Back from Dinocon 2025 (Exeter, UK)

Dinocon is a dinosaur-themed convention and a direct successor to the TetZooCon series of conventions that I wrote about on this blog before, in 2022 and 2018. Dinocon was a two-day conference in Exeter. It was excellent, but I will not discuss all events and talks at length; this is a blog about speculative biology, after all, not aimed directly at dinosaurs. 

Even so, I guess that most people interested in speculative biology will also be interested in dinosaurs because of the large overlap: first, dinosaurs are strange and intriguing animals, and second, much about them is speculation. Of course much can be told from their remains, which thse days sometimes even includes colours. But the gap between facts and what dinosaurs really looked like and how they behaved is huge. Every dinosaur restoration is filled with educated speculation, which is still speculation. I find palaeoart and the history of palaeoart very interesting, not only because of the artistic component, but also because the choices made in depicting an animal tell a great deal about underlying concepts. 

Dinocon, as the TetZooCon successor, fortunately still cares very much about palaeoart. Speculative biology was not prominent in the official programme, which is obviously of some concern to me. Of course, focusing squarely on dinosaurs may be the perfect choice for a convention that is just starting. I do hope that speculative biology will get more attention in future Dinocons; we'll see. Next year's version, by the way, will probably take place in early August 2026 at an as yet unknown place in the English Midlands; Birmingham was mentioned. 

Speculative biology was certainly present unofficially at Dinocon 2025. Matt Wedel, known among other things from the 'Sauropod vertebra picture of the Week' (SVPOW) blog, gave a truly excellent lecture about why the general sauropod body scheme seemed to represent a package of features that, once arrived at, seems destined to remain unaltered. He used two examples from speculative biology to illustrate his reasoning, with Dougal Dixon's 'turtosaur' as a acceptable sauropod development. 

Here's a video showing Wedel drawing attention to Dougal's 'New Dinosaurs'. 

Moreover, both C.M. Kösemen (Snaiad) and Dougal had stands at which they sold artworks and books respectively. Dougal's new version of 'The new Dinosaurs' sold out quickly. Dougal told me that the images are the same as before but that the text has been thoroughly revised. You may read a review on this new version on SVPOW, with an image of a turtosaur, right here. Andy Frasier, of 'Dragons of Wales' (here and here), had a stand at which he sold his palaeoart. Another stand sold copies of a glossy magazine, called 'Almost Real', about speculative biology that was unknown to me. I intend to write about it at a later date. 

Click to enlarge

 Here is a scene at the art show with, from left to right, Mehmet Kösemen, me, and Biblaridion.   

Something of definite interest for lovers of palaeoart and of possible interest for lovers of speculative biology is another convention about dinosaurs and palaeoart, this time in Strasbourg in France: it is called Dinoël, a combination of 'dino' and 'Noël' (Christmas). It was held for the first time in 2024, and there will be another one in 2025. Various people involved with Dinoël told me that there are no firm plans to include speculative biology yet, but they certainly did not exclude the possibility. (I did not find a website of Dinoël, but you can find it on Instagram.) 

And that brings me to the last subject of this report. There was a nice panel discussion about AI and palaeoart. As the products of AI are essentially reiterations of work produced by humans, AI 'art' is squarely based on human creativity. But if you start thinking about using art made by others, without their permission, without even referring to the source, without reimbursement, and in likely breach of copyright, the whole of AI art evokes very unpleasant associations. Darren Naish wondered out loud whether the use of AI art is in fact immoral. This is a good point, with which I agree. People who use it should think twice about the morality of using AI art.  

To end on a more upbeat note, here is a short (and jumpy; sorry) video showing a tiny bit of Exeter cathedral. I could not help noticing that some of the grotesques on the facade are very nice examples of creature design.  

And on an even more upbeat note, here is my wife, Roelien Bastiaanse, having mixed feelings about dinosaur reenactments.