HOME | DD
jconway β Diplodocus longus
by-nc-nd
Published: 2007-05-13 17:25:39 +0000 UTC; Views: 17568; Favourites: 261; Downloads: 269
Redirect to original
Description
Yay, meta-palaeontography.When I was about fourteen or fifteen, I went to an exhibition called "The Great Russian Dinosaurs" at the Australian Museum in Sydney. Fresh-faced from my readings of Bakker, I was excited, and looking for a fight with all the stuffy orthodoxy I read so much about. Luckily, I found myself outraged at once at the mounting of the skeletons. Hadrosaurs rearing high! Ribs not properly swept back! I was spluttering with the kind of smugness that only a teenage fanatic can have, and decided that something must be said. So, I bailed up one of the palaeontologists travelling with the exhibition, and confronted him about one of the most heinous of crimes against the Light of the Dinosaur Renaissance : an ankylosaur with semi-sprawling front legs.
With a supercilious smile I enquire politely as to why he had mounted the creature in such a way. He smiled and said "Real animals move -- they change position sometimes". How was I supposed to fight with that? All my trackway data, my shoulder anatomy arguments, rendered moot by an evasive side-step. So, I thought, I suspect this man is an idiot; and I know just how to test him: asked him if he thought Velociraptor had feathers. "Maybe" he said, without a trace of sarcasm. Foiled! I stalked of to visualise the most feathers, erectest gaits, hottest blood, and fastest running dinosaurs I could from those evil mounts.
What's the point of all this you ask? Well...
My betrayal of the dinosaur renaissance. Guess what teenage John, sauropods were scaley and spikey. Sometimes they dragged their tails on the ground. And maybe they weren't always standing on their back legs to feed or fend off an Allosaurus running at a gazillion miles an hour.
Related content
Comments: 87
Incredible artwork! LOVE IT. Check out this one:Β www.les-dinosaures.fr/Dinos/diβ¦
π: 0 β©: 0
www.mathematical.com/dinoexpo.β¦ looks pretty 90s
π: 0 β©: 0
I'm pretty sure sauropods didn't have those spikes. maybe that isn't your intention
π: 0 β©: 1
They did.
plesiosauria.com/pdf/Czerkas_sβ¦
π: 0 β©: 1
That paper is very old. 1992 was the Dinosaur Renaissance, which had many inaccurate views pop culture's stupid nostalgia holds. New studies show that the spikes were a misrepresentation.
π: 0 β©: 2
New studies show the specimens with the spines belonged to another taxon notΒ "misrepresentation", we can still speculate about their presence in other diplodocids.
π: 1 β©: 1
Well, Mark Witton references it in one of his 2015 posts, and he's both a paleontologist and a sauropod fan, so I'd think they still hold unless you have those new studies at hand.
π: 0 β©: 1
Unfortunately, I only heard about it. I can't find a study that shows otherwise. But the spines are very unnessacary anyway.
π: 0 β©: 1
Eh, as long as they're not proven to be inaccurate, they're necessary. It's like not putting claws on a T.rex's foot.
π: 0 β©: 0
Would say the same as "Tomozaurus" (sorry, but... yes) But... well...
"Because animals move" is the most common argument.
But... yeah... Of course a sauropod could have layed downΒ its tail, when resting, if it wanted to. Animals always like to do ridiculous stuff, right (You know it...)? Β
π: 0 β©: 0
"dude" yes I am a writer..cant type worth shit ,punctuation is off but thats what editors are for home-boy...
π: 0 β©: 1
Editors will sometimes tell a writer who can't (won't) punctuate properly to take a hike, unless you're friends with one or have pics of them in coitus with a donkey.
Why not learn some basics? Not learning basic punctuation and claiming to be a writer is like claiming to be a NASCAR racer and not knowing how to steer your car.
I remember quite well reviewing stories on another site. Some writers seemed to feel (flat out said so) that punctuation and spelling were of no importance. Frankly, that attitude is appalling. Here were good to excellent stories that I had to trudge through simply to get the meaning of what they had written. It was like eating eating good food served in a bowl made of cow dung.
Have some care for your craft. If you care so little for punctuation and spacing and such, I will not read past the first few paragraphs. If you are unable to handle those aspects, get someone to edit it for you BEFORE submission, whether here or for a serious publisher.
You certainly look like you're talented as a graphic artist; nice work!--so giving the writing aspect some work should come naturally.
And thank you for your kind words about paleoartists. I think paleoart and its creators are awesome too!
π: 0 β©: 1
that is why we have EDITORS!!!AND I AM NOT A GRAPHIC ARTIST I WRITE PALEOFICTION.THAT IS WHY SPIELBERG FIRED THE WHOLE WRITEING STAFF IS THEY WERE SO CAUGHT UP IN PICKING IT APART,THEY WERENT GETTING ANYWHERE WITH CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT.WHAT YOU HAVE READ IS CALLED AN UN-EDITED "DRAFT".SO FAR I AM STILL WRITING ON STAFF AND WE ARE LOOKING INTO A 2ND SEASON.SO I MUST BE GETTING SOMETHING RIGHT MY FRIEND.ALOHA,PEACE/OUT
π: 0 β©: 1
I'll make sense out of what you said some time.
π: 0 β©: 1
no need-sometimes the best thing to do is have a coke and a smile and shut the f--- up-! we live in a world where so many people got nothing better to do than pick other apart.me ;I dont have that problem,I lift others up,bolster the self esteem,and watch them go!the finest paleoartists IN THE WORLD illustrate my books for me and FOX has allready called me back for more!?! may not live up to your idea of what writers should be like but then again;who are you?all I did was give you the good word ,so why dont you just step off?I will be over here,you over there and as we say here on the Island of Kauaii,"ALOHA and mind you own culiana!
π: 0 β©: 1
Who are these finest paleoartists? Anyone I know? And if you can't take the critique, stay away from the heat.
And remember this--if it looks like crap, tastes like crap, smells like crap, and IS crap, it's still crap, no matter HOW many dung beetles eat it. Crap does have its place in the world; in the world of writing and art--as something to point to and say, "This is crap, this over here is good." We need examples both good and bad. Where do you fall in?
π: 0 β©: 1
you are pathetic..as far as "anyone you know" goes ;I doubt it,way out of your league and as far as if I can take the heat little boy? anything your faggity little self has;other than sitting over there taking cheap shots at others when nobody knows you and nobody cares.as far as who I am? that would be 1ST LIEUTENANT KENNEY E. SILLS/OF THE 2ND AIRBORNE RANGERS,U.S.ARMY. not that it matters...
π: 0 β©: 1
You definitely have problems, but that last sentence is right on the money.
π: 0 β©: 1
just fade away little boy...you are nobody at all~
π: 0 β©: 0
WELL,i AM A PALEOFICTION WRITER,SO I LOVE MY PALEOARTISTS!!! THEY GIVE US THE DREAM TO SEE AND i TRY AND GIVE THE LIFE TO IT ALL IN MY STORYLINES.SO I AM VERY PLEASED TO MEET YOU MY FRIEND---KENNEY
π: 0 β©: 1
Dude, you're a writer? Is all your writing in all caps with misused punctuation?
π: 0 β©: 1
sure "dude",I am a writer!cant type worth shit ,punctuation is off but thats what editors are for...when I write all in caps to the paleoartists its because I like the work and I want to kick out some respect for the awsum work I see ...!..I was a 1stLtntU.S.ARMY(173AirborneRangers-BadToltz,Germany)and as I am in my first year writeing paleofiction I was lucky enough to have some executive level friends working for a publishing firm who assure me I will do well.but its been my experience to get good people in my corner ,and the paleoartists to me is where it all starts,so you will see me get wound up when I see some killer work!!!---treating people right takes me a long way..
π: 0 β©: 1
Okay, look, sorry for the snark. But if you're going to label yourself as a writer, I think you'd be taken a lot more seriously if you took more care over your writing. Punctuation and clarity matterβthey are your main tools.
Being lazy with it is like a visual artist not being able to draw. Sure, in some cases you can get away with it, but it sure as shit don't help.
π: 0 β©: 1
are you supposed to be somebody?I got editors and it sure isnt you.I am packing as I write this because my agent is moveing me to the islands in 2 weeks so I cant be that bad I guess..?hey I am just over here treating people GOOD because I dont forget where I come from.you one of the writers from the set?sorry you all got fired;but we are only getting 12 episodes to start with and we are happy to have it..got a better idea,;take another look at your self before you go correcting on people and make sure your shit is 100% before you go trying to put me in check~see ya
π: 0 β©: 1
Hey, whatever man, sorry for being rude.
π: 0 β©: 0
Don't know if I like more the art or the text...Congrats for both!
π: 0 β©: 0
I had a similar experience as you; when I was 13, I went on a trip to Toronto with my school. One of the things we did during the week was to see the Royal Ontario Museum. At this point, the dinosaur exhibit didn't have a lot of mounts, let alone accurate ones... they did have a very nice T. rex though. Anyway, as we walked along, the tour guide kept mixing up with what were saurishians and what were ornithischians. It drove me bonkers! So I stepped out of the crowd, and corrected her. Everyone looked at me. She then went on to say that "this what they say in the books." WHAT BOOKS HAVE YOU BEEN READING!!! After a somewhat... "heated" debate, we made a bet; if I was right, she'd eat her shorts. Her words, not mine.
π: 0 β©: 0
I love the muted colors, and of course, the story that goes along with it.
π: 0 β©: 0
I love the MOOD in this painting. Very nice indeed. Great colors.
MJB
π: 0 β©: 0
Darn, somebody said it before me...this looks very Charles R. Knight. Amazing stuff.
π: 0 β©: 0
Jesus I cannot get over your talent. I love how you carefully compose and consider your drawings to give the clearest emotion. Like how this one is peaceful, and subtle. The long canvas, the muted earthy colors, and even though there's a clear focal point, nothing stands out too much to give us the sense of silence and safeness. Um sorry, some of these words.. don't even really explain what I truly mean, but I did my best. I've never come across art like yours on DA. It's a real treasure. :]
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank god I read that! I was about to rip your face off for making such a beautiful piece lacking the (supposed) accuracy!
π: 0 β©: 0
Retro paleo! Woot! Vive la counter-revolution! Long live Linneaus!
Seriously, very cool. Chas Knight-ish with updated anatomy.
π: 0 β©: 0
Well, normally I would say this is a stunning piece of paleoart, but see....there's a glaring error. Diplodocus had blood hotter than a quark-gluon plasma (in fact, it had a fusion-powered metabolism). As such, it moved primarily at relativistic speeds. This sauropod should be severely length-contracted. I suppose I can suspend disbelief and add it to my faves, despite my better judgement. At least you gave it reduced dorsal stabilizer fins.
π: 0 β©: 0
I just read some of the previous comments, and ignoring the trifling issue about the tail being broken/disarticulated, you are right that the tail is not necessary to lift up the neck. Mamenchisaurs and brachiosaurs have exceptionally long necks and puny (by sauropod standards) tails, and appear no more likely to tip. The neck (which had an exceedingly low specific gravity) weighs only a small fraction of the body, and could have been lifted off the ground even if the tail were amputated (albeit perhaps with greater muscular exertion).
π: 0 β©: 0
I find your caption is at least as interesting as the painting. Both very good.
π: 0 β©: 0
First, let me concur with Squidy53 that Rhoda is a sweetheart, and I'm sure she'd love to see this homage (if you haven't already sent it). Now on to my opinion...
There's a lot good to be said of this painting; the atmosphere is fantastic (and does feel very classic late-Knightish), the animals are doing animalish things (rather than tearing around at top speed being uber-cool), and I am particularily jealous of the lush, impressionistic landscape you rendered (notice how in my artless attempts I generally leave the folliage woefully absent).
But there are some problems anatomicaly. No bunring at the satke, but I assume you mean for these to be anatomically accurate renditions, if perhaps ones that attempt to present a very counter-current visual image than most post-Dino Ren images. While admirable, there are a few problems that exceed what the evidence allows (in the event that you did not intend the image to fall within known anatomical boundaries, please ignore the following comments and bask in the artistic glory that is rightfully yours for producing such a aesthetically pleasing image):
1) The tail. This is the biggest one; while undoubtedly the tail could (and at least occasionally probably did) contact the ground, it probably could not do so at such a proximal location. The zygopophyses of the proximal tail are quite small and the condyle/cotyle articulations are very broad, which would have yielded limited mobility in the the first 15 or so caudals (with mobility gradually increasing from caudal 10 to 20). This was studied quantitatively by Myhrvold & Currie in 1997, who came to the same conclusions. The result is that even in maximum ventraflexion (which was probably not a terribly relaxing posture) you can't get the tail to contact the ground until around caudal 25 or a hair later (depending on assumptions about minimal zygopophyseal overlap), which is almost halfway down the tail. The occasionaly tail drag mark seen in trackways (and they are statistically insignificant, although they do occur) are very lightly impressed and usually show significant motion; as such they are probably better interpretted as the limp whip-lash postion of the tail dragging on the ground during locomotion.
2) The spikey things on the back: I've spoken at length with Kirby Sieber about these (he dug up the specimens in question) and the ones in your illustration easliy exceed their maximum size (by almost 100%). Also, there is no evidence that they are midline structures, and given their locations within the quarry it looks like they are better envisioned as keratinous structures along much of the dorsal surface (of course, there may have been a midline row as well). While still very reptillian in appearance, it would likely have been more reminiscent of crocs than iguanas. The midline-spike idea was largely invented by the initial reporters (Czerkas), who has previously shown favoritism to midline dermal-feature hypotheses. And other scal impressions not yet published from the same quarry show that the rest of the skin still had tiny little scales that would not have been visible from any kind of distance that would allow one to fit a whole sauropod into a scene.
Not that you could have known thew dermal stuff, so I thought I'd share post hoc. Keep up the good work!
π: 0 β©: 3
Would these structures have lain flat on the body rather than being erect spike-like structures?
π: 0 β©: 1
That's not how they seem to be preserved, but I suppose it's not impossible. Or perhaps at an angle, sort of like non-bony versions of what we see in titanosaurs?
π: 0 β©: 1
So does that mean that diplodocids may have had a bit of a "hedgehog"-like appearance?
π: 0 β©: 1
I thought I probably was pushing it with the tail -- not too worried, because I intended to sacrifice a little accuracy for effect. (Or maybe it's tail's broken!)
The dermal stuff is interesting. I don't think anything too accurate can be done in that respect until it's published (I've never seen a picture!). Though in my defence I would say that variation among species must have occurred with respect to spine/scute size. Is it still thought that duckbills had a row of midline scutes? And Ceratosaurus? Ah, dinosaurs, too much to up with.
π: 0 β©: 1
That's cool, I take no umbrage with people who sacrifice accuracy for artistic purpose...as long as they do it intentionally. And it works here, which is the important thing.
I hope the dermal stuff will be published soon, but I wouldn't hold my breath. You are certainly right about size variation amongst species, although in this case the dermal impression in fact comes from Diplodocus (although I don't know which species atm).
Ceratosaurus is still thought to have midline osteoderms, more or less like the spikey ridge that so many toy manufacturers have portrayed. Hadrosaurs do seem to have rows of non-bony scutes, and while there is a bit of variation in size and shape to them, they seem to maintain a one scute per neural spine rule, and there are no Greg Paulish frills known like he drew for Parasaurolophus (but then, there aren't dermal impression known yet Para.).
Skin impression wise, there is a lot of variation in the small details of individual scales (overall shape, micro-ornamentation, variation in size on an individual), but while several dinosaurs have larger scales for ornamentation (e.g. Carnotaurus, ceratopsians, corythosaur undersides) I have yet to see any dinosaur with "pavement scales" larger than a few mm. My sample is hardly all inclusive, but does include Carnotaurus, Allosaurus, a stegosaur, several hadrosaurs, a ceratopsian, and Psittacosaurus.
Anyways, keep up the good paleontographic work!
π: 0 β©: 0
BTW, it really is a fantastic illustration, I was just trying to provide some anatomical commentary. If you find my post too obnoxious, feel free to hide it.
π: 0 β©: 0
| Next =>