[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: GSP's hadrosaurian reconstructions
Allan Edels wrote:
> Just a clarification of what I was questioning. I was NOT saying "How
> dare he put these silly-looking huge necks on the hadrosaurs" - I was asking
> 2 distinct questions (although I was imprecise in asking them) -
> 1) What precisely were the silhouettes of the hadrosaur necks
> supposed to represent - a flap of skin (as some artists have put on the back
> of _Parasaurolophus_'s head and neck), OR a 'withers'-type neck (as
> mentioned in Sam Girouard's post)?
> 2) What were these ideas based on?
> I have had answers to both these questions: 1) a 'withers' type neck and
> 2) based on fossilized skin impressions (including nuchal ligaments).
No, I can see just how uninformed the list is. Greg isn't the one to put
the 'thick' necks on hadrosaurs, it's Stephen Czerkas.
Czerkas, Stephen, 1993. Frills and goosenecks. Abstracts of Papers,
Fifty-Third Annual Meeting, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, New
Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science, Albuquerque, New Mexico,
October 13-16, 1993. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, Volume 13,
Supplement to Number 3: 32A.
And Greg just ran with it. Which is fine. He puts spikey, Iguana things
on sauropod necks, which is fine, agian due to Stephen.
George posted that Ken 'corrected' Stephens reconstruction of
Stegosaurus plates and spines. I was tell George about horizontal tail
spikes before Ken came out with the 'real' thing. Thankfully, science
proved me right.
As far as reconstructions are concerned. If I do a wrong one, I will do
it again, and again until I get it right. Which Is why I write for
Prehistoric Times on How to draw Dinosaurs (for free I might add).
I hate it when artist will copy other's works and not do the research.
Go to libraries, go to museums, etc. Just because it's easier, dosen't
mean it's right.
For example, Euparkeria skull that everyone uses is wrong! It does have
a downturned snout, so does Ceratosaurus (Greg gets these right and
wouldn't you know it, no one copies those). Triceratops Flabellatus that
EVERYONE uses (Paleontologist and laymen alike) (Marsh's line drawing or
the really nice plate) is TOTALLY WRONG!!! Lull wrote a short paper in
1934 (a year after his 1933 monograph) and corrected this and no one
uses it!!! THat is why I had George specifically use both the wrong and
right line drawing in his Gakken Mook Ceratopain article and I put it in
my PT article. Does anyone use the right drawing? NO!!!
Its frustrating, but it needs to be done.