Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Ok, here comes one of my longest journals, hope you have the patience to read it completely, would love to hear what you think.

Now let's take a look at the article which was published by Andrea Cau recently about a phenomenon he called "paleoartismo" (a word which no one seems to be able to translate, if there is one out there who can please enlighten us, for me it sounds like wannabe paleoart )
To read a translated version of the article look at this journal: www.deviantart.com/journal/Som…
In this journal I few quote a few arguments and general sentences of Mr. Cau's and we will see if they will justify the coining of a word like paleoartismo.
Lets start with the symptoms he list to identify a paleoartist which suffer from "paleoartismo"

"Just published is a new dinosaur, have the urge to draw it."
He mentioned in this case especially Deinocheirus (in an older blogpost he critique that no one of this drawings match the actual animal. This argument is bit strange because all artists I saw so far who have produced a picture of the new Deinocheirus have labeled their work as "hypothetical", "without reference" or "highly speculative". When someone don't read the description of the picture it's his/her own fault. But why are so many artists I know (and myself) so willing to draw Deinocheirus in its new form, without any references and only the abstract of the paper? The answer is simple: WE WAIT SO LONG! I see this sudden flood of artwork for this particular species as something like a freeing sigh of the community. Finally we know more about this animal and there are even two specimen! My own enthusiasm was too huge to produce NOT a Deinocheirus, and I will do it again when the paper is out. The reaction of many of my colleagues was similar. Also it's interesting to see how near we will come the actual fossil. It's a game for the mind, creating a animal only from a rough description and our knowledge about its relatives. I wouldn't say that's something negative.

"- Just published is a new hypothesis paleontological want to translate it into a design "in vivo"."
The same here. Why not? we want to make us our own pictures. Every plaeoartist is building it's own prehistoric world in its head and by painting/drawing new concepts you better understand the them, and like the Deinocheirus pictures these works don't need to be labeled as true. In addition I must mention that many concepts which were known as "the truth" become later bullshit so why. So what you are producing is right or not that's the case is nearly every paleontological concept.

"- Dwelling on the aesthetic aspects of a reconstruction paleoartistica rather than scientific correctness."
This can be indeed a problem but we should also note that paleoart have "art" in it. So I'm not surprised to see sometimes pictures which are more aesthetic than scientific, especially in species which are only known by a few bones. In difference to some others I see Paleoart/plaeotogrpahy as more than just illustration.

"- Consider the works of paleoart (including skeletal reconstructions) as "palaeontological". 
That's the only argument I can fully agree to. But paleontologists must also understand that we can only work with what we have, so when you don't upload own skeletal drawings, photos or personal advice we will use what we find (more on this subject down this page).

"- Mix together elements of fantasy and science dell'iconogragia paleoart (ie, draw fantastic creatures inspired by the paleontology, or draw inspiration from extinct animals to creatures of fantasy)."
Argh! That hurts! Not only because I felt addressed but also because it's completely unnecessary, paleoartists don't need to be only palaoartists. I know many very talented colleagues which do a bit fantasy art beside their main work and you see where they come from. What you do beside Plaeoart/Plaeotography shouldn't be a matter for paleotonlogits (and if this is meant irocical I don't smell the humor, it just smells caustic)

"- Drawing caricatures of dinosaurs, or comic book characters paleontological, to spread a message paleontological (more or less correct)."
Also a argument I don't understand, most cartoons are clearly cartoons:
My Little Maniraptor: Pinkie Pie on Normal Faults by Albertonykus
But even if they are very stylized they can teach many things to the unknowing (I learned the dromaeosaur wing structure from a small comic which is not dissimilar to the one of Emily Willoughby.
<iframe src="ib.adnxs.com/tt?id=22110625"></iframe>
Ads by RemarkitAd Options
How Raptors Lost Their Primaries by EWilloughby

For me there is no risk that someone could think that these are real dinosaurs, it's more a opportunity to teach children and unknowing persons about prehistoric live and to make jokes.

But there are other words in that article which let me frown:

" In recent years, mediated by the network, it has spread a disease to which all those who are interested in paleontology..."
Is that true? was it the internet which make us drawing animals only from a few bones, forming a own iconography or producing images of concepts and animals which are poorly supported by evidences. Nope.
When you study the history of Paleoart/Paleotography you see that such things are very common. Only think about the Crystal Palace sculptures by B.W. Hawkins, they had just a few bones but they had the urge to reconstruct the full animal. It was the beginning of the first Dinomania, and I think it's a event the paleontology still feed on. The internet in our present days have only accelerate these phenomenons and it has enable many artists from around the world to share their experience and work. And sensationalism was common likewise. 

" This is no longer paleoart! Create an image of "Deinocheirus with a hump" without even a single picture of the new bone is a form of paleoartismo"
How I already showed (somewhere) is paleoart a wide field. I would call these "reconstructions"  paleo-experiments, no one have ever seen a ornithomimid with an hump/sail, well lets try how it could work visually. But it's still within the boundaries of the Paleoart spectrum.

"I speak of the excessive production of illustrations, designs, works and images related to paleontological concepts, which are then placed online without any filter."
Naturally without filters! Google can't differentiate between accurate and inaccurate depictions of prehistoric lifeforms.
And I wouldn't prohibit any artist to post it's sketches, concepts and not completely accurate reconstructions.

"For example, enter the word on Google Images " Deinonychus ": the majority of the results are works of paleoartismo, followed by a minority of works by professional illustrators, from an even smaller minority of images of skeletal reconstructions (often in turn based on casts, not on fossil remains true), and finally, a handful of poor images of bones real Deinonychus!"

That's actual a bad example for a couple of reasons. How I said: Google don't differentiate. And the web has a memory! so beside up to date reconstructions we find also many old depictions, sketches, pictures of kids, product placement, JP fanart etc...
The context is also not shown in Google, maybe the author just wrote something about Vintage Dinosaur Art ;)
"...from an even smaller minority of images of skeletal reconstructions (often in turn based on casts, not on fossil remains true)..." 
Indeed, there are not many skeletal reconstructions, many of them are the old ones with that broken quadrate, and some of the skeletal drawings show also mistakes, but why. Actually when you google "Deinonychus fossil" you find again mostly these old skeletal casts but no real fossils of Deinonychus. But WHO has access to the fosslis? not the paleoartists, we can't make photos of the actual fossils, can not synchronize our work with the actual fossil, we can't open the drawers. Who knows, maybe the broken quadrate would have been noted earlier when more people would had access to pictures of the real fossil. We can't only improve without good visual imformations. I don't want to say that it's the fault of paleontologists when we produce inaccurate paleoart/paleotography, but when the drawers are closed the drawers are closed.
It's in addition worth to say that skeletal reconstructions are a king discipline of this genre, only a few are able to produce accurate depictions of extinct osteology

(what I would like is a visual open access database with photos of published specimens. Like libraries which scan their old, valuable manuscripts.)

"The term "excessive" denotes a number of works that are not supported by the same amount of science behind it works."
How I already indicated is the degree of accuracy in depictions of ancient life a matter of:
-the skills of the artists
-the knowledge of the artist
-how much soft tissue he/she prefer
-who is his/her adviser
-what he/she want to show/tell

"Final consideration, also to mitigate the inevitable criticism * my words: There is nothing wrong with being affected by paleoartismo"

Really? Words like "invaded (plagued?)", "disease" or "pandemic" tell another story of the authors opinion. We can't split depictions of prehistoric creatures into good and bad, paleoart and paleoartismo. Yes, we need to differ between more or less accurate but in a way that people which don't follow the path of fully accuracy feel still comfortable, everything else would feel like a constriction of creativity to those who want to draw more oldschool dinosaurs.
(warning product placement)
Paleo-definitions by Hyrotrioskjan

I wrote this journal heated (it's very warm in our kitchen in the moment) and you will sense that this topic can make me very emotional. This journal will maybe expand in the hours days because it's possible that I woke up in the night and have a few new arguments.
But that's all for now.

Edit: again my brain awake from a phase of reversible brain death and spit out a few additional thoughts:

A question came into my mind: when will be a paleoartist ready? What are the criteria that allow me to publish my work?
When I become a member of DA I thought I was ready to show my paleoart to the world, today I know I wasn't ready (better never visit the dead end of my gallery) . Maybe I'm now ready... or not. But what I know is that: if I had not submitted my art here I wouldn't be where I'm today. We learn from our mistakes, but we can't learn when we don't show our mistakes to someone who recognizes them as such.

So stop that elitism.
 
Today there are more Paleoartists than ever, and nearly everyone can upload his/her pictures on the web. 
We are living in an era of picture floods, where the picture become less value. 
There are indeed many images in the internet which show inaccurate depictions of prehistoric life, but instead of splitting the genre we should teach those who want learn and urge those who don't to label their work as "inaccurate", "not real" or in a different way which shows that their work don't depict animals based on fossil data. 
(Stamps could be useful here on DA, things like "I don't care about accuracy, I just love dinosaurs" and "I care about accuracy because I love dinosaurs even more" ;)

Greetings

Joschua



Add a Comment:
 
:iconstudiospectre:
StudioSpectre Featured By Owner Aug 29, 2014  Professional General Artist
Charles R. Knights representations of dinosaurs are now considered quite inaccurate, however I still view them as beautiful paleoart based on the knowledge he had at his time and our knowledge today. 
It's all relative. Some kids will paint simple silly little dino images, thats fine, they don't have to be in a textbook and there's no real reason to critique them against professional paleoart. 
Paint what you love, love what you paint. 
Do research if that's what you want to do, if accuracy is your goal. It will show, it will be obvious, but what is most important is what you want to create for yourself and your audience. 
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Sep 1, 2014  Professional General Artist
I think that wasn't completely his point but I agree with you :nod:
Reply
:iconandreacau:
AndreaCau Featured By Owner May 15, 2014
Guys, are you aware of the fact that most of you did not comment against my original words but against a very bad English translation done by Google, a translation that has deformed some of my words in a way that does not reflect my original idea?
After reading most of your comments, it's evident that you have mostly misunderstood the tone and the aim of my post, and so have argued against something that is not in the original Italian post. If you cannot read it in Italian, please, don't write against it after reading that mutant pseudo-English translation.
I'm sorry that I write in a language known by just 1% of the world people, but that's my mother language and the best way I have to express my feelings. A Google translation of a complex rethorical argument is always a very bad deformation of the original tone and intent, as is eviden from most of your comments, that - I repeat - are arguing against something that was not in the original Italian post. The fact you read some words that seem to form a phrase in the Google translation does not mean that such a phrase was in the original text. This is particularly true for the tone and the rethoric: even some Italian readers usually misunderstand my play of words and my rethorical prose. Imagine how a non-Italian reader could misunderstand the tone of a Googled translation (by a machine, not by a human translator) of my original words.

This comment is just to remark that most of the "Andrea Cau" you are challenging is just a Googled Andrea Cau, not the real guy.
Best,

Andrea
Reply
:icondinogod:
Dinogod Featured By Owner Jul 29, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Hi Andrea Cau.

I by my own have a spanish blog, since spanish is my maternal language. I understand italian very little (but more than other languajes), so can you make an abstract of this matter of paleoartisimo?
I'll apreciate very much your real point of view on this subject, since I'm about to write about modern paleoart, paleontography and paleoartisimo.

This is by no means a challenge, but a request for you. BTW I love your blog, but there are many things I don´t fully get.

Thanks for your time.

Greetings from Mexico.
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner May 15, 2014  Professional General Artist
Honestly I was hoping that I just understood something wrong when writing this journal, I think it's a little late to correct it now but I will refer to your point in my next journal, thanks for your comment!

All the best,

Joschua
Reply
:iconandreacau:
AndreaCau Featured By Owner May 15, 2014
Guys, are you aware of the fact that most of you did not comment against my original words but against a very bad English translation done by Google, a translation that has deformed some of my words in a way that does not reflect my original idea?
After reading most of your comments, it's evident that you have mostly misunderstood the tone and the aim of my post, and so have argued against something that is not in the original Italian post. If you cannot read it in Italian, please, don't write against it after reading that mutant pseudo-English translation.
I'm sorry that I write in a language known by just 1% of the world people, but that's my mother language and the best way I have to express my feelings. A Google translation of a complex rethorical argument is always a very bad deformation of the original tone and intent, as is eviden from most of your comments, that - I repeat - are arguing against something that was not in the original Italian post. The fact you read some words that seem to form a phrase in the Google translation does not mean that such a phrase was in the original text. This is particularly true for the tone and the rethoric: even some Italian readers usually misunderstand my play of words and my rethorical prose. Imagine how a non-Italian reader could misunderstand the tone of a Googled translation (by a machine, not by a human translator) of my original words.

This comment is just to remark that most of the "Andrea Cau" you are challenging is just a Googled Andrea Cau, not the real guy.
Best,

Andrea
Reply
:icondinogod:
Dinogod Featured By Owner Apr 5, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Joschua, this entry matches on what I think about present paleoart.
I'm a paleontologist in training (Ph. D. candidate) and the guys at my lab and I are very interested on this subject... even I've tried to do some paleoart.

It's interesting on how the vision of the artist is often more open minded than those of the scientist, but you have to understand one thing: many scientist are elitists due to their scientific background (others are just assholes) and are not aware of second and third degree of speculation... for us speculation is forbidden, but many of my colleagues forget that this ONLY APPLIES TO SCIENCE, not to paleoart and everyone has the right of reconstructing any extinct creature, we don't own the copyright of any creature (even if we describe it).

Keep going the work of the artist is what leads those long gone creatures to the public, which are the ones who support the existence of paleontology in a world with "more important" scientific needs.

I've written something on my blog (it's in spanish and btw sorry for my nasty grammar). This is the link: bit.ly/1pF7K4A

Greetings and you will hear from me again :D
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Apr 7, 2014  Professional General Artist
Hi Roberto, thanks for your support =)

>many scientist are elitists due to their scientific background (others are just assholes) and are not aware of second and third degree of speculation...<

Hah, well that's also what I sense sometimes, thankfully most paleontologists and other scientists I know personally are open minded enough =)

And I also think that many forget the border between science and art (and they tend to forget the history of Paleoart/Paleontography)

>everyone has the right of reconstructing any extinct creature, we don't own the copyright of any creature (even if we describe it).<

Right :nod:
Reply
:icondinogod:
Dinogod Featured By Owner Apr 9, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Thanks for your opinions, I've founded them of most value :)

I'll writte something on the matter on my blog soon.

Greetings ;)
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Apr 9, 2014  Professional General Artist
Nice, feel free to use my graphics =)
Reply
:icondinogod:
Dinogod Featured By Owner Apr 9, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Thank you very much. :D
Reply
:iconjwmorenob:
jwmorenob Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2014
"a word which no one seems to be able to translate"

For the english version, just take away the "o" at the end.
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Feb 10, 2014  Professional General Artist
I know now =)
Reply
:iconleogon:
Leogon Featured By Owner Jan 6, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I read your journal thoroughly and I specially appreciate this Part:
"- Consider the works of paleoart (including skeletal reconstructions) as "palaeontological". 
That's the only argument I can fully agree to. But paleontologists must also understand that we can only work with what we have, so when you don't upload own skeletal drawings, photos or personal advice we will use what we find (more on this subject down this page).
Well, I can not consider myself a "Paleoartist", but I'm interested in "Paleoart" and in a country with poor resources on the subject I have no choice other than compare the net findings and rely on the most reliable of them.
So ,why should somebody try to monopolize Paleoart just for the scientific aspects of it?
A lot of people specially on DA,draw and create their own concept of a world gone by forever! I think still nobody has enough evidence of all the past eras and periods to make the most precise depiction of them!

Anyway, thank you so much for your nice article about the topic.:-)

Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2014  Professional General Artist
Thanks for your agreement :lol:
Reply
:iconleogon:
Leogon Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
You're more than welcome. =) (Smile)
Reply
:iconnaeomi:
Naeomi Featured By Owner Jan 4, 2014
I agree the elitism is not ok. People shouldn't be punished because knowledge is hidden and hoarded away from everyone else, behind excursive clubs and pay walls. Its just hurting everyone.
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2014  Professional General Artist
Thnaks =)
Reply
:iconyoult:
yoult Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Professional General Artist
"- Mix together elements of fantasy and science dell'iconogragia paleoart (ie, draw fantastic creatures inspired by the paleontology, or draw inspiration from extinct animals to creatures of fantasy)."

Das ist natürlich der größte Schwachsinn im ganzen Artikel. Das soll er mal Wayne Barlowe ins Gesicht sagen.
Ich würd's ja verstehen, wenn er es so meint, dass man keine Fantasy-Elemente in die Paleoart mischen soll. Aber so wie das da steht, verbietet er einem komplett Speculative Evolution zu betreiben.
Ich habe meine Fantasy-Wesen generell lieber wissenschaftlich plausibel (auch in Filmen oder Spielen) und sowas geht einfach nicht, ohne sich Anleihen aus der echten Natur zu nehmen.
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Professional General Artist
Besonders dieser eine Satz hat mich die ganze Zeit aufgeregt :nod: So was bringt mich um den Verstand Flippin' Tables  

Mr. Cau's Artikel sind ja sonst sehr interessant und meist auch fundiert aber in Sachen Paleoart vergreift er sich immer mal wieder im Ton :no:


Reply
:icondontknowwhattodraw94:
Dontknowwhattodraw94 Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I understand his opinion about the fact that some drawings are less scientific correct than those of professionals who have acces to the original fossils and files, but you can't stop people from drawing dinosaurs.

However I'm not into all those terms such as paleoart. Are those terms just to classify drawings from less accurate to more accurate such as shown by your Paleo-definitions or are this like "real" communities or groups of artists/scientists who public their worls on the internet and here on DeviantArt?
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Professional General Artist
I use Paleotongraphie and Paleoart different to describe two ends of an spectrum other use it interchangeable =) 
Reply
:icondontknowwhattodraw94:
Dontknowwhattodraw94 Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Oh okay, thanks :)
Reply
:iconyoult:
yoult Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Professional General Artist
Paleoart is a rather informal term coined by Mark Hallett to refer art that depicts subjects related to paleontology.
Paleontography on the other hand is either way the despriction of fossil remains in scientific literature or the representation of forms of life represented by fossil remains.

So the second definition of paleontography is pretty much the same as paleoart. People though tend to give paleontography a more scientific, serious and technical meaning than paleoart which is basically just art.
Reply
:icondontknowwhattodraw94:
Dontknowwhattodraw94 Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Okay, thanks for the help :)
Reply
:iconmrgorsh:
MrGorsh Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
There's one thing I can agree with him about - the surge of depictions of newly found animals, while some old, less popular ones get little to no attention despite sometimes having more material avaliable. (For example I'd like to take Blasisaurus, you seem to be the only person on DA who dared to make a life restoration of this ornithopod)

On the other hand, most of the rest comes out very harsh and patronizing (and as I'm an anti-authoritarian type it's especially yucky to me and doesn't help to get his point across). So basically... Paleoart produced by people who don't have access to the original material in-person should be now called a disease, because he said so. If you're not a pro, then you should not label your work as paleo art. If you don't stick to the minimum dictated by scientific knowledge, you should not label it as paleoart. Google is a big meanie booboo because it doesn't endorse the True Paleoartist work when using the search engine to find images of certain animals, instead giving the filthy amatures' work. Nothing better to express one's views than to show their elitist and discouraging approach and then say something akin to "it's ok to be affected by this disease, just don't think you're people anymore". 

I, honestly, don't see anything wrong with paleoart not being done by professionals. If we see the raw skeletals or minimalistic life restorations of people like GSP - we recognize them as such (And I for one adore GSPs work, even though I prefer my dinosaurs not being as minimalistic). They're destined to be restored with minimal data avaliable because, obviously, they're meant to represent the solid scientific knowledge. But then we shouldn't fall into the trap that speculation is bad. Because dinosaurs were (well, are) living animals with all sorts of different behaviours and soft tissue structures, restoring them only as standing museum mounths is "paleontological", but there's little to no "art" in it. If we go into paleo-arthritis, we'll end up on the end of the spectrum where paleoart will no longer be capable of presenting non-paleo-interested people with live restorations of the animals, simply because, say, we couldn't restore Utahraptor with feathers, because fossils don't have any trace of them - therefore we must restore it bald or else it can be called paleoartismo. :)

I'm now conflicted whether or not I should buy myself a tablet and start experimenting with digital work. Or rather, if I do so, should I post it online or not in fear that some people might find it offensive if my art pops up on Google image search.
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2014  Professional General Artist
Thanks for your comment =)

>I'm now conflicted whether or not I should buy myself a tablet and start experimenting with digital work. Or rather, if I do so, should I post it online or not in fear that some people might find it offensive if my art pops up on Google image search.<

Don't fear =) art can't need fear, to be productive we must be fearless.
A interesting side effect of Cau's article is that when you search now for pictures of Paragondolella that you find a bunch of Deinonychus pictures =D

>For example I'd like to take Blasisaurus, you seem to be the only person on DA who dared to make a life restoration of this ornithopod<

Thanks =)

>They're destined to be restored with minimal data avaliable because, obviously, they're meant to represent the solid scientific knowledge. But then we shouldn't fall into the trap that speculation is bad<

:nod:

>Nothing better to express one's views than to show their elitist and discouraging approach and then say something akin to "it's ok to be affected by this disease, just don't think you're people anymore". <

Yes, that hurts.



Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2014
From your analysis of the article, it looks like Cau is saying that paleoart should be left to the pros alone, i.e. the lucky few who have access to museum collections and sound advices from professional paleontologists and that mere amateurs such as me should not even consider dwelling in prehistoric animal reconstructions as we will just spread the "disease" of scientifically incorrect paleoart and feed the mass with it. I hope this is not actually what he is saying, because this kind of elitism sounds even worse than what Greg Paul ranted about a few years ago...
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Professional General Artist
Elitism is also something I sense here, thanks for remembering me of that word :nod:
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014
I have to read the article in more depth to understand his point, but he actually flagged two illustrations in the conodont google search screenshot as examples of  what he is calling "paleoartismo", the first is from Dmitry Bogdanov, a Russian artist known for his many accurate depictions of miscellaneous prehistoric creatures for whom I have a lot of respect, and the other is from me, so I feel doubly insulted as "paleoartismo" in his term is clearly used in a very derogatory term. I think I might write something about it...
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2014  Professional General Artist
Indeed, I notive that also :nod:

Would be nice to read what you think about that in detail =)
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Jan 4, 2014
Yeah, I cooled off a bit... What tipped me off was the fact that Dmitry's and my art were labelled as "paleoartismo" while there was nothing wrong with them that I can think of in term of scientific accuracy as we both work using images of fossils as guidelines and read the scientific literature. I think the guy just labelled the pics as such as the illustrations look a bit too amateurish to his taste (see how he constantly used the word "professional" in opposition of "paleoartismo" and see how he only uses illustrations of well established paleoartists such as L. Panzarin on his website). I can live with that as I am well aware that my skills are far from being at the level of the pros. So there is not much point on expressing outrage without having either proficiency or reputation to back me up. In retrospect, Cau's elitism is less about scientific accuracy than about proficiency and paleontological fluency... he just can't stand having mere amateurs with minimal artistic skills and paleontological education taking over the net. I can understand the frustration (which I think is share by many paleontologists and professional paleoartists). So even if the way he expressed it seems harsh and the words he used (or the target he chose, i.e. wikipedia) seems not particularly appropriate, I am not going to argue about it.
Reply
:iconfragillimus335:
Fragillimus335 Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
All I say is spread the dinosaur love... :)
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Professional General Artist
=D :hug:
Reply
:iconguilleelbardo:
guilleelbardo Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2014  Hobbyist
Well it is hard to get the real emotion of the article from that translation, but I would say he's just another elitist that
needs to separate his art from everybody else's by being hyper critical of anything percieved as "demeaning" to the artform.
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Professional General Artist
:nod:
Reply
:iconewilloughby:
EWilloughby Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2014  Professional General Artist
Hmm. Interesting article, and interesting analysis. I can honestly see both perspectives, though I think Cau is being a little overly critical. I think a big part of his problem isn't that "paleoartismo" exists, but that it's becoming so prevalent to the exclusion of more serious, research-based reconstructions - and I'm not honestly sure I disagree with that. For instance, it used to be the case that an educational "PSA" style comic or dinosaur tutorial (like the one of mine you linked to) were fairly infrequent, but at this point it seems that a lot of different artists are doing those, and there's not much novel or interesting between them anymore. Another corollary problem is that "paleoartismo" illustrations often masquerade as being more serious than they are, at least to the general public, and Deinocheirus is a good example. As soon as the abstract went live, speculative illustrations started pouring in, and most people who take a casual interest in paleontology don't know that the actual material hasn't been published. They see the new revised anatomy of Deinochierus and they think "Oh, so that's what it looked like!" and the new perception spreads like a virus - even though most of them are not based on anything remotely scientific. Once the material is officially published, the more accurate reconstructions will not get as much publicity because it will be "old news" at that point.

So, I can understand being a little annoyed by all of this, especially for a professional paleontologist who takes great care and precision in his work. When it catches me in a bad mood, I can get a little annoyed by some of it too. I do think it's possible to exhibit Cau's listed "symptoms" of paleoartismo without committing any crime. I, for one, quite enjoy illustrating new research as soon as it's published, but I'm very careful to avoid too much speculation if I want the image to be taken seriously in a serious context. My illustration of Acheroraptor, for instance, is under a CC license at Wikipedia and I did not reconstruct the animal very far beyond what we know - the skull. 

I think a lot of the frustration is inevitable, because most people who draw dinosaurs on the internet are not professionals and they're doing it for fun, and they can't control (and many of them don't care) whether their "sort" of illustration eclipses the more professional kind. All we can really do is encourage people to be more accurate and judicious about how and why they draw dinosaurs the way they do. 
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Professional General Artist
Thanks for your comment Emily =)

>Another corollary problem is that "paleoartismo" illustrations often masquerade as being more serious than they are<

That is for me the real problem :nod: do what you want as long as you make clear that your artwork isn't accurate or isn't based on references.

>Once the material is officially published, the more accurate reconstructions will not get as much publicity because it will be "old news" at that point.<

I hope that will not happen, I had so far the feeling that the discovery mostly go round in the "inner circle" of the paleo world, I think it will be still a big surprise for many when the paper comes out.
For me personally it will be still a day a joy, because to read something about a new discovery and to see than finally the fossils are two pair of shoes.

> All we can really do is encourage people to be more accurate and judicious about how and why they draw dinosaurs the way they do.<

Very well said :nod:



Reply
:iconmarcoornithodira:
marcoornithodira Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2014  Student Traditional Artist
"Paleoartismo"="paleoartism". Made-up word which Cau defines it in the post; I guess you could say it 'literally means' "a tendency to do paleoart".
From what I understand, you're not disagreeing with him that this tendency exists, but saying "so what?", right? I wouldn't disagree with either position, though that might have to do with me being both generally a moderate and 'infected' by paleoartism (though it doesn't show much because I'm lazy and slow). I get what he's saying though, especially those references to the nature of paleontology (while my opinion on this subject isn't exactly that of a professional or someone who's studied appropriately, his points seem convincing). 
I guess you could say in a paleoartism-free world, nobody would feel compelled to draw something that they reckon is, as you said, hypothetical, without reference or highly speculative. People wouldn't have to use the science as constraints to make their artistic visions accurate, they would go the other way around and build scenes to represent the data. And if there weren't enough to work on, the idea for the paleoart piece wouldn't even come to your mind in the first place. 
Of course I think most of 'us' –though to be honest it seems like everybody does paleoart now, so it's not as much a community as a worldwide phenomenon, a 'disease' in the morally neutral sense of "something that spreads quickly", which is probably what Cau meant too– feel like artists first and critical, informed readers of papers etc. second. I, for one, am currently painting a scene with an animal based on Scott Hartman's Troodon skeletal, in the snow, with a tree. I'll admit freely that I didn't go bottom-up with the construction of this thing, I wanted a snowy thing and I made it plausibly Troodontid-ish. There may be nothing 'wrong' with that (or yes, and I don't know if I'm actually way more abnormal that I thought *oops*) but it's not exactly the best way of treating this subject. I think that's what Cau was talking about; of course, I can't judge that well how accurate a reconstruction is, or what the author was thinking when s/he did it, so I won't say I can judge if something is paleoartism (other that knowing that mine, though somewhat controlled and delayed, definitely is). Still, I think he made some solid points. 
Also, I'm pretty sure the tone you get from the translation is somewhat harsher than the original.
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2014  Professional General Artist
>From what I understand, you're not disagreeing with him that this tendency exists, but saying "so what?", right?<

Mostly, but I also don't like the way how he define paleoartismo.

>Also, I'm pretty sure the tone you get from the translation is somewhat harsher than the original.<

That could be, translations are always a doubtful sources :nod:

>or yes, and I don't know if I'm actually way more abnormal that I thought *oops*<

That a important point, when are we ready to publish our work? (without a scientific adviser) 
Reply
:iconorionide5:
Orionide5 Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2014
"- Mix together elements of fantasy and science dell'iconogragia paleoart (ie, draw fantastic creatures inspired by the paleontology, or draw inspiration from extinct animals to creatures of fantasy)."

That's a ridiculous thing to criticize! Imagine if that applied to living creatures! "No! That dragon's head looks like a crocodile's! And its wings look like bat wings! Start over!"
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Professional General Artist
Thanks for your agreement =)
Reply
:iconedaphosauruspogonias:
EdaphosaurusPogonias Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
That would mean drawing fantasy animals is impossible, as the dragon must have copied animals with eyes or mouths because prehistoric animals have them!
Reply
:iconpinerain:
PineRain Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I share these same opinions with you. I think whoever wrote that article was completely unaware of the reality of what they were talking about...
Reply
:iconhyrotrioskjan:
Hyrotrioskjan Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Professional General Artist
Well, the problem is that Andrea Cau is not someone "whoever" =)
Reply
:iconpinerain:
PineRain Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Yeah. I see where you're coming from.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
January 1, 2014
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
7,798 (1 today)
Favourites
12 (who?)
Comments
46
×