The PIP is not so much the idea of painting a picture as the idea of painting inside the picture. This is not the picture present but before or after – a type of an exhibition project (an arrangement proposal) or documentation after the show. The closest example of a similar concept can be found in the paintings serving as catalogues of art collections, which the European rulers used to send each other in the eighteenth century. Other possible associations are church interiors of Dutch perspektiveschilders, affected by an abstract sense of Protestant iconoclasm. In both cases, the pictures were predominantly utilitarian – they served as the means of documentation or registration. My paintings retain their aesthetic autonomy. I paint objects that are fictional. Having been created by accident, they can not copy. In my opinion much of the painter work is the careful observation of what is happening with the paint – and so with the whole picture – beyond our control. What visual effects are generated spontaneously by the paintbrush and paint themselves? I evoke potential objects, devoid of clear authorship and provenance, by capturing these effects and introducing them into the structure of representation. Everyone, however, can see in these objects an unknown work or an abandoned project of other artist. They can also be inanimate parts of nature. The problem of authorship is discussed here on a few levels.