Visual Atelier 8

Interview

Close

August 2024

Exploring the Enigmatic Art of SERIFA.

Hello Serifa, we have enjoyed your mysterious and enigmatic works for some time, it’s an immense pleasure to speak with you. Serifa is a collaborative partnership that has produced a distinctive artistic voice. Could you please recount the pivotal moments leading up to your meeting and how your shared creativity has evolved into what we know today?

We both (Nastassja & Christian) have been working together for a long time. Our roots lie in editorial design. We have been designing book covers for publishers for many years. In 2009, Christian co-founded an agency with two other founders, which Nastassja later joined. Since 2021, we have had our own studio, where we still work for publishers, but over the past year, we have shifted our focus more towards our artistic journey. We both have very similar creative tastes, which greatly helps us in our collaboration.

Embodiment and interests in the human condition seem central preoccupations of your practice. The themes of visual spiritual essences, darkness, and anonymity recur throughout your images. Could you please elaborate on the significance of these motifs, and how your implementation of computational methods have assisted you in representing these complexities of human experience?

Our current style actually emerged from the process of publishing works daily. We didn’t have a specific goal in mind and decided together which works to publish. Through this selection process, our style evolved. We never intended to create or emulate a specific style. It’s more of a constant process, a continuous adjustment, balancing, and settling. And since it’s a process, our style will surely change over time. This fits well because, as we know, the only constant is change.

The theme of anonymity also developed this way. We like that anonymity allows anyone to identify with it. We appreciate the vague, the blurred, the unstable, and the imperfect. Our work with AI has helped us develop our aesthetic more quickly. We primarily use AI for the chaos factor. In our work as cover designers, we’ve seen countless images. Everything we’ve already seen bores us quickly. That’s why we often create images that can be disturbing.

Whether our works have a meaning is probably something each viewer must discover for themselves. All areas of our work are now influenced by AI. We use AI in generating the initial images as well as in post-processing. AI is now integrated into Photoshop, which is also very helpful.

I’m fascinated by your daily art practice where you create new pieces or a new piece each day. Can you walk us through your creative process or say a few words on the wide range of inspirations you masterfully echo, from design and typography to vector effects, vaporwave airbrush, and punk cover New York photocopy aesthetics? Please tell us about how you find the inspiration and motivation to produce and maintain a joy in doing so.

The main reason we follow the ART EVERY DAY model is a pin with that inscription we found in a gallery in NYC, which inspired us to choose this method. Creating and publishing something daily is an enormous challenge. But before this practice, we found ourselves too self-critical to create anything for a long time. Perfectionism often kicks in, and you quickly stop because you’re not satisfied. But creating only once a month doesn’t lead to enough workflow, and you don’t develop properly.

We often take a long time for a day’s work. Anyone who seriously works with AI knows that the results can be very random. Some days the results are hard-fought. During vacations, etc., we work ahead, increasing the workload. The fun lies in seeing how quickly you develop with this method and what surprising results you can achieve when you don’t have days to work on a piece and allow chaos its space. We are inspired by many things, likely from our entire professional experience as designers but also from nature and music.

Ultimately, our work might be all that we’ve absorbed in our lives expressed anew by us. Sometimes we receive DMs or comments praising our particular style and even naming it. But we can’t say what the style we’re following is called, we just try to sense an aesthetic that we currently like. Our typical day begins with working on our ART EVERY DAY series in the morning and planning and scheduling posts. We often release works in our shop afterward.

Currently, we are also working on our new Open Editions, where we select a piece from the current ART EVERY DAY series each day and offer it in our shop for 48 hours. Afterward, we have to respond to many emails and comments. In the afternoon, we work a lot for publishers or on commissioned projects with musicians or other partners.

As you work with machine learning algorithms, taste becomes the final arbiter of what’s good, which leads me to ask how you strike a balance between controlling the creative process and surrendering to the unpredictability of tools. Are there core strategies or intuitions guiding your navigation of such a tension?

It’s primarily intuition that tells us what’s important, beautiful, appropriate for us right now. Therefore, in our opinion, selection is one of the most important criteria in art. Declaring something as art. So, a brick in a gallery can be art if someone has deliberately chosen and declared it as such. That’s where the saying I could do that too comes from. Yes, but you didn’t choose it and elevate it to art. The unpredictability of the results is the best part of AI. If we fully understand it one day, the magic might be lost.

Many contemporary artists try to eliminate their own ego. They still provide some guidance or retain some control, but the results are not completely controllable. For example, Baselitz, who paints many of his pictures upside down. One challenge is that sometimes the results don’t work at all. Sometimes you put a lot of effort into a series and then scrap it completely because it’s going in the wrong direction. Successes are when we have a specific image in mind, but the result, due to unpredictability, becomes much more interesting than we thought.

Your practice exists at the nexus of art, technology, and society. How do you perceive the intersections and feedback loops between these domains, and what specific social or cultural issues do you aim to address or expose through your work if any?

We don’t have social or political themes and don’t want to communicate any specific messages. If someone interprets something in a piece, it’s their own interpretation, not our directive. We like that AI technology is a mirror of our time. Art can be this mirror, and it’s more fun to engage with the present or the future than with the past. We do not react to current trends, etc.

Some posit that a learned reliance on artificial intelligence as a creative tool diminishes a work’s value and meaning through mechanical reproduction. Others see AI as a means to subvert the notion of artistic originality and authorship, highlighting the inherently machinic nature of all artistic production. Where do you stand in this debate, and why?

Most critics haven’t spent much time with AI art and don’t know how it works. They think it’s two clicks and done. Generally, evaluating art by the amount of work put into it is complete nonsense. Michelangelo would have used a jackhammer if it had existed back then. We work with all tools to advance our aesthetic. It might also be with traditional materials like canvas and acrylic. It doesn’t matter at all.

But this criticism arises with every new technology. Whether it’s printmaking, screen printing, or photography, there have always been critics, usually people who have no idea. With a book, it’s about the story you want to tell, not the medium. The criticism we often hear is usually brief. Something like, Ah, that’s made with AI, gross. So, very constructive

Some critics argue that AI-generated art is exploitative, as it relies on the labor and creativity of human artists who have come before without properly acknowledging or compensating them. How do you respond to this criticism, and do you think that your use of AI in art-making perpetuates this exploitation? Please provide a rebuttal to the many critics.

We focus on creating original works that are not copies. Often, people message us saying they’ve never seen anything like what we do. This makes us very happy and confirms that you can create new, unseen art with the help of AI. It’s important to understand that while AI can facilitate the creation of art, the artist’s vision and direction are crucial. AI is a tool that expands our creative possibilities, but it doesn’t replace the unique perspective and creativity of the artist. Every artwork we produce is a result of careful selection and refinement, ensuring that what we create is genuinely original and reflective of our artistic voice.

Being featured in prominent publications like Vogue is a testament to your artistic prowess. How does it feel to have your work showcased in these platforms, and what impact do you think it’s had on your career and artistic trajectory?

Thank you for the kind words. It was a great honor for us to collaborate with VOGUE and be featured in their magazine. We have surely gained even more reach and more people have seen our work, which makes us very happy. We are grateful to everyone who shares our work and takes an interest in us. That goes for you too. Thank you for your interest in our work and for the interview. After we announced our collaboration with VOGUE, many other interested parties reached out to us, and we are currently in contact with them. We look forward to potentially more projects arising from this.

© SERIFA

Source