Exactly, emptiness is a suspension in space that I imagine as a kind of time without a defined place; it is a dreamlike representation.

Within the works, it becomes visible and tangible, existing between aseptic zones and areas where color triumphs, where lines and forms intertwine

The past has a constant presence in my work.

I have created several series in which echoes of the past are placed in dialogue or in contrast with who we are today in the age of the internet.

My background as an artist is deeply rooted in classical training.

My formal studies were primarily focused on figuration, modeling, and the history of ancient and modern art.

I learned how to draw and paint by respecting all the criteria and techniques necessary to achieve sound perspective, shadows, and proportions.

After completing my studies, I had the opportunity to travel around the world, to nourish both my eyes and my knowledge by visiting major museums, attending as many exhibitions as possible, and reading numerous monographs on the great masters of the last century.

All of this experience, all of this knowledge, I have placed in a drawer that remains permanently open.

I do not forget what has been done in order to arrive at what we are today.

Having learned patience and the discipline of working by hand has allowed me to merge these values with what I create today.

I produce digital art by making use of all available technology, yet deliberately reducing it to an act of subtraction and of memory.

By making use of technological tools as a medium, and in particular through the use of AI, I believe it is essential that my work retains a trace of imperfection, of smudges and irregularities, that makes the final creation as human as possible.

My process is particular and unconventional.

At times I create works entirely by hand in a digital environment; in other cases, I produce sketches or even finished works that I then reshape into infinite variations using AI, before returning to them and working over them as if they were sketches to be defined with my brushes.

I work exclusively with Photoshop and, by choice, with a mouse. I do not enjoy drawing with a graphic tablet, it feels too close to the tool I used for more than twenty years and does not connect me with what has become my new world and my new way of interacting with the digital canvas over the past six years within web3.

All the images I generate with AI belong to me, because they are the result of a folder that keeps filling up with elements I have created myself, which I then combine and shape.

The selection of the works is guided by aesthetic factors and by intuitive perceptions of what they might become.

Nothing is defined: everything is mutable and can be totally transformed, sometimes almost 100%, in the final phase of the process.

What remains is a trace, a trace of what will be.

To create the eleven works that make up the exhibition, I believe I generated at least more than one hundred images using my generative prompt.

AI remains only a fascinating tool within my process, because I also choose to rely on surprise, a concept that is possible only today and remarkable in its very nature.

There is no act of rejection: I embrace all of it, as if chance itself were freeing what is about to happen.

From there, I outline my guidelines, my directions, which in many cases are quite strict. I work according to a very precise structure, one that is perfectly divided between the irrational and the rational.

All of this could, in theory, be achieved simply by using AI or creating with code, but my art must be permeated by the pictorial matter itself.

The fact that this matter is made up of countless pixels is fascinating, ‘revolutionary,’ at least for me, and for any artist working in this field, part of an avant-garde movement where a significant divide is emerging between what used to be digital art and what is now art on the blockchain.

Keith Haring, in the last decade of the 1980s, created drawings with a Commodore Amiga, always a precursor and innovator.

Yet he was still limited to drawing as he would on a piece of paper.

Today, both conceptually and practically, everything has reached a higher stage.

We have transcended the traditional concept of canvas, of computer, or of any other medium.

I like to destabilize the viewer, to create questions, and to make the work either simply accessible or completely open to interpretation; I don’t dwell much on this question myself

I work in this way about 90% of the time; I have always done so, even in painting.

I always feel the need to create a narrative that connects multiple works to strengthen the message I want to convey. Everything I have previously created is connected to what I am making now, even works from ten years ago.

The silhouette tells a lot; there is no figurative detail, no defined face.

They are presences within these spaces.

They inhabit these spaces, sometimes even forcibly, as if they are prisoners of them.

I love everything related to technology, the future, and evolution, but I am also grateful to have been born in the 1980s, to have had the chance not to grow up in this environment, and to have lived a life completely different from today.

Having experienced life differently allows me to approach what I now consider the future in a healthier way.

I immerse myself fully, yet I am able to remain somewhat detached.

I see that the machine is overtaking the human, and in the work mentioned, it has become part of it, almost naturally.

But it is important to maintain some distance and always remember that we created machines not to be controlled by them, but to support an evolutionary process that undoubtedly leads us to new horizons to explore, not to trap us