I saw this open source image and I had to say ¨Ough!¨.
Yes, my fast brain system sees a metaphor for DNA as building blocks forming a staircase, finds it beautiful and loves it. And then, after a second, my slow thinking brain aches to see that nothing about it actually looks like DNA.
The most common form of DNA is B-DNA, which consists of a double helix that turns towards the right side (like when you open a bottle). Following the staircase analogy, B-DNA makes a full turn every ten steps, which is much steeper than in the image.
As a disclaimer, DNA can actually form a left-sided messy looking double helix structure, called the Z-DNA. However, it is rare, if actually occurring naturally (until it will be found otherwise).
So I decided to make my own version of the image with what I think is a better degree of accuracy. I tried to keep the metaphor and the feel while improving the accuracy.
It was a nice exercise where I learned tools from the original artist to make a composition more beautiful and evoking. And I kept my scientist's soul.
What do you think?
Where is the thin line between compelling communication and scientific accuracy?
I think you approach visualizations the same way I do! While I am not a scientist at all, I do my utter best to follow the guidance and references that scientists give me, and these are the kinds of details and respect for accuracy that I always try to imbue my work with, even when it is meant to be short hand and conceptual rather than lifelike. Bravo!