HOME | DD | Gallery | Favourites | RSS
| MattMart
MattMart
βοΈ
[489398]
[2003-08-28 00:08:42 +0000 UTC]
(United States)
# Statistics
Favourites: 119; Deviations: 95; Watchers: 895
Watching: 4; Pageviews: 128601; Comments Made: 1125; Friends: 4
# Interests
Favorite visual artist: Doug Henderson, Josh "Shag" AgleFavorite movies: Almost Famous, Back to the Future
Favorite bands / musical artists: Led Zeppelin, Hooverphonic, The Tea Party, Nick Drake
Favorite writers: Robert Frost, W.B. Yeats, D.H. Lawrence, Ernest Hemingway
Favorite games: Monkey Island 2, The Longest Journey, The Sims 2
Tools of the Trade: Wacom Tablet, Photoshop, Pencil
Other Interests: Sketching, writing, pop culture, prehistoric birds
# Comments
Comments: 158
π: 0 β©: 0
Hi, I really like your work. Just wanted to let you know, I made a vector illustration inspired by your reconstruction of Tyrannosaurus rex.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
I'm inΒ need of your assistance. Your book, A Field Guide to Mesozoic Birds and Other Winged Dinosaurs, it states that Microraptor zhaoianus is found in both the Yixian and Jiufotang formations. Yet virtually all other sourcesΒ say it's exclusively Jiufotang. So what's going on here? Is this a case of Science Marches On or are there Yixian Microraptors hiding in a museum somewhere?
π: 0 β©: 1
Good question! Turner 2012's paper on paravian systematics lists Microraptor as coming from both the Yixian and the Jiufotang. That's why it was included as such in my book. I had assumed further specimens from the Yixian were found and were among the ones discussed in Turner's paper. However, so far there doesn't seem to have been any more on this, and Turner does not cite any particular Yixian specimens. A few people have asked me about this and now that I think about it, I have a hunch Turner might have been including the Yixian specimen now known as Changyuraptor. Just a hunch, but it's possible. So far no other specific fossil currently assigned to Microraptor have been published as specifically hailing from the Yixian.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you so much for clearing that up.
π: 0 β©: 0
Haven't seen many updates here or on your blog in a while. Hope you're doing well. Is the new book still coming along?
π: 0 β©: 1
Yes, doing well, thanks! My real job and other things have been keeping me pretty busy. Most of what I've been working on is for the new book(s) so I haven't been posting much online, but I'm plugging away at it! I'm hoping to have one new book ready by the end off this year, but that might be over-ambitious...
π: 0 β©: 0
Just picked up a copy of A Field Guide to Mesozoic Birds from the holidays, and I love it! Amazing work.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks, glad you like the book!
π: 0 β©: 1
Nice !!!
I like Stegoceras !!!
I am yourΒ Watcher !!! 
π: 0 β©: 0
Hi mr Martyniuk, I need your help. I'm doing a life restoration of Microraptor with a dorsal vision but I don't have any reference about the widht of the snout. Is this a correct restoration?
i.imgur.com/x43LwXP.jpg
π: 0 β©: 1
Yes, that looks reasonable, but don't feel like you need to follow it exactly. We don't have any Microraptor skulls preserved in 3D, all of them are crushed flat, so we can't tell much about its width with certainty. You may also want to look at good 3D preserved skulls of other dromeosaurids like Velociraptor to get an idea how wide it might have been.
π: 0 β©: 0
Found the gallery through a link in your blog. I'm not knowledgeable in neither art or biology or paleontology or any related field, but despite a few technical terms I find your blog super interesting and easy to read, and I like your art as well. 
π: 0 β©: 1
Not defunct, just not much that I produce lately which I'm not saving up for my next book, which will have a ton of dinosaurs featured... still check comments every month or so!
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh...what book? I'm really curious about it.
π: 0 β©: 1
Title still being decided, but it's basically Beasts of Antiquity: Mesozoic North America edition
π: 0 β©: 1
Great! Can't wait to see it.
π: 0 β©: 0
Hello Mr. Martyniuk!Β I made this deinonychus restoration inspired by your studiesΒ delirio88.deviantart.com/art/Dβ¦
and I'd likeΒ to have a severe comment from you. I'm trying to do my best to give shape to this restoration more accurate as possible and his criticisms would be valuable for that purpose.
Thanks for your time.Β
Best from Italy.
π: 0 β©: 0
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
π: 0 β©: 0
Oh, and one last question... what would you consider Ornitholestes?
π: 0 β©: 1
I think we need better studies to know for sure. Cau's megamatrix found it to be a tyrannoraptoran close to maniraptoriformes, so I'd go with that for now, but basal maniraptoran more advanced than ornithomimosaurs can't be ruled out as a possibility.
π: 0 β©: 1
Again, thank you so much
π: 0 β©: 0
Hello Mr. Martyniuk! I've been Inspired by you and your excellent book to write and possibly illustrate my own guide, one about the Tyrannosauroidea. Of course I would include the Proceratosauridae and Tyrannosauridae, and primitive Tyrannosauroids like Dilong, Dryptosaurus, and Yutyrannus, but I'd like your opinion: Should I include the Coeluridae? Considering the phylogenetic controversy about them?
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks, glad I could give you some inspiration and I look forward to reading your guide! I would definitely include Coeluride-- I think most recent studies are starting to agree that they are basal members of the tyrannosaur lineage. Mabe you can add a not that this is still somewhat uncertain... and also that if they ARE members of the lineage, the correct name needs to become Ceoluroidea, not Tyrannosauroidea, since Coeluroidea is the older name!
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you so much, I really appreciate it! Wow, to think that Tyrannosauroidea could actually be called Coeluroidea. I think I will make a note of that!
π: 0 β©: 0
Just wanted to say, I just picked up Dinosaur Art and was really delighted to see your work in it!
π: 0 β©: 0
Ever since reading your book (One of my favorite dinosaur books, by the way), I've tried to follow the philosophy on color you describe whenever drawing dinosaurs. One thing I've been wondering about, though: you say in the section on color that members of Galloanserae and Palaeognathae can't use carotenoid pigments, so their use in stem-bird feathers is fairly speculative. What's up with the golden pheasant, then?
Also, if stem bird scales are modified feathers, does that mean that they would have followed the same color rules as feathers? Can their scales show iridescence?Β What types of coloration could bare skin have?
Sorry if I asked too many questions, I'm really interested in this particular topic and I've had a hard time finding good sources on it.
Thanks in advance for any answer you can give me.
π: 0 β©: 1
Good questions! As far as I know, the Golden Pheasant doesn't use carotenoids in its feathers (and a quick bit of literature search seems to support this). It looks like an extreme case of structural coloration! Some photos do make the colors in this species look *very* bright and carotenoid-like, others make them look a bit duller and more metallic, so it looks like it is a form of iridescence. Something I should research more, but this probably represents the extreme range of color possibilities in non-carotenoid coloration.
I believe the structure of birds scutes and scales is different enough from feathers, despite being developmental derivatives, that carotenoids can be used. Many non-neoavian birds have colorful foot scales that I assume are due to carotenoids. Bare skin and scales can have all kinds of colors-the carotenoid limitation in non-neoavian birds seems to only effect their use in feather,s not skin, scales, scutes, beaks, reticulae, etc., and even we simple mammals can use both carotenoids and structural color in our skin (just look at the colorful skin in some monkeys).
Hope this helps!
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks! I suppose this means that avoiding sparkleraptors is not a strict necessity for accurate paleoart, so long as they're not nocturnal. It's weird to think that feathers are actually harder to make brightly colored than scales, especially considering the paleoart meme of sparkly Archaeopteryx. (Sparchlaeopteryx?) So essentially, scales and skin could run the gamut of coloration, from melanin to carotenoids to structural coloration, but stem-bird feathers were limited to melanin and (possibly only rudimentary) structural coloration?Β
Again, thanks, this is very helpful.
π: 0 β©: 1
You've got it! Brightly colored skin and scales seems pretty common among tetrapods with good color vision, and this is via carotenoids, structural layering or both. Most mammals lose out, probably because most have relatively poor color vision (or so I usually hear). I think golden moles are the only non-bird to achieve structural coloration in integument other than advanced feathers, but I'm not sure about the mechanics of that example or if it's true iridescence.
π: 0 β©: 0
What's current consensus about the timing of feather evolution? I like the idea that they're basal to Avimetatarsalia, but are Pterosaurian pycnofibers homologous to feathers? I'm just a senior in high school so my knowledge may not be totally current, but this is a subject that has always interested me. Thanks !
π: 0 β©: 1
Nobody knows, really. It's possible pynofibres are feather homologues but nobody has been able to test this hypothesis yet. They're probably at least developmental homologues, but then again, croc scutes may be too (not that croc scutes evolved from feathers, but from the same dermal layer/buds). It may be that once this very plastic type of dermal structure evolved, many scute and feather-like things arose from it independently in lost of lineages, so we might expect most archosaurs to have some kind of mix of scutes, feathers, quills, and other weird dermal structures.
π: 0 β©: 1
Cool, thanks. Love your book, your art and your blog!
π: 0 β©: 1
Hello Mr. Martyniuk.
It's me again. Don't know if you'll actually reply to this question, but I needed to ask you. While reading your interview with Brandon Keim on Wired.com, I noticed that you're already working on a second edition of your marvellous book "A Field Guide to Mesozoic Birds". The question now is pretty obvious: is it true? If so, it would be amazing, a wish come true.
Hope I am not too annoying
Thank you for your time
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks for checking out the interview! It is true that a second edition is in the early planning stages. I'm trying to draw new illustrations for it as new species are described, a few of which appeared in the Wired article. However, it will be some time until enough new material is generated to justify an entirely new edition--probably 1-2 years!
π: 0 β©: 1
Hi Matt, thanks for your kind answer.
Well, it's still good to know that there will be a 2nd edition, and I can't wait to see what changes you have already planned. Hope to hear more about it in the near future.
π: 0 β©: 0
saw a ceratopsian of yours on tumblr and had to immediately "watch" your page so that I can browse through your fabulous work later.
π: 0 β©: 0
Hello
There is my first picture about Skeleton....What is your opinion about my art?
[link]
keyvan_1878@yahoo.com
Best regards, Amin Khaleghparast
π: 0 β©: 0
Just saw your ascent of bird drawing on Richard Dawkins' facebook page. Great work! Look forward to seeing more of your stuff
π: 0 β©: 0
Just got your book in the mail. Absolutly amazing.
Now all it needs is a companion book: A Field Guide to Cenozoic Birds
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks! I'd definitely love to do something small-scale with the birds of the Hornerstown and Green River formations one day...
π: 0 β©: 0
Hello, the names DinoBirdMan! I'm really love and very instrest about the feathered dinosaur art were you just work on. I will add you as a watch!
π: 0 β©: 0
| Next =>