Speices "Design"

Community and Forum → Insects images → Speices "Design"

guest: pivot, 23.10.2010 10:40

are there any patterns that build a particular pattern on the wings of butterflies? looking through millions of images, I realized-there is.
The Lord God always created fancy patterns based on some laws.
a spot, a sling, a root area, a vertex - these are just attempts to find some meaning of forms.
I have always been confused by the small number of species in the genus ornithoptera. this is one of the most majestic genera of butterflies, and the species can be counted on your fingers. I decided that based on the design of the existing species of the genus as well as the adjacent genera, I could come up with a new species that I thought would have such a design that it could well exist somewhere in Papua New Guinea.
I present my first work-
Ornithoptera tritonus
modulated from an image of a real butterfly.

Comments

Pages: 1 2

Likes: 2

Likes: 3

Likes: 1

25.10.2010 9:51, Guest

2vasiliy-feoktistov

but I immediately say that this is just a design. I would never do such a stupid thing when announcing a new species. and the names are just part of the design, too. I've chosen the right ones, as it seems to me.

the purpose of this post is not at all in fakes, not in comparison with the Creator, but in finding out whether it is possible to understand and understand the patterns of butterfly wings, the shape of their wings, and so on ( in existing species) so that you can come up with alternative species.
and not just to invent, not just fantasy views, but those that could well exist in reality.
That's what I mean.

spots on the wings of butterflies are not just located and have a certain shape and size for a reason. they are all related to each other, their size, the nature of the shape, the blurriness or clarity of the edge, the rhythm. The drawing has genetic markers that characterize the belonging of a genus or family. spots, bandages. you need to be able to figure out their variability, and this is not so easy.
and the purpose of this post is to draw attention to exactly this. limit on the variation of drawing markers within the genus. in this case - ornithopters. but you can try it on some other one.

25.10.2010 9:56, vasiliy-feoktistov

2vasiliy-feoktistov

but I immediately say that this is just a design. I would never do such a stupid thing when announcing a new species. and the names are just part of the design, too. I've chosen the right ones, as it seems to me.

the purpose of this post is not at all in fakes, not in comparison with the Creator, but in finding out whether it is possible to understand and understand the patterns of butterfly wings, the shape of their wings, and so on ( in existing species) so that you can come up with alternative species.
and not just to invent, not just fantasy views, but those that could well exist in reality.
That's what I mean.

spots on the wings of butterflies are not just located and have a certain shape and size for a reason. they are all related to each other, their size, the nature of the shape, the blurriness or clarity of the edge, the rhythm. The drawing has genetic markers that characterize the belonging of a genus or family. spots, bandages. you need to be able to figure out their variability, and this is not so easy.
and the purpose of this post is to draw attention to exactly this. limit on the variation of drawing markers within the genus. in this case - ornithopters. but you can try it on some other one.

No offense, I just gave you an example.

25.10.2010 20:09, okoem

spots on the wings of butterflies are not just located and have a certain shape and size for a reason. they are all related to each other, their size, the nature of the shape, the blurriness or clarity of the edge, the rhythm. The drawing has genetic markers that characterize the belonging of a genus or family. spots, bandages. you need to be able to figure out their variability, and this is not so easy.

Probably all this has already been studied by someone. For example, even in the Yakhontov determinant (if memory serves), there is some information on the evolution of the pigeon pattern. Determinant of the 1939 edition. By the way, as for the text, it's a very sensible book. Not a match for the recent "Danny matelyky..."

Likes: 3

25.10.2010 21:28, pivot

in general, as a child, I was often fond of making realistic models of butterflies. carcasses were made from plasticine. I made my body hair from a neatly trimmed pile of velvet or plush, if you needed it with a shine.
the wings were made of thin carbon paper, with a rather complicated relief. the terrain killed 2 birds with one stone: it gave realistic partial shadows on the wings and prevented the painted wing from twisting. an additional frame was made for the wing. a thin brush pattern was drawn, each scale. metal stains were made on the basis of a mixture of acrylic silver paint and transparent ink, sometimes green. legs and antennae based on thin plant twigs.
the apollons looked especially cool - it turned out to imitate transparent areas with tracing paper, especially if you applied a little gloss to the raised surface of the wings with hairspray.

Likes: 5

26.10.2010 1:43, А.Й.Элез

Oh, my colleagues think correctly; just a little more sense of humor, and all the " creators "would be ignored here, especially since the" Conversation " already has a very thick topic about evolution, largely from the local garbage, and many other topics for conversation that are not directly related to entomology. Or have they already taken it as a principle: no winter without the " Saga of Rasp..."? But the "Saga" was at least about the case, and then in the future you can sniff fouls, but for what? The seed is not worth a penny, with such a seed, what kind of intellectual power did you expect to discover? Everything quickly turned out, so it's all the easier: now, before it's too late for us to make a stop, we won't bring the conductor to apply the brakes...

Likes: 2

26.10.2010 8:44, pivot

Oh, my colleagues think correctly; just a little more sense of humor, and all the " creators "would be ignored here, especially since the" Conversation " already has a very thick topic about evolution, largely from the local garbage, and many other topics for conversation that are not directly related to entomology. Or have they already taken it as a principle: no winter without the " Saga of Rasp..."? But the "Saga" was at least about the case, and then in the future you can sniff fouls, but for what? The seed is not worth a penny, with such a seed, what kind of intellectual power did you expect to discover? Everything quickly turned out, so it's all the easier: now, before it's too late for us to make a stop, we won't bring the conductor to apply the brakes...

thank you for the irony. poetry - it is clearly not enough here.
about that. to stop the discussion on the topic of evolution = here I agree, this is the minimum of outtopic, and the maximum-everyone has their own faith in this regard

now, if someone spoke directly on the topic , I would be very happy, but so far it will not be enough.
Well, let's assume that I didn't say anything about the creator. according to the drawing of the wings at least someone will tell me something clever? or will there only be replicas from the top of their coolness and pathos on the rights of the old-timers of this forum?

Likes: 1

01.11.2010 15:41, RippeR

the first 2 works are cute, but the third, although beautiful, but, in my opinion, does not correspond at all to your idea of creating a view that "could exist". Where would this marshmallow fly with such wings?.

What do you mean by patterns in the drawing? If we look at it from the point of view of evolution, and this is confirmed in many places, there is a pattern, and the pattern of one butterfly is similar to that of another - that is, close species have a similar pattern and their origin from a common ancestor can be traced. Of course, if the species have been separated for a long time, then they will look completely different.. And if we talk about the presence of a common ancestor, then compare the pinnipter and ornithopter - here you have a species that could exist (and you can also mention wingless species). Then your assumption can only indicate one thing - there can be any butterfly, just any.. You just need to take and draw it to look like a butterfly, observe the signs of the squad - and voila..! Yes, even if you move away from the topic a little, you can still draw a new group of butterflies that never existed and will not exist, but they could.. exist.. The idea is clearly meaningless from this point of view, just if you like to be creative - then do it, what base to attribute just what)

Likes: 1

02.11.2010 12:15, RippeR

totally wrong. it may not exist at all anyhow. and I wouldn't mix a featherbed with an ornithoprethra together, it's a complete lol.
absolutely not every butterfly can exist. it's a no-brainer, and it's strange that you don't understand it.
and with a new group, the same new family - I wouldn't risk it at all, it seems to me that this task is insanely difficult, there are a lot of factors and nuances to take into account, you will need knowledge in addition to taxonomy and phylogeny of all other areas.
therefore, the point of my creative work is not to be creative as such, but to observe all the HIGHLY PROBABLE combinations in the butterfly drawing.
and here you have to think, and think a lot, and not just brush kalyakat.
I'm surprised you didn't realize that.

Here you are wrong, because I have already described to you that there is already anyhow, if we take into account the presence of a common ancestor. Of course, faith in cottage cheese will not allow you to understand this.
That is, there are some more general signs, but there are less. However, potentially, anything is possible, and in practice, only what really exists is possible.
Because if we also take into account the common ancestor, and in humans, and in snails, and in butterflies, and in beetles, and in fungi?, ...., then ANYTHING can really exist, because EVERYTHING really exists!
Yes, or watch Discovery, a program where they draw possible creatures on some planets - why not.. And there are people sitting there who are smarter than you.
The fact is that all the factors can never be taken into account, and taking into account some small part will only lead to the satisfaction of your creative ego.

You can calculate at least a hundred times high-probability combinations that will never occur. And even more so, if we take into account the cretionist theory, then what probabilities can we talk about if this * * * * is potentially capable of anything?

And finally, the most important thing, if you haven't already understood, is not the patterns in the drawings (since in this case you are investigating the consequences, and the results will be very narrow accordingly). It is necessary to investigate the reason for the appearance of the drawing. For example, if it is a random mutation of a certain gene, then you need to look exactly there, which means that the boundaries of these mutations can be much wider.

Likes: 1

Pages: 1 2