AI + Art = Tech Myth
Mixing tribal gestures with organic symbols and visual ciphers, Jari Anttonen’s AI motifs filter through layers of meaning and distill into a kind of techno mythology.
When I search AI images for work that might rise to the high bar we call fine art, I keep an open mind. AI Imagining, though classic in origin, is not bound to the traditions, trends, and limitations of physical painting, drawing, or mixed media. Tech-based art has its limits, but the gestural freedom it provides has opened up new conceptual terrain. Jari Anttonen’s AI motifs mix tribal gestures with organic symbols and visual ciphers that filter through layers of meaning and distill into a kind of techno mythology. I’ll let Jari tell you more. Hello Jari. Thank you for taking the time to share your experiences.
Hey, and thanks for having me.
Did you study traditional analog or new media art?
No, I’m completely self-taught. But I’ve always been interested in visual arts, and I’ve worked as a creative for the past 25 years. I also do photography, mainly when I travel, though it’s a very different process from my AI work. Since I started with AI, I’ve found myself picking up the camera a lot less. That’s a bit of a shame, actually. What fascinates me about photography is how fleeting the moment is—you only have one chance to capture that perfect shot, unlike in AI where you can just run endless variations.
What initially drew you to AI image-making?
Initially, I was just looking for a better alternative to stock photography. After countless hours of scrolling through stock sites trying to find that "perfect" image for a work project, I thought maybe I could just generate the image myself and make the process more enjoyable. But I soon realized the tools weren’t quite there yet—there was too much randomness and not enough control. Along the way, though, I stumbled into a huge community of people using AI to create art. That’s when I started exploring its creative potential. Like many, I began by trying to replicate images that caught my eye. Eventually, I found my own voice, but it’s still a work in progress.
Has it changed how you think about art in general?
In some ways, yes. I think about art more now than I ever did before. I used to associate art with galleries and museums, but AI has shown me that art is much broader than that.
In studying your work, I noticed that you began by altering traditional religious motifs. Your work quickly became more visually and conceptually complex and varied. Did the tools encourage your rapid evolution?
Definitely. When I started, I was mostly just experimenting, just curious about what AI could actually do. As I got more comfortable with these tools and saw the amazing work others were creating, I became just so inspired. That pushed me to explore more complex concepts. As with anything, the more you practice, the better and more confident you get, and the same applies to using AI.
Would you urge analog painters to experiment with AI?
Absolutely! It might give you fresh ideas or help you break through creative blocks. Even if it doesn’t become part of your regular process, at least you’ll have some experience with what AI can offer. It’s not just about typing prompts and hitting “generate”—there’s much more to it.
I’m all for mixing things up. Crossover is inevitable, and I think it’s great. I’ve seen artists use AI-generated images to create analog collages, and it’s amazing. Personally, I love physical objects, which is one of the reasons I sell prints of my work. People still crave something tangible.
Your mythic techno tribal style seems to suggest that despite our tools, we are primitive creatures who still respond to art as magic.
Myths and mysticism are a big part of my work, for sure. I’ve always been drawn to the surreal, and AI allows me to tap into that. In some ways, AI gives us a chance to explore primal aspects of ourselves, like seeing how a machine interprets humanity.
What are you hoping your art will communicate?
I want people to feel something—whether it’s love, hate, or disgust even. I also want to challenge conventional beauty and explore the appeal of the grotesque. A lot of AI art you see is highly polished, and I deliberately try to avoid that. There’s definitely beauty in imperfection.
AI images come from an amalgam of millions of pictures made by humans across time. Does the essence of your tool come to mind as you create?
AI just speeds up a process that humans have been doing for centuries—combining ideas and references. Sure, it’s easy to use AI to mimic another artist’s style, but where’s the fun in that? And I deliberately try to avoid any artist names in my prompts, my goal is to create something unique.
Do you create analog art?
Not at the moment, though I’d love to. My wife does calligraphy, and I’m in awe of her work. There’s something magical about those tiny variations in brush strokes and ink blobs. Analog art has an extra layer of depth that AI just can’t replicate, and I don’t think it ever will.
In your image-making approach, do you differentiate between illustration, posters, and fine art?
I think the distinction between different art forms is pretty artificial. What really matters to me is the interaction between the work and the viewer—the emotions it evokes. People can label it if they want, but I’m not too concerned with that.
I use whatever style best communicates the idea. That’s one of the great things about AI—you can experiment with different styles rather quickly. Sometimes I start with a photorealistic approach, but midway through, I might switch to something more illustrative.
I think over-explaining can take away some of the excitement of discovery. Personally, I like trying to figure out what the artist was thinking as they made their work. I might leave a hint in the title, but even then, it’s open to interpretation. Since I don’t come from a traditional art background, I don’t feel the need to follow any of those rules. And honestly, I’m still refining my artistic vision—it’s an ongoing process.
What is AI doing to your perception of reality?
I guess it has broadened my sense of what’s possible. Also, these days, I’m much more skeptical about content posted online. My motto is, "Doubt first, believe later.” Seeing the pace the generative AI is involving; I don’t know if anyone of us will know what’s real anymore in five years. It’s both an exciting and terrifying time to be alive.
To see more of Jari Anttonen’s art and visit his shop go to:
Interesting question. Thank you for asking. I hadn't thought of it that way.
AI, generative, and tech-based art, being so new and unvetted, grants artists the freedom to explore terrain that traditional contemporary art does not entirely approve of. For example, illustrative storytelling, which AI is good at conveying.
I used "techno-mythic" to describe Jair's style. By combining ancient magical, mythical symbolism with tech imagery, he is pointing out the adaptive nature of human innovation. We rarely make disconnected leaps of imagination. By replacing old symbols with new tech, he suggests humanities belief (real or misplaced) in the "powers" of the technology. All in all, his use of the familiar opens a path for further contemplation about the unknowns that lie ahead.
On a personal note, I hope you've been able to find a new location for your gallery. Maybe even on a Dead End street? :-) - Julia
Hi Julia, I enjoyed reading your piece on Jari Anttonen's AI art. Thank you. I did wonder however, about the title, "AI + Art = Tech Myth". While the concept of a "tech myth" is off-course intriguing, I wasn't sure if it was intended to have a positive or negative connotation. On the one hand, the sources highlight how AI art can create new mythologies and push the boundaries of artistic expression. On the other hand, the idea of a "myth" could also suggest a sense of artificiality or disillusionment with AI art. What's your opinion about this?