[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: GSP's hadrosaurian reconstructions


    Some of us are slightly behind the times in some areas.  I read quite a
bit just to maintain expertise in my _own_ profession.  I had not seen the
'thick' necks on hadrosaurs until I read Greg's article as printed in the
DinoFest International symposium proceedings (from the 1996 DinoFest,
published for the 1998 DinoFest).  I did not see Stephen's paper.  I was
unaware of this _new_ reconstruction until now.

    I know that you have quite a large collection of references and papers
(based on discussions on-list).  Some of us do not have access to a lot of
papers, or extra funds for reprints.  (While I usually make a bit of money,
I also have some high expenses - including health problems with my mother
AND my mother-in-law).

    As I indicated in my previous post, I like the neck on SOME of the
hadrosaurs, but not on all of them (especially the longer-necked* ones).  [*
longer-necked in proportion to the rest of the body, versus the shorter
proportions].  What is your impression of this observation?

    I too hate it when an artist doesn't do his homework.  Most of my
friends who are paleo-life artists do their homework, and correct their
sculptures and paintings as needed. {Admittedly a short list of people - but
a list nonetheless}.

    Good luck, and don't get too frustrated.  Some of us appreciate good,
correct work.  I did subscribe to some of George's publications, so I have
seen many of your drawings, and I have seen some of your articles in
Prehistoric Times.

    Allan Edels

-----Original Message-----
From: tlford@ix.netcom.com <tlford@ix.netcom.com>
To: dinosaur@usc.edu <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Date: Monday, August 31, 1998 4:58 AM
Subject: Re: GSP's hadrosaurian reconstructions


>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.