Since I'm guessing that's a Tarbosaurus - due to the compact skull, robust body and two fingered hands - I'll say Nemegtosaurus or Opisthocoelicaudia.If that happens to be a Tyrannosaurus rex, then I say Alamosaurus.
:-|Okay. Back to the drawing board. LoL! Thanks for trying. :-)
Carcharodontosaurus and Paralatitan????
It's Alamosaurus and Bistahieversor.
Jobaria and Rugops.:-|Any tips about likeness very welcome... also about the plausibility of the proposed front leg swipe. I figure that prominent claw is good for more than... yeah, what is it good for?
I have a few objections here David:1) Jobaria did not live alongside Rugops. The notion that Jobaria lived in the Cretaceous turned out to be a mistake (one of Paul Sereno's many mistakes in the rush to make maximum PR out of every discovery...) Jobaria is actually an early Jurassic sauropod, which makes sense as it's so primitive. Whatever predators it did live with, Rugops wasn't one of them. Sorry but maybe this isn't the best sauropod to show knocking the snot out of a predator - it's still a bit mysterious which large predators it lived with.2) Rugops didn't have just 2 fingers on each hand. That's why Taylor and I guessed the predator in your pic was a tyrannosaur. Rugops had 4 fingers, and its arms were chubby and stuck out to the sides like little immovable buds, not down and forward like a T. rex's slimmer (but stronger) arms. Abelisaur arms and hands were downright immovable and useless.3. In all likelihood, Rugops and other abelisaurus did not have feathers or quills on their arms. They were some of the LEAST birdlike of theropods (though if feathers were a basal trait of all dinosaur lineages, as Tiyanulong appears to suggest, a partially feathered abelisaur may be possible). I still think it's very unlikely though, seeing as Tiyanulong had not much more than fuzzy down, whereas true feathers with shafts/quills are only present in coelurosaurs, which excludes more basal theropords like ceratosaurs/abelisaurs from having them.As for the Jobaria, they actually look pretty accurate. I'm gonna have to pass on the big wacky dewlaps, but fleshy structures are an artist's personal choice, so stick with it IF that's what you find realistic. The only real noticeable flaw with your Jobarias is that their arms are way too long. They were not brachiosaurs, they were basal eusauropods like Cetiosaurus or Barapasaurus - these guys all had shorter arms than hindlegs (as did camarasaurs, which some people used to believe was what Jobaria was.) I suggest making the arms shorter, but still not "diplodocid-short".
Thanks for the run-down!Won't be a surprise when I say I'm more illustrator than paleologist :-)Sounds like I should make 'em into Trex and Alamosaurus? Or Mike's Nemegtosaurus or Opisthocoelicaudia. (Will have to google up some papers.)(Not now, but when I have time to reapproach them.) I'm finding these speedpaints to be generating lots of things on my to-do list :-|
Post a Comment