RoR: Forum

Rebirth of Reason

Forum : Art : Blood 2,000,000x

Blood 2,000,000x

Blood 2,000,000x
David S. Goodsell

Description of Image:This watercolor illustration shows a cross-section through the blood, with blood serum in the upper half and a red blood cell in the lower half. In the serum, look for Y-shaped antibodies, long thin fibrinogen molecules (in light red) and many small albumin proteins. The large UFO-shaped objects are low density lipoprotein and ... (See the whole comment)

(Added by Hong Zhang on 6/02, 8:06pm)

Discuss this Artwork (26 messages)

Friday, June 3, 2005 - 12:30am

Thank you. Very interesting picture.

I am not sure it would be appreciated by non-biologists just upon artistic merit.

Do you have any idea if it is drawn to scale or not?

Friday, June 3, 2005 - 8:11am

Really neat picture! The cell wall looks complicated. What are those Y-shaped purple things sticking out towards the serum side?

Thanks Hong. I found the rest of the contest entries here:

http://www.hwi.buffalo.edu/ACA/HotNews/ArtEntries2005.htm

Friday, June 3, 2005 - 8:34am

Medical illustration is just that - illustration..... it is not fine art.....

Friday, June 3, 2005 - 10:25am

Nice find Hong!

Looks like it will make a good stained-glass panel.

Robert M., it won't classify as a medical illustration. I doubt this watercolor will be of any instructive value. Since the emphasis is clearly on beauty, this is art. Fine art? I dunno...

The selective recreation of reality must include microscopic reality. If it requires a certain knowledge of science to appreciate it, so what? Beholding the wonder that is the universe should inspire as much, if not more, art than what is commonly recognized as inspiring (landscapes, religious themes, etc). Just think of it as landscapes of the very small. Nanoscapes anyone?

If I were more 'comically' inclined, I'll put the Atom somewhere there, riding the UFO lipoproteins...

[Edited for confusing the Atom with Captain Atom (darn atoms).]
(Edited by num++
on 6/03, 1:04pm)

Friday, June 3, 2005 - 10:48am

Obviously Num++ isn't paying attention to what is before him - is so an illustration, which means is there as an instructional aid, not for contemplative purposes - thus, is not art.......

Friday, June 3, 2005 - 11:39am

Is so not a "medical illustration"....
Is so for contemplation among the scientifically inclined....
....thus, is art....

(Does Newberry have an MD?)

Friday, June 3, 2005 - 1:38pm

Thanks Hong.

In addition to the informational part, it's pretty.

Michael

Friday, June 3, 2005 - 1:47pm

Hong - I can't resist.

Ayn Rand wrote: "Art is a selective recreation of reality according to the artist's metaphysical value-judgments."

She obviously was talking about human beings. In our benevolence as a species, we can also include other life, er..., forms, can we not? So here is this work - a magnificent groundbreaking masterpiece for vampires...

//;-)

Michael

Friday, June 3, 2005 - 2:51pm

I agree with Michael. It is pretty. I really like it. Thanks Hong.

When something is an illustration or even photography, why must we dismiss it out of hand and say it has no artistic merit?

Objectively speaking...The colors are vibrant and the composition is strong. It is balanced visually by putting the color with the most visual weight, red, in smaller proportion at the bottom. The irregular shapes and splashes of additional colors add visual interest and texture to the piece as well.

Non-objectively speaking.... I showed it to my son Sean and he said it was beautiful.

Kat

(Edited by katdaddy on 6/03, 3:05pm)

Friday, June 3, 2005 - 5:49pm

I am glad you folks like it - even without being a molecular biologist. And I agree with many of your comments here, especially num++'s "microscopic landscape" and Kat's comments.

Marcus - I believe it is drawn roughly to the scale. It shouldn't be hard. Hemoglobins are probably about ~6 or 7 nanometers across. I have a print of this. Don't know the size of the original work though.

Mike - Those tree-like purple things sticking out from the membrane to the serum side should be the poly-sugars that are attached to those transmembrane glycoproteins. I think the rest of entries of the context are not really comparable with this one, artistically speaking. Dr. Goodsell's website (click on his name) has a few other beautiful pictures, though I still like this one very much.

num++ - Actually, according to my best knowledge, the shapes of various molecules (blobs) in this picture ARE accurate at this resolution. Atoms (with radii ~ 0.1-0.2 nanometers) are much too small for us to see in this picture. So I would say that the artist actually was trying to recreate the reality of the blood at microscopic level and to the best of our knowledge today.

Robert M. - Whatever one may label such work, I really got a kick out of it when looking at it. There are certainly creative elements in it: although we know the shape of these components of blood and their locations rather accurately, what color to use for each molecule (except hemoglobin which we know is red)? and where exactly to place them? And what view to choose? etc. These are all up to the artist to decide or contemplate. Maybe I should ask you a question: what would distinguish a landscape painting from a...hem...land survey drawing?

MSK and Kat (and Sean) - Yes, I think it is very beautiful too, AND very accurate scientifically! Though I might have thought that the hemoglobins are a bit too red for a better color balance, but they are hemoglobins, which is what's responsible for the color of our blood!

Hong

(Edited by Hong Zhang on 6/03, 6:48pm)

Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 2:45am

The difference is between an attempt to duplicating a photograph, that is, being a recorder - and being creative, utiliging the landscape components as means to an end, the end being thematic presentating..... in other words, between that which is - and that which could and perhaps ought to be...

Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 6:41am

Robert, have you ever heard of a program called Photoshop?

Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 7:04am

Photoshop is an excellent example of craft tooling.......

Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 8:27am

Hong:

"Maybe I should ask you a question: what would distinguish a landscape painting from a...hem...land survey drawing?"

They have different purposes. (Edit) As well as different means. Rendering would be commonality; though it has a very minor function in fine art.

Michael

(Edited by Newberry on 6/04, 9:05am)

Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 1:09pm

"Brushes bad. Craft tools. Me use fingers -- only true art tools."

- Grogbert Malcom, 34,081 BC

Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 1:17pm

Robert and Michael,
Thanks for the explanation. I am not sure about David Goodsell's initial intention when creating this piece. It is certainly not the recreation of a photograph - no such "photograph" or recorded image is in existence yet. I am not even sure how much computer rendering that he used. I do renderings of molecules all the time and this is so much more. The scientific accuracy certainly warrants it's superb value as an illustration, but it is quite beyond just that...the colors, composition, etc. are all artist's creation.

I like how he choose to represent the very molecular details inside a living organism. Much more pleasant than a flayed human being!

Hong

Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 1:50pm

I don't think there can even be a real photograph like this.

The shortest wavelength of light that is detectable by the human eye is violet at 4(10^-7) meters. The human red blood cell has a diameter of 7.8(10^-6) meters - we can use this as a gauge for the resolution of the watercolor. The folds of polysugars can be estimated to be at least 100 times smaller than the RBC diameter, and they can be seen in the watercolor. So the work can be said to have a resolution of ~8(10^-8) meters.

8(10^-8) < 4(10^-7)

The resolution of the illustration is finer than the shortest wavelength for visible light. If there were photographs taken at the same scale, it cannot be taken at optical wavelengths (requiring electron microscopy most probably). So there will be no color other than what an artist will provide.

[Edited to correct poly-]
(Edited by num++
on 6/04, 1:56pm)

Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 9:08pm

Hey Jonathan,

Just today I made a finger painting...mostly at least, block in the colors with very heavy paint...then used paper towels, no straw was handy, and my fingers to create the highlights...I am delighted with it.

Michael

Saturday, June 4, 2005 - 9:30pm

Hong: "...the colors, composition, etc. are all artist's creation."

The art and aesthetic thought of the 20th Century pretty much forms havoc on contemporary minds; including many soloists. Color for color sake is a non conceptual approach to color. For example harmonious reds and greens don�t have a lot to do with representational art but rather have more significance for design�like picking a nice peach colored curtain with a nice aqua-blue colored rug. A contrary example is you might paint a red apple: lemon yellow highlights, orange and red base, and magenta or violet shadows�the total over all affect, with a good artist, will be a red apple�but only simple minds would paint it a solid red.

Michael

(Edited by Newberry on 6/04, 9:32pm)

Sunday, June 5, 2005 - 1:44am

Great to hear that you're enjoying keeping the traditions of the Grogbertian School alive, Michael!

J