I think creative ideas come from personal experience and curiosity.
From what we live through, what stays with us, and the questions we can’t stop asking. Curiosity pushes us to explore, and experience gives those explorations meaning. When the two meet, ideas start to form naturally, without being forced.
Personal experience gives ideas their weight, and curiosity gives them movement. Experience shapes how you see the world, while curiosity keeps you looking beyond what you already know. One grounds the idea, the other keeps it alive.
When curiosity meets lived experience, ideas don’t feel borrowed or artificial. They feel honest, because they come from paying attention to your own life and still wanting to understand more.
NFTs and digital art remain an important breakthrough not because of short term market prices, but because they solved long standing structural problems that digital creators faced for decades.
For most of its history, digital art was culturally visible but economically fragile. Files could be copied endlessly, attribution was easy to remove, and ownership was impossible to prove in a native digital way. As a result, digital art was often treated as disposable, promotional, or secondary to physical work. Value existed in attention, not in the object itself.
NFTs introduced a technical shift rather than a stylistic one. For the first time, a digital artwork could have verifiable authorship, provenance, and scarcity without relying on institutions, galleries, or centralized platforms. This did not suddenly make all digital art valuable, but it changed the rules of what was possible. Digital works could now exist as collectable objects rather than just images circulating online.
The decline in market prices does not undo this breakthrough. Markets fluctuate, especially early ones driven by speculation. What mattered was not the inflated valuations, but the establishment of infrastructure. Wallets, on chain provenance, creator royalties, and peer to peer ownership created a foundation that did not exist before. Even in a quieter market, these systems continue to function.
Another key shift is psychological rather than financial. NFTs forced a broader cultural acknowledgment that digital labor is real labor, and that digital objects can carry meaning, history, and personal attachment. This parallels earlier moments in art history when new mediums were dismissed before being normalized, such as photography, video art, or digital music files.
Importantly, NFTs also separated validation from traditional gatekeepers. Artists no longer needed approval from galleries or publishers to issue work, document its origin, and reach collectors directly. Even if many projects failed, the principle remains powerful. The ability for creators to define context, edition size, and relationship with audiences is a lasting change.
In this sense, declining prices may even be healthy. They remove speculative noise and return focus to intention, experimentation, and long term practice. When value is no longer guaranteed by hype, the medium becomes more honest and closer to art rather than finance.
Digital art was devalued in the past because it lacked a native system of recognition and ownership. NFTs did not magically solve taste or quality, but they solved that missing layer. Regardless of market cycles, that structural shift remains, and it continues to influence how digital creativity is produced, shared, and understood.
“According to reports from Cointelegraph citing CoinGecko, the total NFT market capitalization stood at just $2.5 billion in December, representing a 72 % collapse from the January peak of $9.2 billion. Weekly NFT sales remained below $70 million, while the number of unique buyers and active sellers dropped sharply, indicating a loss of momentum across the entire ecosystem.” — Analysis Blockchain / Bitcoin World
