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


Darren Naish reports:   

            << Of interest to some will be Jenkins' criticism of 
Anton's artwork: he argues that they are sometimes 
anatomically innaccurate, do not make big animals look 
bulky enough and are often just wrong when it comes to 
skull shape etc. Anton's restorations of hyaenodontid 
_Hyainailouros_ and amphicyonid _Amphicyon giganteus_ 
are said to look like 'oversized woolly-coated Alsatian dogs 
and polecats!' (p. 89). He also writes 'This is not a trivial 
criticism, the so-called accurate reconstructions of 
'renowned artists' such as Greg Paul and Ely Kish (both 
dinosaurophiles) are anatomically risible: yet they hold a 
major position in the field of palaeoart and have done so for 
years' (p. 90). >>

       I've seen Anton's studies and he does very careful work. He has an 
thorough understanding of animal anatomy to which I can attest, having an old 
sabertooth painting of mine critiqued (read disembowled) by him. Some of 
Mauricio's plates in the new book are from paintings done many years ago now. 
He's come a long way since then and his pencil studies in the book are 
superb. Everyone's a critic, take it for what it's worth...not much. DV