea.io/Coldie and https://opensea.io/ColdieVault

The Interview I Art Collector NIFTYNAUT

As we step into a new year, we continue the ongoing series of interviews with some of the most fascinating voices in the digital art space. Kate Vass is excited to kick off with the first of this year's interview with collector NiftyNaut.

NiftyNaut’s collection spans historical milestones like CryptoPunks and Autoglyphs, as well as emerging projects and experimental works that challenge traditional definitions of art. What sets NiftyNaut apart is a thoughtful approach to collecting—one that prioritizes storytelling, innovation, and a deep connection to the artist's journey over hype or market trends.

As Charles Saatchi once said, "The role of the artist is to ask questions, not answer them, and the role of the collector is to ensure those questions continue to be asked." Visionaries like NiftyNaut play a crucial role in supporting emerging movements and amplifying the voices of digital creators, ensuring the space continues to evolve and inspire.

In our conversation, we dive into what makes a piece culturally significant, the evolving role of NFTs in art history, and his vision for redefining how digital art is experienced. Whether you're an art collector, creator, or curious observer, this dialogue offers a rare glimpse into the mind of someone shaping the future of art in the digital age.

Larva Labs, CryptoPunk #2460, 2017

KV: What was the first digital art piece you collected, and why did it resonate with you? 

NN: It was CryptoPunks. When I stumbled across them I thought it was different - I am one of the 267 wallets that actually claimed them. I recognised it as something pioneering as you could suddenly proof ownership of digital items. That was a game changer for me and I went down the rabbit hole.

Larva Labs, Autoglyph #173, 2019

KV: Your collection includes notable works like CryptoPunks and Autoglyphs. What draws you to these iconic series, and what role do you think they play in art history? 

NN: Two angles that really interest me: what constitutes art in our digital(-native) world and the technical nerdy nitty gritty parts to make digital art. I’m captivated by how Punks challenge our traditional notions of art. Those 24x24 pixels combine simplicity and cultural impact and became symbols of digital identity. They are basically reducing art to its essential digital elements. From a tech POV it is the pioneering, kicking-the-can kind of stuff I appreciate. Punks pushed the enveloped and introduced verifiable digital scarcity with a simple original implementation that ended up inspiring the entire NFT / tokenisation-of-everything movement. What makes Autoglyphs remarkable is that they were the first project to generate and store their art entirely on-chain. Simply put: LarvaLabs created with Punks and Glyphs something aesthetically and technically meaningful that met community adaptation and let to subsequent innovations. 

Larva Labs, CryptoPunk #3288, 2017

KV: Are there any lesser-known artists or collections in the NFT space that you’re particularly passionate about? 

NN: Two in particular: MCSK (@mcsikic) and Material Protocol Arts (@material_work). MCSK is such a versatile artist who is exploring the concept of time in his works. He is incredibly talented, loves tinkering and is using different media and tools. I started my own art residency with hon.art, with him as the first artist in 2024, and he just created those incredible sculptures to display digital art. Material Protocol is a studio that is pushing the boundaries with 'Cycles’. Their project uses the blockchain as its canvas, it is interactive and creates an evolving digital sculpture that records its own history and changes over time. Both MCSK and Material Protocol experiment with and explore the concepts I am interested in.

MCSK, Gameboy, 2024

KV: How do you stay ahead of trends in the rapidly evolving NFT and digital art space? 

NN: I don't. It was manageable when the space was smaller and 'NFT' was synonymous with digital art. But now NFTs have become an umbrella term, with platforms popping up everywhere tokenizing everything - it's impossible to stay ahead, and I don't try to. Instead, I move at my own pace, exploring things I like and what friends share with me. Stepping back from the constant rush helps me focus on the bigger picture and avoid the fallacy that you always need to be first. Besides, most trends end up being overhyped and overpriced anyway. 

Pxlq1, Dynamic Slices #488, 2022

KV: What’s your approach to evaluating the long-term cultural or financial value of a piece? 

NN: I am really bad in evaluating the future value of a piece. I collect them because I like them. In my experience the things that aggregate value over time are the ones that don’t live on hype or utility as both will eventually fade. Take Punks as an example, it took some years before they moved to where they are. In my experience, innovative ideas are normally not necessarily understood in the beginning and it takes time to being adopted by a broader audience.

Ivona Tau, The cycle of night (lat. Nocte Cursus), 2021

KV: What personal philosophy guides your collection? Are you focused on investment, curation, or storytelling? 

NN: While I was driven during the art blocks peaks from a gaming / competitive pov -I need to have a full curated set- I am nowadays somewhere between curation and storytelling. Curation in a sense of what pieces do I want to have in my wallet or what I want to share for an exhibition, what would spark a conversation with people that are not in this space and how could this piece convince them to explore digital art. And storytelling from a pov of the artist. I am quick in judging, and sometimes I judge pieces / artist absolutely utterly wrong because I don’t understand their journey or their message. So it takes sometimes a second or third look for me and some talks with family / friends / artists / others to truly understand what is behind a piece. And if I get hooked on a story I want that piece.

John Orion Young , Franny, 2021

KV: Do you see your collection as a legacy project? If so, what story would you like it to tell about this era? 

NN: My collection turned into an attempt to tell the story of what fascinated me most about this era: the intersection of what constitutes art in our digital world and the technical innovation behind it. I'm drawn to works that challenged traditional notions of art - whether it's CryptoPunks showing how 24x24 pixels could become cultural symbols, or artists pushing the boundaries of generative on-chain art. Looking at my collection, I see pieces that forced me to rethink the very essence of digital art and its technical foundations. I hope future viewers will not just see individual pieces, but understand this fundamental shift in how we thought about art, ownership, and digital expression.  

Kim Asendorf, Cargo #588, 2023

KV: How does hon.art redefine the traditional museum experience, and what aspects of Johannes Cladders' anti-museum philosophy were most influential in shaping this digital space? 

NN: hon.art is the spectre of all unfinished ideas I had, that turned into this evolving digital collection and hub. I came across Cladders during some philosophical rabbit hole I went down regarding how to present and display digital art. His anti-museum philosophy just resonated with me: he rejected traditional museum conventions and he was viewing museums as living spaces for dialogue rather than static repositories. I'm still at the beginning with HON but I envision a translation of these principles into the digital age. I want to exploring algorithmic curation to create unexpected juxtapositions, build interactive archives that preserve both artworks and their context, and enable artist collaborations and a residence- something I did a first trial of in 2024. I envision simple systems for visitor-curated exhibitions and ways to show the evolution of digital artworks over time. The core principle remains true to Cladders: art shouldn't be locked in ivory towers - whether physical or digital - but should be an active part of social dialogue and everyday life. In an era of declining trust in traditional media, art remains one of our most powerful tools for confronting and exploring societal issues. Most importantly, institutions should serve art and people, not the other way around. This principle guides how we should approach both physical and digital art spaces today.

Jonathan Chomko, Natural Static #114, 2023

KV: The idea of a boundary-less, ever-evolving space is ambitious. How do you manage the tension between technological constraints and the goal of seamless accessibility for a global audience? 

NN: Ha yes - something I am debating with myself ever since. I would argue that actually more people have access to technology than to a museum. I think the comparison though, shouldn’t be between universal access and limited access, but between different types of limited access, where digital actually provides broader reach. I mean digital distribution has loads of advantages like time flexibility (24/7, no queues), cost efficiency (mostly free, no travel costs, constant access and repeatedly), cultural accessibility (no language barrier), geographic reach. In my opinion, the answer lies not in trying to ensure universal individual access, but in creating new forms of collective engagement. Rethinking what we mean by "digital art" - perhaps it's not just about creating works that exist purely in digital space, but about using digital tools to create experiences that can exist meaningfully across different levels of technological access. 

Harm van den Dorpel, Shasette, 2021

KV: What role do you see technology playing in making art an integral part of daily life, and how does hon.art act as a bridge between art and everyday experiences? 

NN: Let me flip this question on its head for a moment. Rather than asking how technology can make art more integral to daily life, perhaps we should ask how art can make our increasingly technological daily life more human. Look, we're living in this fascinating paradox where technology has made art more accessible than ever - you can literally swipe through any museum during your morning coffee - yet somehow, our relationship with art has become more passive, more consumptive, more Instagram-friendly. Writing this, I think it shouldn’t be about bridging art and everyday experiences - it should be about disrupting the notion that art needs a bridge at all. Technology should be breaking down the white cube mentality, not just creating a digital version of it. Think about it: We're carrying supercomputers in our pockets that can render anything imaginable, yet we're still stuck in this mindset of art as something that happens 'over there,' in galleries or museums. The truth is, if we're doing this right, the line between art and everyday experience should become blurred.

Steve Pikelny, Dopamine Machines #270, 2023

KV: Looking back, is there a specific piece or moment in your collecting journey that stands out as particularly meaningful? 

NN: While claiming Punks was the start, I think the most meaningful shift happened slowly over time. I went in with this completionist / rarity mindset and evolved into something deeper. I started spending more time understanding artists' journeys and messages, having conversations with friends and family about the pieces. That's when collecting became less about having and more about understanding.

Xcopy, ICXN #186, 2024

KV: What advice would you give to someone just starting their digital art collection? 

NN: Buy what you like, not what others tell you.

MCSK, REframe _ III, 2024

KV: If you could add any one piece to your collection—regardless of cost or availability—what would it be and why? 

NN: A piece I have seen at the cavernous exhibition halls of Amos Rex in Finland by Japanese composer and artist Ryoji Ikeda. It was an audiovisual installation on a 5x10m screen called data-verse and it was just stunning.

Ryoji Ikeda, data-verse 2, 2019

***

*The responses provided in this interview have been preserved in their original form, with no alterations to the interviewee's stylistic choices or grammar. - Kate Vass

Niftynaut on X: @niftynaut

Hon.art collection link: https://hon.art/

The Interview I Art Collector VonMises

As the year comes to a close, we are excited to share our final interview of the year with a true pioneer in the digital art space, VonMises. A long-time admirer, Kate Vass first encountered his insights during the early days of ArtBlocks.

We are thrilled to share this conversation with VonMises, a prominent collector known for his deep appreciation of digital art. VonMises stands as a testament to the pioneering spirit of collectors who saw the potential of blockchain technology long before it became mainstream. Through our dialogue, we dive into his journey, the inspirations behind his collection, and his insights on the future of digital art.

We hope you enjoy this interview as much as we did.

KV: Could you describe the moment or event that catalyzed your transition from traditional finance to the cryptocurrency world? What initially drew you to Bitcoin as an early adopter?

VM: It was in April of 2011, I was reading up on one of the financial market blogs and saw a story that caught my attention.  It was an article on a new currency called Bitcoin.  As a financial markets nerd, I was immediately interested.  Within a week of reading that article, I had purchased my first bitcoins, from the now defunct Japanese based exchange MTGOX,  and my world began to change in ways I could have never imagined.  

I had felt for a long time that the world needed a digital cash equivalent, something that allowed a person online to transact without the need for an intermediary and in an anonymous way.  While many others had tried, Bitcoin solved a lot of the problems that had caused other digital currencies to fail.  While I wasn't sure at the time that BTC was a game changer, I knew having some exposure to it made sense.  

Dmitri Cherniak, The Eternal Pump #3, 2021

KV: You acquired 60 CryptoPunks within the first month of discovering them. What convinced you that they were worth such a significant early investment?

VM: I've always been into collecting during my life from coins, to sports cards to watches and a few others, but when I came to NFTs and specifically CryptoPunks I knew I was looking at something special.  In a lot of ways, it almost felt like my whole life had prepared me for this moment as CryptoPunks combined trading, collecting and crypto all into one! I remember telling my wife that I thought Punks were the best collectible I'd ever seen and that they would easily go up 10x in short order.  Here's one of my first discord posts from April of 2020.  In April of 2020 you could buy a punk for $150-200.  

@VonMises14’s post on X from 30.04.2020

KV: You use CryptoPunk#1111 as your digital representation. Could you share what this piece personally means to you?

VM: While I have owned many rarer and more valuable punks, when I bought punk #1111 for 1.111 eth in September 2020, he just really resonated with me.  For me repping a punk was never about making a digital flex, it was always about sharing in a community and showing respect to all the builders and true pioneers in the space who also rep a punk.  I also felt like punk #1111 looked like me, as much as a punk can look like someone I suppose, although I don't ever wear a silver chain! Now that I have a following and I'm known in the NFT space, it's me and the face of VonMises.  I can't imagine ever using something else and I hope to pass him and the VonMises "brand" on to my daughter someday.  

Larva Labs, CryptoPunk #1111, 2017

KV: You chose the name Von Mises, inspired by Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises. Can you explain why his views or he himself is important to you?

VM: Most people who study economics are taught "Keynesian" economics, a school of thought based on the ideas of John Maynard Keynes. This approach is widely accepted and taught around the world, and it’s what I was taught when I studied economics. However, I always felt there were gaps in Keynes' explanations of the business cycle and the role of government in the economy. After learning more about Austrian economics, especially the ideas of Ludwig von Mises, many of these gaps started to make sense.

The Austrian School emphasizes the importance of free markets, the distortions caused by central banks, and the real causes of economic recessions. It challenges the Keynesian view that government intervention is the key to economic stability. In fact, Austrian economists believe that such interventions often worsen economic problems by distorting market signals and misallocating resources.

I believe Ludwig von Mises would have strongly supported cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin if he were alive today. Bitcoin is a form of money that is valued by the market, not determined by government decree, which aligns with Mises’ view on the importance of market-driven money and the dangers of central bank control.

DEAFBEEF, Series 0: Synth Poems - Token 124, 2021

KV: How do you balance personal interest with market trends when collecting NFTs? Do you always follow investment principles, or do you sometimes buy purely for enjoyment?

VM: I tend to be a completionist in my collection style, so if I decide I like something I will want to have all or as much of it as possible.  While I try to stick to a relative value framework I do also buy NFTs for personal reasons and enjoyment value.  

Dangiuz, Flyswatter, 2022

KV: Your collection spans CryptoPunks, XCOPY, Beeple, Bored Ape Yacht Club, Tyler Hobbs, and DEAFBEEF. How do you manage such a varied portfolio, and are there specific styles or genres you’re particularly drawn to?  

VM: I'm really trying to assemble a collection of early, historically significant and culturally relevant art and collectibles from this golden era of digital assets.  Many times I'm able to spot which ones will fit this before they run up in price like XCOPY, Punks and Art Blocks, but sometimes I don't see it in time and have to make a decision much later and at a much higher price.  While I try not to chase assets I miss out on early, on occasion I'll pay up to have something I missed that fits my longer term criteria.  

XCOPY, Last Selfie, 2019

KV: You've expressed a general intention to hold onto your collection and mentioned not wanting to sell many items. How do you decide which NFTs to sell? 

VM: For me having one of something is pretty much the same as having none because once I decide to buy I typically won't sell out of it completely.  Thankfully my strategy once I decide I like something is to buy more than one.  This allows me to hold a position and still allow room for some sales if others enter the space and decide they want to own some as well.  

DCA, Genesis #183, 2020 (VonMises’ first Art Blocks mint)

KV: What initially drew you to ArtBlocks, and how did you first connect with Snowfro?

VM: Back in early 2020, the CryptoPunks Discord was a truly special place. There were only about 30 of us actively chatting daily about NFTs, discussing how Punks would one day be recognized as real art, and how museums would eventually own them. The relationships formed during those early days are irreplaceable, as the purity of that moment is something you can't recreate today. When you have a core group of true believers, all obsessively diving into the technology and fully convinced of its future, you create a unique bond based on shared conviction—not on money.

This is where I met Snowfro. He was incredibly generous with his time and knowledge and one of the most honest people I encountered in the space. I was quite active in the Punks Discord, frequently sharing my bullish takes on Punks, and we had many discussions around our shared belief in the future of the space.

Around September or October of 2020, Snowfro began talking about his new generative art platform, Art Blocks, which he was about to launch. As someone I respected and admired, I knew I had to be involved when Art Blocks launched to show my support for Snowfro.

Tyler Hobbs, Fidenza #592, 2021

KV: As an early member and curator of the Art Blocks curation board, what criteria did you use to select and endorse generative art pieces?

VM: In the early days of Art Blocks it was more about how the art felt relative to what I had seen in the past. With Art Blocks still in its infancy there wasn't a lot to go on.  Often my criteria would be something like, would I be willing to hang this piece on my wall? 

Dmitri Cherniak, Ringers #206, 2021

KV: You managed to mint 350 Chromie Squiggles. What attracted you to this project, and how do you decide which pieces to keep and which to sell?

VM: My support for Snowfro was the primary driver. When it comes to selling or trading, I would typically sell my least desirable pieces first and hold on to the better ones.  On occasion I would list better pieces for sale but only if I had multiple examples and only at high prices.  I firmly believe in the old trading mantra "sell when you can, not when you have to"  

Snowfro, Squiggle #463, 2021

KV: You sold one of your Autoglyphs, #392, for 375 ETH, marking a significant transaction. Why did you decide to sell it at that time, and did the sale enable you to acquire other important pieces or invest in new projects within the NFT space?

VM: This sale happened in October 2021, to me the market had begun to feel like it had peaked. It wasn't clear but given how much the value of Autoglyphs had moved up, and given that I still had 2 additional Autoglyphs, it just made sense to let that one go.  I'm sure some of the proceeds made their way into other art pieces, but I don't remember if it went to something specific.

Larva Labs, Autoglyph #392, 2019

KV: When you used 60 BTC for a purchase on Silk Road, did you ever imagine Bitcoin would reach its current valuation? Have you made any trades in your life that you consider mistakes or missed opportunities?

VM: When I was buying BTC in the early days,  I mentioned it to lots and lots of investment professionals.  My sales pitch was something like "there's a 95% probability that you'll lose all or most of your money, but here's why you should still buy it". I then went on to explain how the potential was there for 1000x type returns. While seeing BTC at 100k is well beyond what anyone could have realistically envisioned back in 2011, I did know big moves up were very possible and to reach the level of a true global currency would require more than a 1 trillion dollar market cap. In my opinion there are absolutely scenarios where BTC climbs well above 1 million USD.   When it comes to mistakes or missed opportunities there's not a whole lot I'd change other than buy more of what I bought!  

Hideki Tsukamoto, Singularity #253, 2021

KV: In addition to CryptoPunks, Fidenza, and Autoglyphs, you own works by generative art pioneers like Herbert Franke. What draws you to early generative art, and how do you view its importance in the NFT space?

VM: I feel it's important to pay respect to the pioneers of generative art for sure.  I had the pleasure of meeting Manfred Mohr in NYC after purchasing one of his early works. It was very cool to see his studio and he showed me a lot of his early works and shared his journey as a true pioneer.  He has the first computer hard drive disk he used mounted on his wall.  It's about one meter in diameter and he told me it had a memory of like 5 kilobits! Owning an early Herbert Franke is something on my list, perhaps you can help me out here!  

Herbert W. Franke, Math Art (1980-1995) - Math Art 95 - No. 3, 2022

KV: Having lived through multiple bear markets in both traditional and crypto finance, what strategies have helped you navigate these challenging periods?

VM: I try to always remember that It's never as good at the top as it feels and it's never as bad at the bottom as it feels.  Markets always over react in both directions so try not to be too focused on the short term. I never let short term sentiment skew my longer term view.  During the recent NFT bear market it's natural for people to just straight line extrapolate out the downtrend and assume we are headed to zero.  For this to be true, You would need to accept that NFTs have no future, which to me is just insane to say.   The benefits that blockchain technology brings to art and collectibles is nothing short of revolutionary and with near 100% certainty NFTs have a very bright future.  

I try to always have a well thought out thesis that I can refer back to in times of distress.  If you know what you own and understand why you own it, the short term means a lot less and you can stay in a position without being shook out by bad short term volatility or uncertainty.  

Bryan Brinkman, NimBuds #187, 2021

***

*The responses provided in this interview have been preserved in their original form, with no alterations to the interviewee's stylistic choices or grammar. - Kate Vass

VonMises on X: @VonMises14

Collection link: https://deca.art/VonMises?filters=1&details=1&sort=ACQUIRED_DESC

The Interview I Art Collector Cozomo de' Medici

"Collectors are as responsible for the direction of modern art as the artists themselves." - Peggy Guggenheim

In this spirit, we continue our series of interviews with notable art collectors shaping the digital renaissance. Today, Kate Vass had the pleasure of sitting down with Cozomo de’ Medici.

Known for his sharp insights and bold approach to building a world-class digital art collection, Cozomo has become one of the most influential voices in the NFT space. From championing emerging talent to acquiring works from established digital masters like XCOPY and Beeple, Cozomo reflects on what it takes to define the art movement of our time.

In this exclusive conversation, Cozomo shares his thoughts on the parallels between the Renaissance and today’s digital art revolution, the role of community trends in shaping collections, and his philosophy on building a meaningful and timeless art collection.

Without further ado, we present our interview with Cozomo de’ Medici.

Tyler Hobbs, Fidenza #938, 2021

KV: Can you tell us about your collecting journey? Did you collect physical artworks prior to collecting digital pieces? What inspired you to start collecting digital art?

CM: My collecting journey started by accident.

I had dabbled a little in contemporary art before, but not enough to consider myself a collector.

Then, in 2021, I started hearing from friends about CryptoPunks.

I was intrigued and soon after, I found myself shopping for one. 

But as I dug in through the Discord servers and group chats, I discovered a blossoming digital art community, with artists and patrons from all corners of the world.

A digital renaissance was underway, and I wanted to be a part of it.

And that made my Punk purchase even more important.

The Punk was to be my digital identity, but as you know, there are many in crypto who rep their Punks… so mine had to be unique.

Long story short, this led to my acquisition of a Zombie CryptoPunk in July of 2021. 

What I intended as my first and only major art purchase, turned out to be the birth of The Medici Collection.

KV: How did you come up with the name Cozomo de’ Medici? 

CM: The CryptoPunk I acquired - #3831 - was already known in the community as “CoZom”, for it’s a zombie punk with a COVID mask.

So the name too was partly a coincidence. 

I then felt it was only natural to amend the name a little, to form my digital identity - 

One that pays homage to the revolutionary Medicis of the past, while at the same time looking ahead to the future.

Larva Labs, CryptoPunk #3831, 2017

  KV: What similarities do you see between the Renaissance and today’s digital art revolution?

CM: There’s one big similarity -  

Digital art has long been a thing, since the 1960s. 

But just now, thanks to the blockchain, it’s coming into prominence and reaching its full, groundbreaking potential.

There were plenty of great pictures from before the renaissance. 

But that time brought out the very best of the medium, and masters that went on to define the very word “art”.

I feel we will see a new generation of digital art masters emerge from this renaissance, much like how masters of the physical canvas emerged from the previous one.

Operator, Human Unreadable #259, 2023

KV: As a well-known figure in the NFT and digital art community, how much do you feel the collective sentiment or trends in the community influence your collection choices?

 CM: It impacts every collector, including me.

But here’s what I’ve learned…

Building a collection with a clear mission helps me from being too swayed by what’s happening day-to-day or week-to-week.

I cannot tell you how many artists I’ve chosen not to collect, only to see them completely stop making art or not make any significant progress in their art practice.

The key is - 

You won’t get any kudos for not spending money or choosing not to collect what’s popular.

But making the right choices is what will compound over the long run and unlock what great collectors are really after:

An impeccable collection of art.

I don’t like to demonize following trends or collective sentiments. 

And I feel the strong voice the community has is a great thing. 

A good example is Comedian by the maestro Maurizio Cattelan.

I heard a collector or two say it’s perhaps the most iconic work of 21st century art.

And seeing how the community was really activated by the work, memeing it and even debating its merits - it’s hard to debate against it.

Together with Ryan Zurrer, we were actually the underbidders on the work, when it was sold this week at auction.

Sometimes, what’s popular is popular for a very good reason.

Helena Sarin, #adversarialEtching, after Modigliani, 2020

KV: Have there been moments where you've chosen to go against the grain?

CM: If you are collecting digital, you are going against the grain.

I have plenty of wealthy friends, that simply don’t want to take the risk of collecting digital art.

They have their gallery connections and would rather dabble in what is tried and true. 

Many get lost in the nuances and debate that collecting X digital artists is more “going against the grain” than collecting Y artists. 

But that misses the point. 

So if you’re here acquiring and championing digital art, I salute you. 

When I think of great collections that I admire, like the Rubells of Miami, what they have done is collect from a wide range of artists that represent the art scene of their times. 

They’re painting a picture with their collection. 

And that means striving to acquire the very best works from the masters of today, while also seeking out the next wave of talented artists.

It’s not one or the other… to build a great collection, you must do both.

My collection is a reflection of this core belief I have…. 

I collect works from artists I feel are not appreciated enough, like Goldcat, Jesperish, Niftymonki and many others…  

Just like how I collect works from artists I feel have made a strong case for their place in today's art movement, like Helena Sarin, Sarah Meyohas, Beeple, Sam Spratt and of course… XCOPY.

Sam Spratt, VII. Wormfood, 2022

KV: You have a significant collection of works by XCOPY. When did you start collecting his art, and what drew you to his work?

CM: I started hearing about XCOPY almost immediately after I started collecting. 

After speaking to collectors I deeply respected and artists of high regard, they all echoed the same point:

XCOPY is the defining artist of the crypto art movement. 

He emerged from the Tumblr golden age, after a decade plus of making GIF art.

Then he finds crypto, minting across Ascribe, various now-defunct platforms, and on Ethereum, where he was an early artist minting on SuperRare.

His genre-defining works, his experiments with blockchain as a medium, and his aesthetics have overwhelmingly influenced the genre of crypto art.

I could keep going, but I felt his place in the movement was beyond question.

So then I set off on a quest to acquire what I could of his SuperRare series. 

To be very honest, I never imagined having an XCOPY collection like the one I today have. 

But as it would turn out, I found myself at the right place at the right time. 

And my goal evolved to building a museum quality XCOPY collection.

After diving deep into his entire body of work and relentless research into his Tumblr archives, I realized X would be known for his character works.  

So my first major 1/1 acquisition was his SuperRare genesis character work “Some Asshole”.

Followed by his genre-defining piece “Right-click and Save As guy”.

More recently, I’ve been fortunate to acquire what’s considered one of XCOPY’s best pictures “All Time High in the City.”

One interesting thing about X is that many of his great works are editions, so those too are represented in my collection. 

Everything from his iconic “Last Selfie” to the cult classic “Mortal”, to his lesser known but critically important works like “VOID”, “Dirtbag” and “DE$CEND”

The last few works I mentioned were minted on now-defunct chains and platforms. 

But with Dirtbag and other lost works, tokens still exist, preserving the history. 

Collecting X is an ongoing pursuit, one I’m excited to continue. 

XCOPY, All Time High in the City, 2018

KV: In the “Medici Minutes”, you share your collecting journey and insights. Why do you think it’s important to share these experiences?

CM: One of my favorite quotes about collecting is by  Nasser David Khalili: ‘a true collector must not only collect but conserve, research, publish and exhibit his collection’.

I started the Medici Minutes to create a space to share my thoughts in longer form.  

I wanted it to feel unfiltered, and just be my musing about art, collecting and crypto. 

I also felt email was the best way to talk to tens of thousands of readers, in a personalized way, each week. 

Each person who subscribes to the Minutes has raised their hand and identified themselves as someone who is interested in hearing more about digital art. 

And each week, I try to share with them my learnings, mistakes and musings. 

Claire Silver, complicated, 2021

KV: NFTs have introduced a new way to assess value in art, combining rarity with digital culture. How do you personally navigate between the financial and cultural value of a piece when deciding what to collect?

CM: In many cases, although not always, these two things go hand in hand. 

And that’s a feature of crypto art - that culture that’s long been unable to accumulate value, finally can.

We’ll talk a bit more about this later in the interview, but I feel collecting strictly for financial reasons and building a collection are very different things.  

Goldcat, Promise of Salvation, 2022

KV: In 2023, you donated 22 blockchain artworks to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Why do you feel it’s important for these works to be represented by a museum? 

CM: By gifting a well rounded package of artworks, the goal was to seed LACMA’s crypto art collection and help them take the next step in collecting and contextualizing art that is truly of today. 

Since that gift in early 2023, we’ve seen many more museums engage deeply with our art movement.  

Ryan Zurrer, a great digital art collector, has done a fantastic job with the groundbreaking Refik show at MoMA and his global tour of Human One by Beeple. 

Then there’s Deji Museum, which has just put on the first ever solo museum show of Beeple. 

The fact that an American artist is having his first museum solo shown in Nanjing is very telling. 

This movement is global.

And Toledo Museum of Art has set themselves apart with their Digital Artist in Residence Program and exhibit of Yatreda.

Overall, my goal with the gift was to help open the gates for institutional engagement from major museums.

And I feel it’s now well underway. 

Beeple, Start Again, 2023

KV: How do you display your collection? We often see tailor made images of renaissance looking interiors with some cutting-edge digital piece in it? Do you create this yourself? Do you also relate to the space as creative? 

CM: I feel displaying the collection - both online and in person - is important. 

Those scenes you mention were a set of works I commissioned from the artist CharlesAI. I wanted to imagine what these works would look like, if they were hung in the Medici Villa. 

For our Medici Emerging Collection, I loved to see MAB create a magnificent OnCyber gallery… something beyond my abilities and certainly, my wildest imagination. 

Showing art in online galleries and simply also sharing it on social media is important. In a sense, everyone is a gallerist in today's art world. 

But it’s also important to do IRL showcases. 

One such example is, we partnered with W1Curates to do a Beeple exhibition in London back in 2023. 

And it was a blowout success, with many hundreds queuing up for the opening. 

We’ve done other shows with W1Curates, an annual TimeSquare exhibition, showings of the collection in partnership with SuperRare and others…

Today we’re more so working on our long-term exhibition programming, which includes institutional shows that take years to plan.

Niftymonki, Departure, 2023

KV: As someone with a platform, how do you decide which artists to support publicly? Do you ever feel the weight of responsibility in potentially elevating or overshadowing certain artists with your endorsement?

CM: I feel it’s important to support artists I collect from and those I don’t. 

There are many great artists I admire, but I’ve missed out on works from. 

Maybe I missed a DM from them or lost an auction for their work. 

Or maybe it’s just an artist I don’t feel compelled to collect, but I feel is still stellar. 

Whatever the case, it doesn’t hold me back from appreciating great artists and their work. 

We run a weekly “Art Tank” where we acquire and showcase the next wave of promising artists.

And my team does a lot of work behind the scenes as well, giving advice and guidance.

I feel the success of an artist in our scene - whether it’s someone I collect or not - is good for our ecosystem. 

DeeKay Motion, Life & Death, 2022

KV: With your visibility and influence, do you feel a sense of responsibility to shape the perception of NFT art in the broader art world? 

CM: Not just me, I feel we all do. 

No matter the size of following or depth of collection, I feel every collector and artist here feels a deep sense of mission to make sure the art of today is represented in the historical art canon. 

And what’s special is that we’re all on this mission, together, to help these artists take their place in the history books.

Joe Pease, Open The Floodgates, 2022

KV: How do you balance personal taste with the role you play in shaping the market?

CM: I feel the market making effects is just that. 

Effects.

It’s a byproduct of my collection building.

So I feel there’s nothing to balance, as it’s mostly something I can’t control.

Earlier this year, I posed this same question to one of the true titans of contemporary art, whose collecting activities also have the market-making effects you speak of.

And I loved his answer so much, that I will just repeat it here.

“Just buy great art at prices you can afford, and the rest will work itself out.”

Entangled Others, sediment nodes #7, 2024

KV: "There is in gardens a plant which one ought to leave dry, although most people water it. It is the weed called envy" (attributed to Cosimo de' Medici) 

In the spirit of Cosimo de' Medici's reflection on the "weed of envy," where he saw art collecting as both a personal pursuit and a symbol of power, how do you navigate the tension between personal enjoyment of your digital art collection and the external perceptions of your wealth and influence within the Web3 space? Do you see envy as an inevitable aspect of digital art patronage today, much like it was in Cosimo's time?

CM: As a rule, I try not to sweat too much of anything I can’t control.

Envy towards you is one such thing.

Now, it’s also normal to feel envious towards others.

For example, there are many great collectors that I “envy”, who have works I wish I could have had.

It’s healthy to acknowledge when others have accomplished something noteworthy. 

But channel it into productive energy and let it fuel your next big project. 

Sandro Botticelli, Primavera or Allegory of Spring, circa 1480

KV: Given the intense highs and lows of the NFT market, how do you approach your public voice in the community during turbulent times? How do you maintain optimism when the market is struggling?

CM: For one, I am fully committed to being here for a long time.

That doesn’t mean I’m not sensitive to the volatility of crypto price movements, but I also appreciate that to some degree, all markets are volatile and over a long time frame, these things tend to resolve itself.

I’m also not a market expert, so I also just don’t know the nuances of all that’s happening in the financial markets. 

It’s also not a point of great interest for me, beyond knowing what I must operate.

I also get great joy from seeing artists I support continue to make progress and break new ground. 

And that progress happens, no matter what is going on in the markets.

Coldie, DEyes #028, 2022

KV: As NFTs straddle the line between art and asset, do you feel there’s a risk of commodifying art to a degree that dilutes its cultural significance? How do you personally navigate collecting as both an investment and as a support of creative expression?

CM: I like this saying from Artnome: 

“Buy art you love, from artists that you want to see succeed, for prices you can afford, with the assumption that you'll never be able to resell it again… and you will always be happy”

I think that about sums it up. 

***

*The responses provided in this interview have been preserved in their original form, with no alterations to the interviewee's stylistic choices or grammar. - Kate Vass

Cozomo de’ Medici on X: @CozomoMedici

Collection:  https://www.cozomomedicicollection.com/

The Interview I Art Collector Niwin

“I have forced myself to contradict myself in order to avoid conforming to my own taste.” —Marcel Duchamp

In our series of interviews with digital art collectors, Kate Vass explores the motivations shaping today's digital art scene. This time, we talk with Niwin, a collector whose style resonates with Duchamp’s commitment to experimentation and challenging norms. Duchamp believed in questioning what art could be and supported ideas that broke with tradition. For Niwin, collecting is more than just ownership; it’s about encouraging innovation and supporting artists who push the boundaries of technology and creativity. By embracing works that defy conventional standards, Niwin embodies Duchamp’s ethos.

In this conversation, he shares how the fusion of art and technology captivates him, and why fostering innovation and challenging conventions is central to his collection. We hope you find his insights as inspiring as we did.

Dmitri Cherniak, Ringers #333, 2021

KV: In 2017, you mentioned a pivotal encounter with Ledger. What was your role or connection with Ledger at the time, and how did it shape your entry into the world of cryptocurrencies and NFTs?

N: In 2017, I was working in the tech industry, developing hardware storage products, when I had the opportunity to meet Eric Larchevêque and Joel Pobeda from Ledger. They introduced me to their groundbreaking device for securely storing digital currency. I immediately understood that blockchain was nothing short of revolutionary, a new technological paradigm that would reshape the future of finance and ownership. This encounter ignited my fascination with cryptocurrencies and led me on a path to explore the potential of NFTs, where digital art and technology merge in ways previously unimaginable.

Andreas Gysin, LCD 1 #11/32, 2022

KV: What sparked your journey into the world of generative art? Did you start as a collector, or did your role as a collaborator come first? How have these practices influenced each other?

N: My entry into generative art came after a period of deep immersion in the blockchain world. I had spent three years mining, trading, and investing, and in 2020, I purchased my first NFT on Rarible. Shortly after, I acquired a Cryptopunk, and then several more—instinctively believing this project and community was iconic and would stand the test of time.

It was during a call with Nahiko that I fully grasped the magic of generative art. The idea that art could be algorithmically generated, evolving autonomously yet bound by the constraints of code, felt revolutionary. Although I wasn’t creating the artworks myself, I quickly took on the role of a collaborator, helping artists navigate the then-unknown world of platforms like Artblocks. These two aspects—collecting and collaborating—enhanced each other, as my understanding of the creative and technical processes deepened, and my appreciation for each work grew more personal and emotional.

DEAFBEEF, Series 1 Angular - Token 129, 2021

KV: Many pieces in your collection feature a red and black theme. What personal significance do these colors hold, and how do they guide your choices?

N: Red and black have always held a deep significance for me. Red represents energy, passion, and the relentless drive to push boundaries—qualities that reflect my approach to both technology and art. Black, on the other hand, symbolizes depth, mystery, and the infinite potential of the blockchain and digital art realms. Together, they evoke a sense of intensity and boldness that resonates with the pioneering and disruptive spirit I love.

HACKATAO & Insight, Aleph-0 #382, 2023

KV: What criteria do you prioritize when selecting pieces for your collection—do you lean toward aesthetics, the artist’s vision, or something else?

N: Aesthetics, while important, are just the surface of what I look for in a piece. I’m drawn to works that carry an emotional weight, pieces with a strong vision behind them, where the artist is pushing the boundaries of what’s possible through technology. I seek out creators who are exploring uncharted tech territories, particularly in generative art, where the fusion of code and creativity brings entirely new dimensions to life.

Equally important is my connection with the artist. Understanding their process, their motivations, and their journey adds immense depth to the works I collect. I’m fascinated by how technology—particularly blockchain—enables artists to stretch their imagination in ways that were impossible before. This cultural and technological impact is often what sets a piece apart for me. It’s about supporting innovation, artistic bravery, and the intersection of creativity and technology, where new forms of expression are constantly being born.

Matt DesLauriers, Meridian #815, 2021

KV: As both a collaborator and collector, how does your experience in helping artists inform your approach to collecting? Do your insights shape your choices?

As a collaborator, I’ve had the privilege of guiding artists into the NFT space, particularly in the early days when platforms like Artblocks were still unknown to most. This experience gave me a front-row seat to the complexities of the creative process, understanding how generative art comes to life through algorithms and how blockchain adds layers of permanence, scarcity, and provenance.

This deeper understanding of the process informs how I collect. I look for pieces that reflect the same technical precision, bold innovation, and emotional resonance that I value in my collaborations. It’s not just about owning a piece; it’s about connecting with the artwork and its creator on a much deeper level. My role as a collaborator has sharpened my eye for detail, and my appreciation for how art and technology come together influences every decision I make as a collector.

Snowfro, Chromie Squiggle #446, 2021

KV: What’s been your most rewarding collaboration with Artblocks? How did your relationship with them evolve?

N: The most rewarding collaboration is with the brilliant Italian quantum scientists led by Salvatore Savasta (@insighbart) on a project that used quantum science formulas to render artistic representations of particles. While helping them shape the project for Artblocks, I also contributed with creative ideas. This project is a true fusion of art, science, and technology—a perfect example of how the blockchain can democratize complex concepts like quantum physics through the medium of generative art. The project even gained recognition at a TEDx talk in Italy, such a thrilling moment.

My relationship with Artblocks began through my friendship with Snowfro, the platform’s visionary creator. We’ve remained close, and being part of the early days of Artblocks was an incredible experience. Collaborating with the generative artist ge1doot, we brought three projects to life, including Ignition, which became Project #9 in the founding series of Artblocks. The thrill of launching such groundbreaking work is something I’ll never forget.

Insigħt, Quantum Collapses #59, 2022

KV: Science seems to be a recurring theme in your projects. How does your interest in science influence both your creations and your approach to collecting?

N: I’ve been fascinated by science from a very early age, it has always felt like the ultimate exploration of the unknown. I got my first computer at age six, and it opened new worlds for me, expanding my curiosity and imagination. Science, for me, is deeply intertwined with creativity. It represents both structure and chaos, logic and wonder, and this duality is what excites me in both art and technology.

In my collaborations and my collecting, I’m drawn to projects that blend science with art, where the precision of algorithms meets the unpredictability of creativity. I seek out art that challenges the boundaries of what we know, whether through scientific principles, generative algorithms, or technological innovations.

ge1doot, Ignition #414, 2021

KV: You’re often involved with projects that incorporate cutting-edge technology. Are there any recent tech developments that have particularly excited you or that you think could impact the art world?

N: I’m particularly excited by dynamic and interactive NFTs, which incorporate real-time data from the blockchain to create artworks that evolve and respond to external inputs. This dynamic approach brings a new level of interactivity and unpredictability.

The use of AI in art is another area that fascinates me. AI-generated art can feel like the realization of dreams, creating imaginative, surreal visuals that push the boundaries of creativity. We’re witnessing a transformation where machines are becoming part of the creative process, generating art that feels deeply personal and expressive.

Also artists like Sougwen Chung or Pindar Van Arman, who are pioneering the collaboration with robots in this space, excite me deeply.

Autonomous artistry is perhaps the most thrilling frontier: robots that can create and publish their own work, potentially reaching a point of singularity where they act independently of human creators.

Refik Anadol, MACHINE HALLUCINATIONS - MARS LANDSCAPES - Collector's Edition #13/30, 2020

KV: How do you live with digital art on a daily basis? Do you prefer physical displays or virtual platforms for showcasing your collection?

I enjoy both physical and virtual platforms for showcasing my collection.
In terms of physical displays, I love integrating digital art into my daily environment through mediums like sculptures, prints, or embroidery. I also collaborate with an embroiderer in France, to bring digital art into the physical world and currently looking for artists that have interest in that medium.

At the same time, virtual platforms are indispensable for experiencing the full range of what digital art can offer. The scale, fluidity, and interactivity of virtual environments allow digital art to live in its native form, where it can continually evolve and be experienced from new perspectives. Both physical and virtual spaces have their place in how I engage with art on a daily basis, but I find the interplay between them particularly exciting !

Hermine Bourdin, Christine, 2021

KV: Where do you see the NFT art space heading in the next five years? Do you expect continued evolution, or are there trends you think might fade?

N: In the next five years, I see the NFT space continuing to evolve, with dynamic and interactive NFTs that integrate real-time data, constantly transforming and reacting to the world around them. AI-driven art will also gain prominence, pushing the boundaries of imagination and technical sophistication, creating dream-like landscapes that feel almost ethereal.

Autonomous artistry—where robots collaborate, create, publish, and perhaps even sell their own work—could revolutionize the art world, pushing us closer to a singularity in creative expression.

100% on-chain art will continue gaining significance, offering permanence, provenance, and ownership in ways that no other medium can. And while the noise surrounding multiple blockchains and Layer 2 solutions will likely continue, I expect Layer 1 chains to remain dominant for high-value, grail-level works, ensuring the security and longevity of these pieces.

Vera Molnár & Martin Grasser, Themes and Variations #63, 2023

***

*The responses provided in this interview have been preserved in their original form, with no alterations to the interviewee's stylistic choices or grammar. - Kate Vass

Niwin on X: @NiwinEth

Collection:

https://opensea.io/Niwin_Vault

https://opensea.io/Niwin

https://objkt.com/@niwin/owned