When art becomes science.

Usually I think that art is often taking science and looking at it in a different way, allowing the unseen to become seen. Though this is also true of Macoto Murayama’s artworks of flowers, they are so intricate and stunning that I think they have become scientific pieces in themselves.

Commelina communis L. – side view – ow, 2011.
Image from http://www.flickr.com/photos/18637958@N08/8286533731/sizes/z/in/photostream/ Licensed under Creative Commons

Murayama collects flowers and carfully dissects them piece by piece. Under a microscope he draws and takes photographs of the flower parts. He then puts it all into a 3D model on the computer where he adds measurements and labels parts. Murayama said that when he looked closer at the flowers, he not only found organic structures but also mechanical and inorganic elements which changed his perception of flowers completely.

Lathyrus odoratus L – side view – b, 2012.
Image from http://www.flickr.com/photos/98184193@N08/9152037505/sizes/z/in/photostream/ Licensed under Creative Commons

He has said that “An image of a thing presented with massive and various information is not just visually beautiful, it is also possible to catch an elaborate operation involved in the process of construction of this thing”. They are certainly better than any diagram I have seen in a text book.

If you want to see more go to his website: http://www.frantic.jp/en/artist/artist-murayama.html

Other references: http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/artscience/2013/05/macoto-murayamas-intricate-blueprints-of-flowers/


2 Responses to “When art becomes science.”

  1. Cameron P says:

    Those pictures are wonderful and beautiful! It’s interesting that science and art both require creativity and looking deeply at the world – but usually those traits manifest themselves in very different ways. These pictures certainly bring the two worlds together.

  2. sathanad says:

    Hi Lucy, up until very recently, I had always viewed science and arts to be of two different extremes.But, I have now come to the realization that they are indeed intertwined, and that art is essential for science. Art is a beautiful expression, and it highlights the abstracts and the things of beauty. On the same token Science is an art I guess. Art highlights the beauty in science. A lot of it is what cannot be seen by the naked eye. Before we had photography and technology, I suppose all scientist had to be able to draw what they observed? – And science becomes art? Thanks for the post:)