[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Notes on scientifically comparative paleoposes
I was responding to what Jason wrote. He wrote the quote I cited below,
mentioning the "brilliant innovation", and later in the post wrote that
no one should copy Greg Paul. Presumably that includes the brilliant
On 3/18/2011 1:16 PM, GSP1954@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 3/18/11 11:24:18 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
<< Jason wrote
"My understanding of Mr. Paul’s process is that he draws elevations –
side views of the skeletons with the sagittal plane perfectly
perpendicular to the viewer’s line of sight - and sometimes dorsal views
and anterior views as well. The point of this is to eliminate the
distortions inherent in perspective drawing. Each bone is drawn to the
same scale, so the proportions can be compared and trusted.
His process is a brilliant innovation."
I agree that this is a lateral, dorsal, and cross-sectional illustration
technique is a quite important and useful addition to looking at and
representing skeletons. However, this was being done long before it was
dinosaurs, in architecture for example. Greg applied it to skeletal
reconstructions--- it did not leap fully formed, de novo, from his head (to be
I don't believe he ever claimed it did). As a result, I don't see how one
can ask others not to use that elevational approach. It is used universally
in many other fields as a standard way of presenting visual information.
No, no, no! Neither Jason or I are asking others not to use the basic
side-top-front-back blueprint system! Gosh golly. Pllleeeaassseee respond to
we are actually saying. I beg all of you.