7 Science Illustrators You Should Know
Articles Blog

7 Science Illustrators You Should Know

Modern technology has given scientists some
incredible tools to study the universe and share their knowledge. With photography, for instance, we’ve been
able to collect images of everything from microbes to galaxies. But before we had cameras, we had scientific
illustration. And throughout the years, hundreds of science
illustrators have made 2D and 3D representations of concepts in lots of fields, from biology
to physics. You might recognize some big names, like Leonardo
Da Vinci’s anatomical sketches and James Audubon’s bird paintings. But there are a lot of people you’ve probably
never heard of, even though their work has had a huge impact on our understanding of
the natural world. The 1500s were a pretty horrible time to get
sick. Medicine was kind of a mess. At the time, doctors believed that we were
all made of four elements called humors: black bile, yellow bile, blood, and phlegm. Supposedly, when these humors were “imbalanced,”
we got sick. Most of what we knew about human anatomy was
from the work of Galen, a renowned Greek philosopher and physician. But Greek and Roman societies prohibited dissection
of the human body. So Galen’s knowledge mostly came from dissecting
pigs and monkeys, and using their anatomy to guess at the structures inside our bodies,
from the muscles to the circulatory system. It wasn’t until Andreas Vesalius came along
that we actually took a good look inside human bodies Vesalius taught medicine and surgery in Italy. And instead of just reading from Galen’s
texts, he dissected cadavers for his students, usually the corpses of executed felons. Through those hands-on studies, he discovered
just how wrong Galen’s teachings were, and clarified topics ranging from how the circulatory
system and nerves worked to bone structure. For example, Galen believed that the human
jaw was made of two bones connected in the middle, from his dissections of dogs. But Vesalius discovered that it’s just one
solid bone. After years of research, Vesalius published
a set of seven books called De humani corporis fabrica in 1543, which was likely the first
complete representation of the human body in the Western world. Working closely with other artists, Vesalius
included over 200 illustrations, from detailed skeletons to networks of blood vessels. As a kinda creepy cherry-on-top, at least
one of his books was bound in human skin! Lots of people consider Vesalius to be the
father of modern anatomy. At the very least, his work changed our understanding
of the human body, and helped usher Europe into a new, better-informed era of medicine. Born into a family of German artists and publishers
in 1647, Maria Sibylla Merian started illustrating young, painting decorative flowers alongside
her stepfather’s male students. At the same time, though, she found herself
captivated by insects, especially the life cycle of the silkworm. So Merian started to collect caterpillars,
studying and painting their lifecycle as they metamorphosed into moths and butterflies – along
with the plants they ate. In fact, Merian was the first science illustrator
to record the relationships between insects and the plants they lived on, which is critical
for understanding food chains, as ecologists realized later on. Plus, she proved that caterpillars hatch from
eggs, instead of a common belief that insects randomly appeared from rotting plants and
meats. The idea of spontaneous generation dates back
to our old friend Aristotle. He never observed insects laying eggs, so
he figured larvae just appeared from random places, from old wax to books to horse carcasses. (exasperated) Aristotle Later in life, Merian spent two years traveling
with one of her daughters in the Dutch colony of Suriname. Her written accounts were some of the earliest
descriptions of the climate, the jungle wildlife, and society in the colony. And in 1705, she published a book called Insects
of Suriname, earning her an international reputation as an illustrator. Even today, naturalists use her work as they
study and classify insects. It’s easy to find science illustrators who
studied biology, observing plants, animals, and the human body to understand our universe. But Moses Harris was also fascinated by light
and color. Harris was a skilled artist and entomologist,
and spent some time studying insects. In fact, he even published a book called The
Aurelian in 1766, filled with illustrations of moths and butterflies. When he wasn’t sketching bugs, though, Harris
was studying Sir Isaac Newton’s relatively new theories on light. Newton’s work with light and prisms showed
that white light could be split into three primary colors: red, blue, and green. See, light is additive. So cells in your eyes detect different amounts
of different colors of light, and blur them together to perceive new colors, even a bright
white. That’s how you’re able to watch this video
in color! Right this very second, the pixels on your
screen are emitting different combinations of red, green, and blue light. Harris expanded on color theory to play around
with pigments, and demonstrated that yellow, red, and blue are the three primary pigment
colors. He also showed that pigments are subtractive
color. Basically, they take advantage of how surfaces
absorb and reflect different wavelengths of light. A white surface, for instance, reflects all
colors of light, while a red surface reflects red wavelengths, and absorbs the rest. After his experimentation, Harris created
an incredible color wheel. Still used by artists today, it shows how
mixing any two of the primary pigment colors together generates the secondary colors – orange,
purple, and green. While all three together makes black. Helena and Harriet Scott were born in Sydney
in the 1830s, when Australia was still a pretty rough place to be, and women weren’t allowed
to study science at university. Luckily, the girls’ early interest in nature
was encouraged by their parents. And when they were teenagers, their family
moved to Ash Island, where their dad studied moths and butterflies. The sisters helped their father with his research,
cataloging specimens, raising caterpillars to observe their behavior and food preferences,
and eventually painting the insects. Like Maria Sibylla Merian, the Scott sisters
depicted the full life cycle of the caterpillars and butterflies they studied. They even included landscape backgrounds of
areas in and around Sydney in many of their paintings. Their dad’s book, Australian Lepidoptera
and their Transformations, was published in 1864. And it was so renowned that the sisters were
awarded honorary membership in the Entomological Society of New South Wales, and were commissioned
to paint for many of the science publications in Sydney. Their skilled work helped document Australian
natural history throughout the 19th century, and they were possibly the first female science
illustrators in Australia. Drawings and paintings can be an awesome way
to communicate research, but sometimes a 2D illustration just won’t cut it. So some scientific artists branched out into
3D work. Born in 1822, Leopold Blaschka came from a
long line of celebrated glass workers. His day job was creating trinkets and glass
eyes for the family business, and training his son Rudolf as his apprentice. In his spare time, he studied plants and flowers,
and made delicate glass models which were displayed in museums and botanical gardens
around Europe. During an ocean voyage to the United States,
he became fascinated with ocean invertebrates, admiring their glass-like colors and shapes. And in 1863, Blaschka was commissioned by
the director of the natural history museum of Dresden to create glass models of sea anemones. From then on, Blaschka and his son turned
all their time and energy to making scientific models. And their work was groundbreaking, artistically
and scientifically. While vertebrates like mammals and birds could
be taxidermied to resemble living animals, invertebrates could only be preserved in jars. That kinda worked, but these squishy creatures
eventually lost their color and became shapeless blobs. Working first from drawings and later from
live specimens kept in saltwater tanks, Blaschka and his son built hundreds of accurate, ethereal
glass models of invertebrate sea creatures. Because glass doesn’t need water to survive,
these models could be displayed in museums and universities all over the place. Now, perhaps the most famous collection of
their work is the Glass Flowers in the Harvard Museum of Natural History. Over 4,000 models of over 800 species of plants
are on display, from entire stalks to magnified pollen grains. And glass flowers are always in bloom! You’ve probably heard of Peter Rabbit – the
cute little bunny in a blue coat who stole carrots from the garden. But long before Beatrix Potter became famous
for her stories, she was a wildlife illustrator. As the daughter of a wealthy family, Potter
was privately educated, and her scientific interests covered pretty much every field
except astronomy. She collected and studied fossils, insects,
and even archeological artifacts before finding her true passion: fungi. The naturalist Charles McIntosh sent her specimens
and taught her how to use a microscope, and her scientific skills grew. She was fascinated by fungal reproduction,
drawing and painting over 350 illustrations of fungi, down to the details like the gills
of mushrooms and their tiny spores. Potter successfully germinated mushroom spores
in her home. She mounted them on glass slides and tracked
their growth, trying to understand how different environments influenced their development. Believing that she was breaking new ground
in fungi research, she even wrote a paper called On the Germination of the Spores of
the Agaricineae in 1897. Whether or not she really contributed to advancing
the field, her illustrations withstand the test of time. Born in Spain in 1852, Santiago Ramón y Cajal
dreamed of being an artist. But, like overbearing parents everywhere,
his father pushed him to study medicine instead. He studied anatomy and pathology, and wrote
books and articles about using microscopes to examine tissue samples. But he was struck with passion in 1887, when
he learned about a neuroscience lab technique called the Golgi method. Even today, we don’t know exactly how the
technique works. But Golgi staining uses potassium dichromate
and silver nitrate to fill random neurons with a dark blackish-brown color. And it leaves the tissue around them completely
transparent. With this technique, Cajal was able to study
individual neurons, which are normally too dense to see under a microscope. Here, he found his calling: illustrating and
describing the structure of brain cells. He made major contributions to the field of
neuroanatomy, and helped figure out the basic structure of the brain – a subject of major
scientific debate at the time. His sketches proved that neurons aren’t
just one long, continuous strand. Instead, he showed the brain was made up of
lots of individual, branched cells connecting and communicating with one another. And he discovered microscopic structures that
scientists still study today: like the axonal growth cone, the structure neurons use to
guide their growth, and dendritic spines, the little bumps on neurons where they form
connections with other cells. Along with the scientist Camillo Golgi, who
created the technique, Cajal was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1906
for his contributions to the field of neuroanatomy. Many consider him to be the father of modern
neuroscience. And neuroscientists today still discuss his
drawings of different cells and theories about how they connect and communicate. Without all these science illustrators, we
wouldn’t have the detailed records and models of the natural world that we do today. So no matter how separately they may be taught,
science and art are complementary tools to explore and talk about our universe! This is an episode of SciShow,
that we could not have done without our patrons on Patreon If you want to help support this show, just
go to patreon.com/scishow. Patreon is basically like a voluntary subscription platform, you get some stuff when you subscribe but mostly It’s just helping us do it so that everyone can get it for free. And of course if you want to support us in a non-monetary way and want to keep watching a bunch of videos that we make, go to youtube.com/scishow
and subscribe!

100 thoughts on “7 Science Illustrators You Should Know

  1. Worst fact check ever: Peter rabbit may have stolen radishes, lettuces, french beans and (almost) parsley, but he never touched MacGregor's carrots.

  2. Aristotelian Abiogenesis was firstly and primarily refuted by Francesco Redi in his paper "Esperienze Intorno alla Generazione degli Insetti" in 1668 – 7 years before Merian published her first book and nearly 40 years before "Metamorphosis insectarium Surinamensium." Abiogenesis was only truly disproven by Pasteur though in the 19th century with his swan-neck flask experiment.

  3. I'm so glad I was able to see that guy's glass work at that museum. It's definitely worth checking out if you're in the area.

  4. As an illustrator, I greatly enjoyed this and found topics for future projects and studies, Thank you for the constant amazing content!

  5. Fucking hell, hundreds of years and nobody noticed how insects were born or at least found Aristotle's explanation a little bit unconvincing.

  6. I've seen the glass flowers at the Natural History Museum at Harvard, they're really amazing!

  7. You mean that until 300urs ago no one noticed that insects and arachnids lay eggs? What were people doing? All this religious teaching takes the questions away, I guess.

  8. No peek list: Audubon, Goethe, Da Vinci …maybe Sibley and Peterson.

    Edit: and thumbs up for pronouncing fungi the right way.. it's such a relief.

  9. this really puts into perspective how important people who really can draw and paint have been in history

  10. If I donate to Patreon, can you just give me the damn transcript for these videos? This is one of the more interesting episodes I've watched recently but Hank Green's voice sounds worse than nails on a chalkboard.

  11. The stupid is not Aristoteles, he just based conclusions on observations with just a sprinkle of biases as most clever humans do. The stupids are the hundreds of years of idiotic christians that took him as absolute and undoubtable knowledge.

  12. I was in Boston a couple years ago to visit friends and one told me about the glass botanical models at the Harvard Natural History Museum. I ended up going there, and they were honestly incredible. I couldn't believe the detail of these hundreds of models. If you are ever in Boston, do yourself a favor and go there.

  13. I love jellyfish illustrations by Ernst Haeckel. They look like some beautiful art nouveau ornaments. So awesome.

  14. 9:46 Hmm… So I gave some thought into this: obviously, the color comes from the dichromate+silver oxirreduction, but the 'mystery' is as to why neurons are dyed randomly; given that the axons are lined with sodium/potassium ion channels, I guess it's the counterions' fault; just swap K2Cr2O7 with, say, Rb2Cr2O7 or Cs2Cr2O7 (but any large cation would do), and do the test against a K2Cr2O7 control
    edit: a high-conc KCl solution may be a cheper alternative

  15. these days it seems like the only viable career option for a scientific illustrator is in astronomy. almost everything else in biology can be imaged to greater accuracy than an illustrator can draw in a reasonable amount of time (aside from diagrams in med school textbooks, for instance)

  16. I love Hank Green Enthusiastic but not to point it get on your nerve. Good vid as always. These names truly deserve to be remembered. Who were they again? lol

  17. Fun fact: if this is something you might be interested in doing, some universities and art schools let you major specifically in medical illustration.

  18. If only artists had such important roles in science today. You'd be lucky to be a textbook illustrator. In a way this video was inspiring, but also disheartening. You can't get very far with art in our modern world, unfortunately.

  19. What is really "funny" is how you try hard to devalue an original partly philosophical Greek scientific approach on how the world works, in ancient times ,comparing it to scientific approaches 1500 years later.. ..!

  20. I don't like how he trashes Aristotle so much. Despite him being wrong on many things. His work on metaphysics and epistemology became the foundations of modern science and technology. with out Aristotle's work on syllogism and formal logic you would not have modern-computer science or math as we know it today.

  21. Newton did indeed show that light could be separated in a prism but he did not define the primary colours. It was James Clerk Maxwell who discovered that the additive mixtures of red blue and green light created white light.

  22. That smug comment about Aristotle is the height of arrogance. Aristotle was a great pioneer in science (not to mention his work within philosophy). Of course he wouldn't get everything right in a single lifetime, but to snark at his errors is just childish. I mean, the man invented logic(!) just to mention one example. He also lay the foundation of Biology of which he was the main contributor basically until Carl Linnaeus.

  23. Hey Hank!! Thank you for what might be life altering enlightenment for me in this episode. Thought every episode is always soul food for me, supper fangirl, I am at a place in personal growth and exploration that can use this information to my fullest. I have always used art as a way to understand my bleeped up brain and now have a new Horizon of application!! Thank you so much. And I've said before but I'll say it again, you are such a babe!!!

  24. Red blue and yellow are primary colors. Green is blue and yellow. Big miss on explanation there. The sky is not red and my pee is not green. Usually

  25. The mandible forms during fetal stages from two structures which merge at the midline. So, it really kinda does start out as two “bones” during development even though it is expressed as a single bone once a fetus is fully formed.

  26. would soldiers have known or seen more anatomy than the doctors since the soldiers probably seen their friends cut open?

  27. I've been fortunate enough to see the Blaschka's glasswork. It's absolutely captivating– the world falls away and you find an hour of awestruck study passes in a moment.

  28. Three honorable mentions: Louis Agassiz Fuertes (wildlife), Chesley Bonestell (astronomy/space flight), and Frances Glessner Lee (forensics) 😉

  29. Why are pigment primaries different than ink primaries? YCM just seems to make sense since they're the complete opposite of RGB and subtractive.

  30. 1:48 Actually, it depends on the age of the person. While an adult person has just one mandibular bone, there were actually two separated halfs as individual bones at one point of their life. Originally, there are two bones. They later connect by an articulation, the symphysis mandibulae, which is actually still visible on adults. This is why some mammals like dogs are considered to have two bones and why Galeno thought it so.

  31. I really appreciate that you guys don't leave out female scientists or artists when you make lists like these!

  32. Vesalius is very familiar to me and I have heard of Merian and Cajal's work. I get pretty nerdy about that kind of stuff. Potter's fascination with fungi was interesting to hear.

  33. Cyan, magenta and yellow are still the primary colors when mixing paint or pigment. Yellow, blue and red can mix a wide range of colors but not the widest range. The idea of red, yellow and blue as primary colors is such an antiquated myth and I wish for the sake of my students that this myth would die.

  34. Love the content, but why is it all biology ? I have yet to see a single video about physics. This biology bias needs to stop!

  35. Hey is it possible you could set and never change the volume of the scishow theme song, and then adjust the narration volume to match it? That way the entire series would be “mastered” and not have such wild volume variations between videos

  36. Hey is it possible you could set and never change the volume of the scishow theme song, and then adjust the narration volume to match it? That way the entire series would be “mastered” and not have such wild volume variations between videos

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back To Top