Cryo-electron microscopy, photon counting-computed tomography, quantum imaging – these are a few modern developments that have allowed scientists to capture microscopic details at ultra-resolution. Researchers today have a vast arsenal of tools to visualize phenomena, from describing how cells communicate at a molecular level to large scale technologies like deformation imaging that map the rigidity of the Earth’s crust and mantle. But how were scientific observations documented before these advanced techniques? Prior to modern technology, how did scientists record the complexities of the human body or observe distant celestial bodies?
Before the digital age, scientists were fundamentally artists. Early scientific figures were not simply visualizations of data – they were the data itself, captured meticulously through hand-drawn illustrations. Before photography became widespread, images used in scientific journals like Nature were wood engravings that were inked and set for printing – a task requiring an incredibly high degree of skill and precision. Illustrators and engravers often worked closely with or were themselves scientists, carefully emphasizing specific details. Looking back at this period, scientific drawings served as more than records – they reflected what the observer chose to illustrate and emphasized the features they considered most significant.
One example of the subjectivity of early scientific art is Ernest Haeckel’s idealized drawings of radiolarians, a group of marine organisms with intricate mineral skeletons. His depictions were highly stylized, emphasizing symmetry and aesthetics, sometimes over factual details. Despite these liberties, Haeckel’s images remained the gold standard for the field of marine biology until the advent of scanning electron microscopy nearly a century later.
The concept of the scientist-artist was exemplified by Leonardo da Vinci, who extensively studied human anatomy in addition to his well-recognized role as a painter. By his death in 1519, da Vinci had compiled over 5,000 pages of incredibly detailed notes and illustrations in anatomy, physics, geometry, and philosophy. His depictions of human organs were groundbreaking at the time; using glass casts, da Vinci accurately modelled the internal structure of the heart’s pulmonary artery. His anatomical sketches were exceptionally accurate – some, like his cross-sections of the human skull have established themselves in medical education. Da Vinci’s sketches remained the forefront of anatomical understanding until Andreas Vesalius published De Humani Corporis Fabrica in 1543, a revolutionary text marking the introduction of “veridical representation”, a new paradigm focused on accurately representing anatomical structures as they truly exist. With the Fabrica came a change in using illustrations as visual records to essential didactic tools.
Galileo Galilei, although not primarily trained as an artist, effectively used artistic techniques in his astronomical studies. In Sidereus Nuncius (The Starry Messenger, 1610), Galileo included etchings of the moon based on his telescopic observations. He was among the first to depict the moon’s surface as rugged and cratered, directly challenging the Aristotelian belief that heavenly bodies were smooth and unblemished. His illustrations used a technique known as chiaroscuro, which contrasts light and shadows, to emphasize the moon’s topography — ridges, craters, and mountains — much like a Renaissance painter would. Beyond aesthetics, his drawings served explanatory and persuasive purpose. Galileo went on to draw star clusters like the Pleiades and Orion to demonstrate the unprecedented power of the telescope. His depictions of sunspots using sequential drawings functioned as modern time-lapse images, visually demonstrating that the sun’s rotation was imperfect, again refuting long-held beliefs.
The introduction of photography in the late 1800s marked a turning point in scientific imaging as wood engravings and hand-drawn sketches gave way to glass lenses and silver halides. Photography was embraced for its perceived objectivity – photographs were trusted to capture observations with an unbiased clarity that the eye could not. Photography’s scientific relevance grew dramatically throughout the 20th century. When Kathleen Lonsdale pioneered the technique of X-ray crystallography to measure a sample’s atomic and molecular structure, her X-ray diffraction photographs were crucial to the discovery of DNA’s structure by James Watson and Francis Crick. The key piece of evidence was ‘Photograph 51’, which showed the diffraction pattern of DNA.
As we move further away from the stylized drawings and hand-made models of da Vinci’s and Haeckel’s eras towards AI-enhanced imaging and 3D rendering, one might question if the artistic process has been lost in today’s technology. Historically, art was an essential means of representation, revealing not only scientists’ observations but also their unique perspectives, philosophies and interpretations of the world. The deliberate and meticulous nature of traditional scientific illustration has since given way to modern methods prioritizing efficiency and objectivity. However, rather than disappearing, the role of art in science has taken a different shape. Artistic insight and creativity certainly still have a place in the scientist’s toolkit –today, researchers and medical illustrators must carefully choose colors, textures, and perspectives to highlight biological processes like cell interactions or neural pathways, making complex data accessible and engaging. The ability to effectively visualize data remains an inherently artistic skill, reminding us that science communication is and will always be an interplay between technical precision and creative expression.
Rishabh Johri
Latest posts by Rishabh Johri (see all)
- Before Pictures - October 2, 2025
