Jari Anttonen is a Finland-based AI artist whose work combines the power of myth and technology. Drawing from ancient symbols merged with the contemporary, his images invite reflection with a mixture of raw emotions. Jari approaches AI as a thoughtful medium, one that allows for visual expression and open interpretation. In this interview, we speak with him about origins, process, and how artistic depth can emerge through collaboration with machines.
Artistic Journey & Background
Where are you from, and how does it influence the way you think visually?
I’m based in Helsinki, Finland. The environment definitely affects how I think visually — long winters, lack of daylight, and the space between things. There’s a lot of quiet time up here, and things tend to move slower.
That said, I’m not a winter person at all, and I try to spend as much time as I can further south in warmer climates. So it’s not just about a northern, gloomy atmosphere. It’s also about being in unfamiliar places and cultures and letting that shift how I see things. India, for example, has been a huge source of inspiration. The colours and contrast are on a completely different level.
Were there particular artists, movements, or visual languages that shaped your way of seeing early on?
Not in a direct way. I’ve never been someone who studies individual artists closely. My influences come from all over — photography, album covers, films, and especially music. Music triggers strong imagery for me, particularly darker, more atmospheric stuff from the 90s. It’s always been more about mood than reference.
What initially attracted you to AI as a creative medium, beyond curiosity or novelty?
It started as a research project for a client. I was looking into whether AI could be part of their process. What caught my attention was how quickly it removed some of the technical barriers I’d struggled with before. I could focus more on intuition, taste, and decision making instead of fighting the tools. That shift pulled me back into making art seriously.
Are there elements from your earlier creative career that guide your work today?
A willingness to experiment, definitely. I got into the internet and web design world early on, when there were very few rules and a lot of things were being figured out as you went. You had to invent your own ways of working. Even though the tools have become more standardised over time, I’ve managed to hold on to that experimental mindset.
Visual Language & Process
How would you describe your visual language to someone encountering your work for the first time?
Surreal, slightly uncomfortable, and emotionally driven. A lot of the work sits somewhere between familiar and unsettling. I’m not interested in perfect or clean images — I’m drawn to things that feel slightly off. Perfection is boring to me.
It’s a bit like travelling and coming across an abandoned building. Most people just walk past, but I tend to stop and spend time there. Those spaces hold something that polished places don’t.
Are there particular myths, archetypes, or belief systems that continue to surface in your work, even indirectly?
They show up, but not in a planned way. A lot of my work circles around ideas of faith, devotion, decay, and transformation. It’s not always a conscious decision — those themes just tend to creep in.
Religious imagery and mythological references work because they carry shared meaning, but I’m not trying to make statements or retell stories. I’m not religious myself — somewhere between agnostic and atheist — but I find that visual language genuinely fascinating.
When you begin a new piece, do you usually start with a clear idea, or does the image reveal itself gradually through the process?
Usually it reveals itself along the way. I might start by trying to capture a feeling or a loose concept, but the process is often messy and a bit chaotic. Some of the strongest results come from things going wrong or drifting in a direction I didn’t expect.
That said, there are situations where the direction is clear from the start — for example when I’m working on a commissioned piece.
How much do you want viewers to “understand” your imagery versus simply experience it?
Experience is definitely more important to me. I don’t feel a need for people to “get it.” If an image sticks with you or triggers some kind of reaction, that’s enough. I don’t like to over-explain my work — explaining too much often kills the tension and the joy of discovery.
What role does experimentation play in your process, especially when working with generative AI?
It’s essential, and often the most enjoyable part of the process. You can’t be too precious or light-handed with AI, you have to push against it when it starts drifting in directions you’re not interested in. A lot of the results are unusable, and that’s fine. The interesting results usually come from pushing things too far and then figuring out what actually works.
In your experience, what is more important early on: mastering the tools, or developing a personal point of view?
Developing a personal point of view matters more. The tools are accessible to everyone now, and they’re changing constantly, so “mastery” is a moving target anyway. What really matters is knowing what you’re drawn to and being honest about it. Without that, the work tends to look interchangeable.
That said, you don’t need a personal style right away. That develops over time through experimentation. I’ve worked in many different styles, and there’s always something to take from each one, even if you tend to outgrow them quickly. The important thing is to stay curious and actually enjoy the process.
If you could offer one guiding principle to someone just starting their creative journey with AI, what would it be?
Don’t chase impressive-looking results or whatever happens to be popular. Pay attention to what feels meaningful to you, even if it looks rough or strange. That’s where something personal starts to form. Don’t hold back.
Vision & The Future
How do you imagine your artistic practice evolving as AI systems become more autonomous or sophisticated?
It will evolve along with the tools, whether I plan for it or not. Five years ago I couldn’t have imagined working the way I do now. As image generation gets easier, restraint becomes more important. I’m less interested in volume and more interested in intention.
I’m open to collaboration with the tools, but creative control stays with me.
What do you hope remains human-led in the creative process, no matter how advanced the technology becomes?
No matter how advanced the technology gets, creativity still needs to be human-led. Algorithms don’t produce meaningful work on their own — they need direction, judgement, and curation. Tools don’t have taste or ethics. People do.
If someone encounters your work many years from now, what do you hope it communicates about this moment in history?
It was a time when technology was moving fast and people were trying to keep up with it emotionally, not just intellectually. If that sense of uncertainty comes through, I’m fine with that. I don’t think of the work as reflecting AI as a tool so much as reflecting this moment in time.
Thank you so much for your time doing this interview. Lastly, how can people reach out to you and what services do you provide?
Thanks for having me! I’m active on Instagram at @fantastinen.art, where I share both finished work and work in progress. I sell selected prints through my online shop at www.fantastinen.com and occasionally take on collaborations, commissions, or exhibition projects when there’s a good conceptual fit.