See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/315444889

Scientific Illustration Overview

Chapter · January 2017

CITATION READS

1 1,192

1 author:

Diana Marques

12 PUBLICATIONS 43 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Skin & Bones Mobile App View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Diana Marques on 29 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Science  and  art  are  frequently  mentioned  in  the  same  context  for  representing  distinct  ways  
of  interpreting  the  world:  from  one  point  of  view  the  laws  of  nature  are  investigated  through  
unbiased  observation  and  experimentation,  to  reach  reason  and  objective  understanding;  
from  the  other  point  of  view  skills  and  imagination  are  employed  to  create  works  that  
promote  aesthetic  feelings  in  the  self  and  in  the  others  (Eibl-­‐Eibesfeldt,  1998).  However  the  
connections  are  much  greater  than  usually  considered  (Reis,  Guerra,  &  Braga,  2006)  and  at  
least  one  Oield  of  study  is  the  overlapping  outcome  of  the  two.

ScientiOic  illustration  can  be  described  as  art  at  the  service  of  science  (Male,  2007).  It  is  by  
deOinition  accurate  drawing  (Wood,  1994)  where  informed  observational,  technical  and  
aesthetic  skills  are  used  to  portray  a  scientiOic  subject  (Hodges,  2003).  Communication  is  at  
the  base  of  all  scientiOic  illustrations  (Jastrzębski,  1985)  where  each  image  is  a  visual  
explanation  that  renders  scientiOic  knowledge,  studies  and  Oindings.  Thus  illustration  
performs  a  didactic  function  and  also  records  and  disseminates  the  state  of  human  
understanding  since  the  presentation  of  scientiOic  results  is  considered  a  fundamental  part  of  
science  without  it  could  not  fruitfully  evolve  (Ford,  1993;  Pyle,  2000).

By  looking  at  the  drawing  the  observer  should  be  fully  and  correctly  informed,  be  aware  of  
and  enlightened  about  the  subject  as  if  he  was  seeing  it  himself  (Wood,  1994).  Such  images  
require  meticulous  and  disciplined  exactness  but  should  also  be  artistically  pleasing;  
nonetheless  accuracy  is  primary  since  a  beautiful  but  incorrect  drawing  is  useless  to  science  
(Hodges,  1989)  (FIG.  1).

It  can  be  stated  that  a  scientiOic  illustration  of  a  particular  species  is  the  next  best  thing  to  
holding  a  specimen  in  the  hand  and  examining  it  (Zweifel,  1988).  No  written  description  alone  
can  sufOice  to  present  a  clear  understanding  of  the  characteristics  of  a  species,  explain  
adequately  its  form  and  details;  an  illustration  can  relieve  the  burden  to  the  writer  and  the  
reader  of  unnecessary  descriptive  material  (Ridgway,  1938).  In  the  words  of  the  renowned  
paleontologist  and  science  communicator  Stephen  Jay  Gould,  “Primates  are,  above  all,  visual  
animals  from  the  very  core  and  beginning  of  our  evolutionary  construction.  The  word  is  a  
latecomer.  A  good  picture  provides  insights  that  words  cannot  convey  at  any  length”  (Gould,  
1999).  This  so  happens  because  scientiOic  illustration  can  eliminate  the  ambiguities  of  
language.

The  use  of  illustration  in  a  scientiOic  context  can  compete  with  photography.  Indeed,  among  
pictorial  media  there  is  a  general  belief  in  the  advantageous  veracity  of  photographs.  Yet  the  
camera  captures  only  a  Oleeting  moment,  anything  that  is  on  the  surface  whether  pertinent  or  
not,  with  inherent  problems  related  to  limited  focal  depth,  lighting  and  reOlections.  A  scientiOic  
Proceedings of the International Colloquium Image in Science and Art - Diana Marques! 1
illustration  is  not  limited  to  showing  what  actually  exists.  The  illustrator  has  the  ability  to  
select  speciOic  aspects  for  special  emphasis  (Dalby  &  Dalby,  1980),  he  eliminates,  adds  or  
changes  values  and  contrasts  consciously  when  drawing,  through  a  thinking  and  discerning  
process  (Jastrzębski,  1985)  (FIG.  2).  He  can  reconstruct  broken  or  missing  parts,  eliminate  
artifacts  and  show  multiple  layers  of  information  in  cutaway  drawings,  transparencies  and  
exploded  diagrams  (Hodges,  2003).  While  the  camera  establishes  and  documents  the  
existence  of  a  subject,  the  illustrator  illuminates  its  essence  (Wood,  1994).  Moreover,  several  
subjects  cannot  be  photographically  depicted,  from  entire  scenes  of  unreachable  (e.g.  outer  
space)  or  inexistent  (e.g.  extinct  organisms  and  landscapes)  situations,  to  the  visualization  of  
processes  and  concepts  which  are  intrinsic  to  the  advancement  of  scientiOic  knowledge.

Nevertheless,  the  role  of  photography  in  scientiOic  communication  is  not  diminished  by  
illustration.  Both  are  different  and  equally  indispensable  approaches  to  supplying  the  distinct  
visual  factor.  Besides,  photographs  are  one  of  the  key  information  providers  in  the  summation  
of  the  informed  impressions  that  illustrators  assemble,  ranging  from  close  consultation  with  
scientists,  to  thorough  literature  search,  examination  of  museum  collections  and  direct  
observation  when  possible.

In  the  beneOit  of  visual  communication,  conventions  have  been  established  through  agreement  
between  scientists  for  uniformity  of  presentation  and  mutual  understanding.  The  direction  of  
light,  orientation  of  the  subjects,  display  of  anatomical  parts  and  other  perceptions  are  
standardized  and  as  such  illustrators  comply  with  the  requirements  when  creating  an  image  
(FIG.  3)  and  take  advantage  of  some  generally  accepted  cues  shared  with  the  viewers  (e.g.  the  
presence  of  an  outline  for  clariOication  even  though  there  isn’t  a  line  around  the  actual  
subjects,  or  the  absence  of  some  anatomical  parts  for  simpliOication  despite  no  amputation  
occurred)  (Jastrzębski,  1985;  Wood,  1994).  One  generally  accepted  convention  is  to  make  the  
shading  of  the  drawing  be  concurrent  with  an  imaginary  principal  light  source  placed  at  the  
upper  left  corner  (Ridgway,  1938).  It  became  the  customary  light  source  used  for  examining  
and  comparing  specimens  with  the  drawings,  assisting  in  the  visual  perception  and  
interpretation  of  unfamiliar  structures.

Conventions  are  one  of  many  guidelines  covered  in  scientiOic  illustration  manuals.  The  
beginning  of  the  20th  century  saw  the  publication  of  guidebooks  such  as  John  Ridgways’  
Scienti'ic  Illustration  (1938)  and  Justus  Mueller’s  Manual  of  Drawing  for  Science  Students  
(1935);  and  the  increase  in  the  attention  devoted  to  the  publication  of  scientiOic  results  is  
patent  in  Noel  Holmgren  and  Bobbi  Angell’s  Botanical  Illustration:  preparation  for  publication  
(1986)  and  also  in  the  release  of  Illustrating  Science:  standards  for  publication  by  the  ScientiOic  
Illustration  Committee  of  the  Council  of  Biology  Editors  in  1988.  A  well  known  reference  is  
The  Guild  Handbook  of  Scienti'ic  Illustration  Oirst  published  in  1989,  with  a  second  edition  in  
2003,  edited  by  Elaine  Hodges  and  with  numerous  contributions  from  professionals.  “Guild”  

Proceedings of the International Colloquium Image in Science and Art - Diana Marques! 2
refers  to  the  Guild  of  Natural  Science  Illustrators,  one  of  a  few  nonproOit  organizations  in  
existence  today  devoted  to  the  promotion  of  scientiOic  illustration.

Besides  representational  conventions,  any  of  the  referred  manuals  contains  an  array  of  the  
subject  matters  addressed  and  techniques  used  in  scientiOic  illustration.  In  fact,  there  are  as  
many  subject  matters  as  scientiOic  disciplines,  and  nearly  as  many  techniques.  More  
commonly  connected  with  areas  such  as  zoology,  botany,  geology  and  anthropology  because  
of  the  images  that  frequently  venture  into  public  hands  (Jastrzębski,  1985),  scientiOic  
illustration  really  has  a  much  broader  range  of  coverage  (FIG.  4).  Environmental  education,  
molecular  biology,  astronomy,  paleontology,  veterinary,  medicine,  ethnology,  archeology,  
cartography  are  additional  subjects,  each  with  different  communication  requirements  but  all  
beneOitting  from  the  increased  value  of  visual  messages.

To  respond  to  such  variety  of  themes,  a  large  number  of  techniques  capable  of  precise,  
realistic  rendering  can  be  employed,  a  few  of  which  have  been  developed  or  modiOied  by  
illustrators  to  achieve  the  intended  level  of  detail.  Resourceful  illustrators  specialize  in  one  
technique  or  become  proOicient  in  several  to  take  advantage  of  the  media  and  obtain  different  
styles  to  get  across  distinct  ideas.  Some  examples  of  techniques  with  widespread  use  in  other  
artistic  Oields  are  graphite,  india  ink,  watercolors,  gouache,  acrylics,  colored  pencils;  whereas  
carbon  dust  and  surfaces  like  scratchboard,  drafting  Oilm  and  coquille  board  have  narrower  
uses  in  general  but  are  repeatedly  acquired  by  scientiOic  illustrators.  Also,  during  the  last  
decade,  digital  technology  has  served  illustrators  who  choose  to  use  computers  and  graphic  
editing  programs  to  produce  images.  They  are  a  powerful  and  versatile  addition  to  traditional  
techniques  capable  of  improving  effectiveness  in  the  workOlow  (Flor,  2004).  Regardless  of  the  
media,  it  is  the  illustrator’s  skills  and  mastery  of  the  tools  that  dictates  the  visual  result.

Considering  the  purpose,  the  number  and  variety  of  subject  matters  and  techniques,  an  
ubiquitous  application  for  scientiOic  illustration  is  expected,  reaching  numerous  and  diverse  
audiences.  In  fact,  the  end  uses  are  even  expanding  since  what  was  typically  considered  a  
natural  setting  –  research  papers,  books  and  manuscripts,  conference  posters  and  
presentations,  all  intrinsic  to  the  interaction  within  the  scientiOic  community  –  has  embraced  
the  new  dimensions  of  space  and  time  and  making  use  of  internet,  interactivity  and  
animation.  As  such  one  can  Oind  scientiOic  illustration  regularly  in  printed  and  online  
newspapers  and  magazines,  textbooks,  popular  and  children’s  publications,  Oield  guides,  
museum  and  natural  park  displays  and  even  postal  stamps.

The  visual  message  is  shaped  according  to  the  audience  since  the  scientiOic  community  is  no  
longer  the  primary  or  exclusive  target.  There  is  a  strategic  approach  led  by  the  illustrator  to  
effectively  deliver  the  message,  using  different  formats,  sizes,  compositions  and  media,  to  the  
viewer.

Proceedings of the International Colloquium Image in Science and Art - Diana Marques! 3
A  good  case  study  is  the  monthly  publication  of  the  Guild  of  Natural  Science  Illustrators,  the  
GNSI  newsletter.  A  glance  through  the  last  ten  years  of  articles  contributed  by  professional  
illustrators  offers  a  privileged  perception  of  the  multiplicity  of  subject  matters,  techniques  
and  applications  that  are  involved.  Highlighting  some  examples:  space  illustrator  Lynette  
Cook  writes  about  depicting  the  Oirst  planetary  system  ever  found  around  a  normal  star  
outside  our  solar  system  (May  1999,  no.  5)  and  Pedro  Salgado  describes  the  collaboration  
with  the  Portuguese  Postal  Services  to  draw  a  series  of  marine  plankton  images  to  become  
commemorative  stamps  (September  1999,  no.  7).  Australian  illustrator  Geoff  Thompson  
shares  his  technique  on  drawing  insects  (November  2000,  no.  9)  as  does  Jennifer  Fairman  
with  birds  (September  2003,  no.  7).  Peter  Gaede  explains  the  process  of  illustrating  3.3  mya  
dinosaur  fossil  remains  (March  2001,  no.  3)  and  Spanish  illustrator  Hannah  Bonner  
(November  2004,  no.  9)  and  Alan  Male  (October  2005,  no.  8)  walk  through  the  development  
of  scientiOic  drawings  to  include  in  children  books.  Catherine  Gaber  writes  about  the  challenge  
of  illustrating  minerals  invisible  to  the  naked  eye  (November  2005,  no.  9)  and  Teresa  McLaren  
about  improving  digital  workOlow  (January  2007,  no.  1).

Every  scientiOic  illustrator  is  interested  in  the  fusion  of  art  and  science  and  might  have  formal  
training  through  a  speciOic  degree  ("Careers  in  ScientiOic  Illustration,"  2010).  It  used  to  be  true  
that  an  illustrator  could  focus  on  addressing  one  kind  of  audience,  or  work  exclusively  in  one  
style  or  technique  or  even  solely  for  an  institution.  That  is  rarely  the  case  anymore.  The  rising  
importance  of  different  trends  in  research,  the  ever  more  sophisticated  image  capturing  
systems,  the  proliferation  of  stock  art  and  royalty-­‐free  image  banks  and  above  all  the  decrease  
in  scientiOic  funding  have  affected  the  institutions’  ability  to  maintain  full  time  employed  
illustrators.  There  is  however  an  increasing  need  for  illustrator’s  services.  The  scientiOic  
community  demand  coupled  with  a  growing  visual  content  demand  for  the  media  and  the  
public  have  created  opportunities  for  entrepreneurship  and  freelance  illustrators.  Yet  there  
has  been  a  consequent  interference  with  their  specialization  in  subject  matter  and  techniques  
–  the  illustrator  needs  to  be  prepared  to  respond  to  a  broader  range  of  requests.

The  role  performed  by  scientiOic  illustration  will  always  be  signiOicant.  Even  more  so  in  the  
light  of  the  natural  inOlictions  and  scientiOic  discoveries  that  we  experience  today  and  the  
future  predicts.  The  advancement  of  science  relies  on  the  interaction  within  the  scientiOic  
community  and  depends  on  public  awareness  for  its  inOluence  on  funding  allocation.  An  ever  
growing  general  audience  demands  easy  access  to  self  explanatory  and  appealing  information  
in  all  that  concerns  environmental,  health  and  social  welfare,  areas  where  the  contribution  of  
accurate  visual  communication  is  fundamental.

Proceedings of the International Colloquium Image in Science and Art - Diana Marques! 4
Bibliography

Careers  in  ScientiOic  Illustration  (2010).    (2nd  ed.).  Washington:  Guild  of  Natural  Science  
Illustrators.
Dalby,  C.,  &  Dalby,  D.  H.  (1980).  Biological  Illustration:  a  guide  to  drawing  for  reproduction.  
Field  Studies,  5,  14.
Eibl-­‐Eibesfeldt,  I.  (1998).  Ernst  Haeckel:  the  artist  in  the  scientist.    Art  Forms  in  Nature.  
Munich:  Prestel.
Flor,  M.  d.  l.  (2004).  The  Digital  Biomedical  Illustration  Handbook.  Hingham:  Charles  River  
Media.
Ford,  B.  (1993).  Images  of  science:  a  history  of  scienti'ic  illustration.  New  York:  Oxford  
University  Press.
Gould,  S.  J.  (1999).  The  Joy  and  Necessity  of  Illustration.    The  Art  of  National  Geographic  (pp.  
240).  Washington:  National  Geographic  Society.
Hodges,  E.  R.  S.  (1989).  ScientiOic  illustration:  a  working  relationship  between  the  scientist  
and  the  artist.  Bioscience  –  American  Institute  of  Biological  Sciences,  39(2),  8.
Hodges,  E.  R.  S.  (2003).  The  Guild  Handbook  of  Scienti'ic  Illustration  (2nd  ed.).  New  York:  John  
Wiley  &  Sons.
Holmgren,  N.  H.,  &  Angell,  B.  (1986).  Botanical  illustration:  preparation  for  publication.  New  
York:  The  New  York  Botanical  Garden.
Jastrzębski,  Z.  T.  (1985).  Scienti'ic  Illustration:  a  guide  for  the  beginning  artist.  Englewood  
Cliffs:  Prentice-­‐Hall.
Male,  A.  (2007).  Illustration,  a  theoretical  and  contextual  perspective.  Lausanne:  AVA  
Academia.
Mueller,  J.  F.  (1935).  A  manual  of  drawing  for  science  students.  New  York:  Farrar  &  Rinehart.
Pyle,  C.  (2000).  Art  as  science:  scientiOic  illustration,  1490-­‐1670  in  drawing,  woodcut  and  
copper  plate.  Endeavour,  24(2),  69-­‐75.
Reis,  J.  C.,  Guerra,  A.,  &  Braga,  M.  (2006).  Ciência  e  Arte:  relações  improváveis?  História,  
Ciências,  Saúde,  13  (suplemento),  16.
Ridgway,  J.  L.  (1938).  Scienti'ic  Illustration.  Stanford:  Stanford  University  Press.
ScientiOic  Illustration  Committee  (1988).  Illustrating  Science:  standards  for  publication.  
Bethesda:  Council  of  Biology  Editors.
Wood,  P.  (1994).  Scienti'ic  Illustration  (2nd  ed.).  New  York:  John  Wiley  &  Sons.
Zweifel,  F.  W.  (1988).  A  Handbook  of  Biological  Illustration  (2nd  ed.).  Chicago:  The  University  
of  Chicago  Press.

Proceedings of the International Colloquium Image in Science and Art - Diana Marques! 5
 FIG.  1  -­‐  Embryo  of  coelacanth  (Latimeria  chalumnae)  ©  Pedro  Salgado,  india  ink  on  
scratchboard
ScientiOic  illustration  for  the  identiOication  of  a  species,  suitable  to  be  included  in  a  
research  paper  or  species  recognition  poster.  All  the  structures  are  clearly  deOined  to  
facilitate  the  differentiation  of  spines  and  rays  in  the  Oins,  counting  of  scales  and  taking  
of  measurements.  The  coloration,  the  result  of  more  or  less  density  of  black  stipples,  
represents  the  volume  and  the  areas  of  real  color  in  the  Oish.

FIG.  2  -­‐  Seaweed  (Thalassodendron  sp.)  ©  Ana  Teresa  Bigio,  india  ink  on  drafting  Qilm  
and  digital
Photograph  of  a  dried  and  pressed  specimen  and  the  scientiOic  illustration  of  the  same  
species  drawn  using  the  herbarium  plate  as  reference.  The  illustration  can  convey  the  
tridimensionality  that  the  organism  would  have  had  in  life  and  visually  divides  and  
selectively  enlarges  different  parts  for  better  understanding  of  anatomical  details.

FIG.  3  -­‐  Rose  chaffer  (Cetonia  aurata)  ©  Diana  Marques,  acrylic  on  paper
ScientiOic  illustration  for  the  identiOication  of  a  species  that  presents  an  impression  of  a  
truly  typical  example  of  the  species  as  a  whole,  without  any  of  the  peculiarities  or  
deviations  exhibited  by  separate  individuals.  In  accordance  with  the  conventions  for  
insect  representation,  it  depicts  a  top  left  lit  dorsal  view  with  the  legs  evenly  spread  for  
clariOication  of  segments  and  taking  of  measurements.

FIG.  4  -­‐  Paleoenvironment  of  the  Cambelas  delta  (Portugal,  150-­‐145  mya)  ©  Nuno  
Farinha,  digital
Paleontological  illustration  of  a  reconstruction  of  a  past  environment  with  extinct  
organisms  that  makes  an  informed  prediction  of  what  the  setting  would  have  looked  
like.  A  complex  composition  of  numerous  elements  depicted  in  a  lively  and  colorful  
fashion  suitable  for  a  wide  and  non-­‐specialist  audience.

Proceedings of the International Colloquium Image in Science and Art - Diana Marques! 6

View publication stats