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

Re: Notes on scientifically comparative paleoposes



In a message dated 3/18/11 6:57:18 AM, david.marjanovic@gmx.at writes:

<< The tree trunks around the *Omeisaurus* (p. 65, again after the first 
page of a chapter) are _all 
completely flat_, one of the poor animals has a head but all the rest of 
it is just brown color on the background (lit much too brightly), 
another had head and neck visible but the neck isn't shaded even though 
its front side is lit by the sun, the legs in caudal view are all 
completely flat, and the distance between the little ones and the bush 
in front of them is just impossible to judge. >>

The above comments are incorrect because the commentator did not send me a 
message asking for an explanation. The painting was based closely on a photo 
I took of the sun shining through conifers from behind. The trunks are of 
course flat in the photo because there is no differential shading from one 
side (likewise, a photograph taken when the sun is on the horizon, with the 
the sun directly behind the camera so that their are no shadows in the 
resulting image, everything from behind being fully lit by the sun, look 
strangely 
flat). The dinosaurs etc are the same. One reason I did the scene this why 
was for that peculiar flat look. I also did much the same in reverse with the 
resting pair of Yangchuanosaurus oil lit by the setting sun almost directly 
behind the viewer. 

And the sun is not "too" bright because that is exactly the way it was at 
the scene and is in the photo. 

G Paul
</HTML>