Mary O’Reilly, PhD, is a Scientific Illustrator & Designer at Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. Mary graduated from Purdue University, earned her PhD in Biological Chemistry from MIT, and was a postdoc at Scripps Research Institute. She has since worked as a scientific illustrator for research institutes and as a freelancer with O’Reilly Science Art. Mary helps scientists communicate complex ideas and discoveries through illustration and animation. She designs research article figures, journal covers, press releases, website graphics, and more.

Can you describe your academic and professional background? What path led you to pursue this field?

I came very close to going to art school out of high school. I had a legendary art teacher named Terry Jackson, but also a funny and engaging chemistry teacher named Dan Clark who liked to quote Homer Simpson and parody David Letterman's Top Ten lists with a chemistry twist. After much deliberation I decided to study chemistry. I was lucky to have grown up across the river from (and thus eligible for in-state tuition to) one of the best chemistry departments in the country, so in the end, Purdue University was the only school I applied to. Though I had no idea what one did with a degree in chemistry, I had some great mentors at Purdue as well. Under the mentorship of Jean Chmielewski I fell in love with research and became keen to pursue a career in academics, which led me to a PhD program at MIT, and ultimately a postdoc at the Scripps Research Institute. In all that time, I never stopped drawing and painting, taking classes and workshops at night, and I always had an easel set up, tucked in a corner of every apartment I lived in. When it came time to go on the job market, I saw hundreds of people lining up for the same jobs, which were limited by hiring freezes resulting from the recent financial crisis. I started to wonder whether I might use my set of skills to fill a far less crowded niche — scientific illustration by a PhD biochemist. After much career exploration and deliberation, I saw this as a better way that I could serve science. 

How did you go about launching your freelance career?

The three most valuable activities I undertook when starting my freelance career were building a portfolio, setting up a website so people could find my work, and spreading the word among my network about what I was doing. In order to build a portfolio, I knew I would need projects with deadlines or it would never happen. I was wrapping up a postdoc at the Scripps Research Institute at the time, so I began contributing illustrations to accompany the research highlights in the institute's newsletter. Getting these in an online portfolio was key in landing my first freelance job, which was with a local biotech company that had come across my website. However, my early work came overwhelmingly from my network, then referrals from my network, followed by referrals from those clients, and many of these became long-standing clients. This is why the third point — alerting my network — was so crucial.

How did you find your current position at the Broad Institute, and what was the hiring process like? 

I met the (now former) creative director of the Broad Institute at a symposium on visual communication in science at Rice University where we were both invited speakers. He was in the process of starting the team that I now work on, called Pattern, as an internal design consultancy for the Broad. I started working with him on a contract basis and then he encouraged me to apply for a position on the team, which I did. I went for an interview and happily accepted an offer shortly thereafter. 

Can you tell us about your current responsibilities? What is a typical day or week like in your role?

I work on a small team whose expertise spans from science illustration to software engineering, but we are united by a common love of design. My primary duties include reading manuscripts and working with the authors we collaborate with to create schematic scientific figures to accompany research articles, but because of my interdisciplinary team, I also get to spend time doing data visualization and designing web apps. A typical day includes meeting with collaborators, meeting with one or more members of my team, reading papers, sketching out ideas, and bringing these concepts to publication quality using Adobe programs. For a given project I typically meet weekly with the collaborators, going over sketches and drafts, brainstorming ideas, and getting their feedback. This process takes place over the course of a month or two, and I have at least three or four projects going at any given time. 

What do you most enjoy about your current job and work environment, and what are some of the challenging aspects of your job?

The Broad Institute is an amazing place to work — it is a warm and collaborative environment and is home to some of the best scientists in the world. I've had the chance to work with some of my decades-long scientific heroes. Best of all, I am constantly learning. The only real challenge is avoiding overload and burnout, since I am tempted to work on almost every project that comes my way. 

Do you have any professional plans for the future? What are some future career paths that could open up for someone in your position, 5-10 years down the road?

I am interested in exploring various forms of science communication. I get a great deal of enjoyment from writing, and I like to explore ideas about when words are more effective than pictures and when pictures are more effective than words, and how this changes for different audiences. Similarly, I'm interested in the balance between data visualization and storytelling for memorability, not to suggest that they are mutually exclusive. I've always followed my interests, and though they didn't always lead me to where I thought I was going, they brought me to exactly where I want to be, so I'll just keep following them. As for future career paths, with the ever increasing amount of data being generated, there is a need for web tools to explore and explain the data. This will include novel data visualization to illustrate new types of data, as well as UI/UX design, and perhaps virtual reality.

What’s changing in your industry? Are there any future trends we should be aware of?

I don't get too bogged down thinking about what the future holds and what jobs might become obsolete and what opportunities are coming down the pipeline, because I think there will always be a need to communicate science, whether it is from one scientist to another, which I specialize in, or to wider audiences. The rest is just learning the right tools as they come. As for illustrations, there is always a need to conceptualize scientific findings, but with tools like BioRender and other libraries of illustrations, I think the value is in deciding what should go into a figure, and then knowing how to put the pieces together to present a cohesive and understandable story. For example, we hold workshops for our researchers to teach them how to apply design principles to the creation of scientific figures. This is how I see the state of illustration in the field of biomedical research, but not necessarily fields like ecology, paleontology, and even medical illustration, which I don't have the perspective to speculate about.

What activities, internships, or organizations would you recommend someone get involved with to help them break into this field?

The Association of Medical Illustrators is a great place to start. It has many resources for people embarking on this type of career. For a more direct path into the field, I would consider master's programs in biomedical visualization or related fields at the University of Toronto, University of Illinois at Chicago, Johns Hopkins, and CSU Monterey Bay. It took me nine years of freelancing before I found the job I have, whereas I think these programs can help one's professional development in a way that should lead them more directly to a job. They also offer critique of students' work, which will give it a polish that is hard to achieve otherwise. But this really depends on someone's personal situation, and there are many paths to this field, so I would never make a blanket recommendation.

Is it common for people in your field to have a scientific/academic background (i.e. have PhDs)? Can you think of any advantages or disadvantages someone with a PhD might experience in your field?

It is not common. I am glad I have one because I find it easier to feel like a collaborator on these projects and offer different solutions, but I would never suggest for someone to get a PhD if they know they are going to pursue a career like mine. In fact, when figuring out ways to explain difficult concepts, it can be helpful to be able to put oneself in the shoes of someone who doesn't already understand the concepts. What I think is most useful is a basic level of scientific knowledge coupled with a curiosity and passion for digging into the details to find the best way to get information from one person's brain to another's. 

Do you have any final words of advice for those navigating these career questions? Is there anything you would have done differently given what you know now?

If you can identify what you truly enjoy doing, not just what sounds like an interesting job, it shouldn't feel like a struggle, and you'll probably be pretty good at it. This is totally cliché, but I really believe it. Sometimes it helps as a starting point to think about what you loved to do when you were a kid, and then see how that can be translated to a modern career. When I was thinking about whether I might want to get into 3D animation like the very talented Janet Iwasa, she told me that I should just try it and see if I liked it. It would involve a lot of tinkering with computers and software. If I had been interested in computers I would have listened to my mother, who very wisely told me when I was deciding between art and chemistry that I should actually study computer science. It was fantastic advice, but the only problem was that I didn't care for computers, and so ultimately I'm glad I didn't take it. I wouldn't do anything differently, because it worked out for my specific interests and my specific life, but everyone has to find the path that works for them. The important takeaway is that there is not just one path.