Why Isn’t More Botanical Art Like This?

Botanical art has some conventions that have helped the practice remain accurate and disciplined: portions of the plants painted in isolation on white backgrounds; often 1:1 in size with the real plant; typically in watercolour for the range of colours (Opera Pink, anyone?) and known factors in preservation.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Botanical art has some conventions that have helped the practice remain accurate and disciplined: portions of the plants painted in isolation on white backgrounds; often 1:1 in size with the real plant; typically in watercolour for the range of colours (Opera Pink, anyone?) and known factors in preservation.

After seeing these works-in-progress by Mieke Roth, I find myself wondering why more of it doesn't look like this:

You can also view this one on SketchFab, in Roth's 3D portfolio.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


About the works, Mieke told me

There is only one thing, but that is me being a perfectionist: the illustration (Ceropegia sandersonii) as is isn’t correct yet. I did a lot of work on the flower itself and that one I made sure to be correct, and on the materials and such, but the twig and stem it is on are not entirely correct. Those I did more on how I wanted it to “feel”. And regarding the black background: I actually find it very effective with botanical renders. And the funny thing is that most of the time I do prefer white backgrounds!

I feel quiet, sacred wonder seeing these organic forms floating and illuminated in blackness. Like stained glass in a darkened cathedral. I love it. As soon as I saw these in her Twitter feed, I knew I had to share them here on Symbiartic.

- -

Links:

 

You may also enjoy:

Ultimate Croc Anatomy!

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe