My painting is stretched between two extremes: discipline of geometric forms and expression of the action painting. Its visual complexity corresponds with multidimensionality and ambiguity of hidden meanings and content.

The concept of place, I am referring to, is also an extreme – on one hand settled in reality by means of visual elements – architectural citations, and on the other abstract, intangible, phantasmagorical and imaginary, filtered through my internal experiences, thoughts and search, in order to find the final expression on the canvas in an appropriate form. It is weaved from facts and ideas where the buildings or their silhouettes move like blocks – creation of alternative spaces (geometric? phantasmagorical? parametric?), which have lost its real and recognisable qualities in the course of the reshaping process.

Many points of view and many vanishing points derange the perspective and produce illusions, sensations of motion. A multitude of lines and interpenetrating spots, silhouettes of buildings and surfaces running in unpredictable, individual directions, crossing repeatedly create the impression of infinity. It’s a representation of tension, conflicts, both external which are easy to observe and internal, dark ambitions. Imaginary journeys somewhere far into the space.

In my paintings I usually rely on other photographic material, both online, found in the books or press as well as on my own observations photographed in the street or during my journeys. I identify with modern version of flaneurism, since It’s possible to see something memorable and intriguing, a basis for contemplation, sketches and finally piece of art or a series of paintings practically anywhere in any situation or circumstances. Read and observed theoretical materials shape my architectural imagination. When I work on a painting, everything happens in real time and becomes the synthesis of my observations and experiences.