Name

_Results

close [x]

Nassar

Brazil

Where do you locate yourself in relation to the systems you work with?

I locate myself inside the systems I work with, but never in full alignment with them. I operate simultaneously as the creator of these images and as an experimenter, testing, stressing, and inhabiting the very mechanisms that generate them. Every image I produce is both a construction and a probe — a way of sensing how these systems behave, fail, and assert power. There is continuity across my works in the persistent return to the body, labor, identity, and control; and rupture in the way each work reorganizes these questions, shifting their meanings and functions. I do not position myself in direct opposition, nor in passive adoption, but in a space of critical contamination, where authorship, experimentation, and system behavior remain entangled.

Where are you heading, and what is pulling you there?

The vector of my practice points toward an investigation of how reality is already being reprogrammed, often silently, through everyday technological systems. I am pulled by contradictory forces: the promise of creative expansion offered by AI, and the acute awareness of its mechanisms of capture, extraction, and normalization.

How would you describe the space your practice is currently unfolding in?

My practice unfolds within a hybrid, volatile space — between the digital and the material, the handcrafted and the automated, the intimate and the systemic. In this space, the body does not disappear under technological mediation; it becomes increasingly exposed, vulnerable, and politicized. This is not merely an exhibition space but a field of friction: between human labor and machinic labor, between care and extraction, between rest and productivity, between image and lived experience. My work does not passively occupy this space — it deforms it. It introduces noise, irony, and discomfort. It creates situations in which the viewer is forced to recognize their own implication in these systems, even when they believe themselves to be mere observers.
Published in >
The AI Art Magazine, Number 3
@CrochetPC , AI generation, 2026.
@CrochetPC , AI generation, 2026.
Nassar, @CrochetPC , AI generation, 2026

Description

This work does not propose a nostalgic pre-digital return nor a romanticization of manual labor. Instead, it points toward an ethics of slowness within the system, not outside it — an imperfect, contaminated slowness that recognizes it has arrived too late for purity. The performative dimension of the image is central. The scene shows me working in Blender, a 3D software I have used extensively over time and know intimately — a tool associated with 3D and technical digital art. This familiarity matters: the gesture is not one of distance or refusal, but of continued engagement. I am not abandoning digital production; I am re-entering it under altered conditions. At the same time, the image itself is generated through artificial intelligence, introducing a second layer of mediation. The work emerges from the friction between manual, embodied labor, highly technical 3D workflows, and automated image generation. Slowness confronts acceleration; familiarity confronts automation. The environment deliberately sabotages efficiency while remaining fully embedded in advanced digital systems. Producing AI-mediated images from a space that resists speed, comfort, and seamlessness turns the act of making into a quiet political gesture — one that exposes how creativity, authorship, and labor are being renegotiated in an era where images can be generated faster than they can be fully inhabited.

Process

What led me to create this artwork was my position as a 3D artist embedded in digital production, combined with the exhaustion that comes from working in Blender under commercial demands, tight deadlines and the fatigue of emerging technologies, like AI. In the last years, I turned my body into a resource that must constantly adapt to accelerated rhythms. Introducing artificial intelligence into this already intense environment did not register as relief, but as another layer of pressure — one that further destabilized notions of authorship, value, and labor. This artwork emerged from that friction. It became a way to externalize the tension between long-term technical expertise, commercial productivity, and automated image generation. Rather than treating AI as a shortcut or solution, I approached it as a material to be interrogated. At the same time, crochet enters the work as an affective, analog object. It carries associations of care, intimacy, repetition, and time spent without optimization. By bringing crochet into direct contact with digital tools and AI-driven image generation, the work stages a confrontation between an embodied, tactile gesture and systems designed for speed, abstraction, and scalability. The work reflects a desire to remain within digital systems while refusing their demand for constant acceleration.

Tools

The process behind this work was almost entirely digital, with one key exception: a selfie taken with my iPhone 14, which served as the initial embodied reference. From there, I worked with Nano Banana as part of the AI image generation process, combining it with curated visual references of crochet textures and patterns. I did not initially know whether crochet — with its softness, irregularity, and tactile logic — could be convincingly translated or modified within a fully digital and AI-mediated workflow.

Image credit:
Essay by
The AI Art Magazine, Number 3
Published in:
The AI Art Magazine, Number 3,
April 2026
WHY?
The magazine reveals what happens when humans and machines get creative together. We’re throwing the doors wide open and believe it's going to be a big party. Come in and let’s dance.
Media coverage
WHO?
Christoph, Franziska, Ingo, Jason, Jan, Jens, Katrin, Merzmensch, Mike, Simone, Tito
© 2026 polardots.studio