What key moments or experiences led you to become the art & science curator, researcher, and educator you are today?

Khristina Ots, Curator of SPLACES: My personal journey began with a deep interest in media art and the moving image. I started with video studies and was always drawn to how technology shapes both the visual and conceptual dimensions of art. During my university years, I discovered the emerging and rather unconventional field of art & science. I was fascinated by how artists entered a realm traditionally seen as the opposite of sensual and poetic perception – a domain often associated with logic and facts.

Through my research, I realized that artists not only reveal scientific knowledge as a poetic instrument but can also critique science itself and open new pathways for it. This perspective was partly inspired by Bruno Latour’s critical approach to the production of knowledge, showing how science is deeply influenced by economic and political forces as well as by the personality of the experimenter.

Today, we understand that interdisciplinarity offers a powerful way to develop new perspectives and to rethink fields we often take for granted. This idea is central to SPLACES and is one of the aspects I value most in our practice. The opportunity to work alongside experts across disciplines – from art to science, from technology to business – makes our work both intellectually exciting and profoundly rewarding.

In your studio statement, you mentioned that SPLACES.STUDIO is a young art & science studio creating sculptures based on nature-driven technologies. How did this initiative come to fruition, and what do you mean by nature-driven technologies?

Andy Shibanov, Artist, Co-founder of SPLACES: Well, it kinda just started with this fascination, you know? Nature is insane — like these massive, cosmic things our brains just can’t really process, and then these super tiny events we normally don’t even notice. That mix gives us endless room to play, to experiment.

When we say “nature-driven technologies,” it’s really about letting natural phenomena do the work. Sometimes it’s wind, sometimes birds singing — super simple, very human things. We capture that as data, and then it turns into form, color, light, or sound in the sculpture. So the piece isn’t just about nature, it’s actually running on it.

And yeah, I guess that’s kind of where we sit — somewhere between art, science, and, well… just trying to make people feel those hidden layers of reality.

Your core team comprises nine professionals with diverse expertise. How would you describe the collaboration process between your team members? How do you communicate creative vision?

Andy Shibanov: Yeah, so, making these sculptures is… honestly, it’s really hard. It’s a huge amount of work, and it takes a bunch of people with totally different skills. Usually, I’ll come up with the initial idea — like, I’ll take some data from a natural process, then sketch out the visuals and the way people could interact with it. Then Khristina and I start shaping that into a concept, and in that process, we always uncover these deeper layers of meaning in the artwork.

After that, we bring it to the team and, of course, the first reaction is usually: “This is impossible. No way.” But that’s when the fun starts. We argue, we throw ideas back and forth, and somehow new things come out of it — like coding tricks, neural networks, new machine learning approaches, or even innovations in power supply, lighting, data capture. So the collaboration is messy, but out of that chaos something really unique is born… something people often don’t even know how to react to at first, because it’s just so different.

One of the studio's aims is to promote positive ecological transformation through scientific and artistic practices. What types of events or initiatives do you create to do so, and how do you measure your impact?

Khristina Ots: We try to create our sculptures in dialogue with nature. One of the reasons for the current ecological crisis is our deep entrenchment in the Enlightenment-era idea that nature stands in opposition to culture. This worldview laid the foundation for treating nature as a resource – something to be conquered, extracted, and manipulated. This dualistic thinking has contributed to our alienation from the natural world, reducing it to a collection of resources or taxonomic specimens. As a result, we often fail to perceive nature in its full complexity and diversity.

Through our work, we strive to restore this lost connection by using art as a bridge between human and non-human experience. Our sculptures give voice to natural entities and invite viewers to experience nature not through data alone, but through touch, sound, and emotion. For example, our Megalith series encourages empathy towards stones – entities we rarely consider as sentient or meaningful. By activating recorded soundscapes through touch, visitors can access the stone’s “memory”: the movement of glaciers, the shaping of its surface by wind and sand, and the sounds of the forest that have surrounded it for centuries, allowing visitors to hear what the stone has “heard” over generations and to connect with it on an emotional level.

We measure our impact through audience engagement, expert feedback, and collaboration with scientists and ecologists – aiming to assess not only the emotional and intellectual response but also the environmental sensitivity and relevance of our work. We hope that by making the nature “main character” we can promote more responsibility and eco-awareness, as we tend to care for something that we care about. 

Since its creation, the studio has already showcased five significant initiatives on the international art scene. How do you balance scientific accuracy with artistic expression in interdisciplinary works? 

Andy Shibanov: Honestly, we mostly start from our own inner drive — what feels important, what we’re curious about, what we think we can actually pull off. But then we stress-test those ideas by bringing in scientists whenever it’s possible. Khristina is really the one leading that part — she’s got the background and experience to build a proper scientific narrative inside the artistic concept.

So it’s not just us getting inspired by nature, it’s also making sure those natural processes are actually tied back to real research… and that keeps the work grounded while still letting us stay playful with the artistic side.

Could you highlight a project that you feel most effectively represents your studio's mission and resonated strongly with your audience?

Andy Shibanov: That’s a tough one, because honestly every project feels unique and I’d love to highlight all of them. But if I really have to pick, I’d probably say Megalith. It’s this sculpture in the form of a stone — just a simple, everyday stone placed outside in the city. But when you touch it, it comes alive, it starts to sound.

It’s such a pure, stripped-down image — the most basic object you can imagine — yet it transforms completely through interaction. For me, that’s the closest to our studio statement: simplicity on the surface, but when you connect with it, a whole new layer opens up.

What's your curatorial strategy for making complex technological concepts accessible to general art audiences?

Khristina Ots: Art always operates on multiple layers, and the way it is perceived depends on many factors: the viewer’s background, the amount of time they are willing to spend with the piece, and the complexity of the work itself. Within SPLACES, our strategy is built around this layered perception. We often begin with the sensory – many of our sculptures are designed to attract attention on an aesthetic level. We use natural materials, warm light spectrums, and immersive sound environments that immediately resonate with the viewer and evoke a feeling of being connected to nature.

On a deeper level, however, each project is underpinned by complex structures: musical composition, scientific data analysis, generative algorithms, and artificial intelligence. While the inner workings of the piece may be technologically sophisticated, the experience remains intuitive – almost magical. This balance is intentional. From the start, we decided that our works should be accessible to all – even children – and that art should act as a membrane between human perception and the natural world. The sensual and aesthetic layer is the first point of contact; beneath it lies a philosophical and ecological narrative that provides the foundation of our practice and conceptual framework.

We usually unfold this deeper layer through complementary formats like public lectures, written articles, and conferences, because technological and scientific aspects often require time and explanation to be fully comprehended. We also actively share behind-the-scenes processes and insights into our methods through social media, where we discuss the technologies we use and the questions we pose. Another important tool is mediation. In many of our exhibitions, we work with art mediators who not only tell the story of the project but also invite visitors into dialogue, helping them reflect on their own emotions and experiences.

Finally, we frequently use video as an extension of the work. Especially for indoor exhibitions, we often create video pieces or include video documentation that helps convey the more intricate layers of research and technology embedded in the artwork. Together, these strategies allow us to build bridges between complexity and accessibility, offering multiple entry points into the artwork for a wide range of audiences.

Looking at your experience with Antennae Journal and conferences, how do you see art criticism evolving to address hybrid art-science practices?

Khristina Ots: Art & science emerged within the broader turn toward interdisciplinary thinking, and as such, it is closely aligned with contemporary critical discourse. Critical writing in art & science allows artists and curators to document and reflect on their collaboration with scientific communities, to explain the conceptual framework and methodological tools involved, and to make visible the often-invisible technological stack behind the work. It serves as a bridge between different knowledge systems, offering a way to trace how ideas travel between laboratory and studio.

In terms of the evolution of textual practice, I would say we are moving toward greater inclusivity of non-artistic and non-humanities-based languages. This shift is not solely tied to developments within the art world, but reflects a broader cultural transformation driven by the deep integration of science and technology into our everyday lives. Both art and critical writing respond to these changes, acting as reflective surfaces that question dominant narratives and offer alternative optics. 

Art and artists play various roles in the fabric of contemporary society. How do you see artistic practices advancing sustainability and social consciousness?

Khristina Ots: We see that throughout the last decades, contemporary artists are increasingly collaborating with scientists and accessing technologies to address urgent environmental and social challenges. These hybrid art & science practices use creative expression as a reflection tool to ask unexpected and sometimes hard questions about the basis of human society – the place of a human in contemporary order. In an age of climate crisis and global inequality, art infused with science and tech serves not just aesthetic ends, but also functions as a catalyst for change – opening people’s minds to imagine what the better future might look like. By merging artistic methodologies with scientific, artists are engaging the public on pressing issues in ways traditional communication often cannot, challenging society to question unsustainable norms and envision a more sustainable civilization. I believe that artists don’t predict the future, but that the power of art can create an image so powerful that we start to bring it to life.

These practices play a crucial role in challenging anthropocentric worldviews. By illuminating connections between philosophy, science, and social thought, artistic practices encourage a shift from human dominance toward ecological interdependence. Through immersive experiences, speculative imaginaries, and non-species perspectives, artists open up new ethical and affective dimensions of sustainability. Art becomes a space where non-human voices – whether animal, botanical, geological, or algorithmic – are not only represented, but engaged with on equal terms. In doing so, it expands our understanding of what it means to care, to co-exist, and to imagine futures where justice includes all forms of life.

What message or call to action would you like to share with our readers?

Andy Shibanov:

You know, with technology evolving and all these complex things becoming easier to use, we as humans can make stuff that used to feel impossible. And every time we push, we’re kind of stress-testing both the tech and our own imagination.

I honestly feel lucky to live in a time where creating something unique is actually possible – and not just for a few people, but for more and more of us. That means a growing number of people can experience it, share it, and tell those stories through contemporary art.

Know more about the studio here.

Cover image:

Saulux by SPLACES.STUDIO.

All images courtesy of SPLACES.STUDIO.