|
Post by Blade-of-the-Moon on Dec 20, 2009 7:25:13 GMT
So is this sculptor basing the model on that image ? I would really prefer the one from Marshall's Spino on the killI painting...with the holes in the sail and all. I love all the spines and such..but it will hard to clean up I bet..heh heh
It's going to be 1/18..so how many inches we talking ?
|
|
|
Post by Radman on Dec 20, 2009 11:15:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 20, 2009 14:32:10 GMT
Well, the one in your sig, bucket... It's neat and all, but the snout is still slightly off by today's standards... I'm sure this is going to be expensive, so if I pay a bunch of $ for this I want every last detail to be correct ;0
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Dec 20, 2009 15:24:58 GMT
Cordylus - the snout may be VERY slightly off but that's being nitpicky. Yes, even for me It's still good.
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 20, 2009 15:54:11 GMT
As I said, if I pay a lot for something I want every last detail to be correct ;D
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 20, 2009 17:06:21 GMT
So is this sculptor basing the model on that image ? I would really prefer the one from Marshall's Spino on the killI painting...with the holes in the sail and all. I love all the spines and such..but it will hard to clean up I bet..heh heh It's going to be 1/18..so how many inches we talking ? No, its going to be 18 INCHES long, and in 1:35 scale. Hence it will be much cheaper than the 1:18 giants that go for around $300. I can't say how much it will cost as a kit because I haven't asked .. umm .. the sculptor about that yet. But it will be very affordable to those who see it as being 'worthy'. And it will be.
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 20, 2009 17:17:26 GMT
So is this sculptor basing the model on that image ? I would really prefer the one from Marshall's Spino on the killI painting...with the holes in the sail and all. I love all the spines and such..but it will hard to clean up I bet..heh heh Actually, there is no single image but a series that we looked at. In the final analysis the sculptor will make the decisions and the overriding factor will be anatomical accuracy. So while some elements of this particular painting may be incorporated, it will not be a carbon copy. I'll be posting more pics as we go along. He'll be doing some drawings - my input regarding the details was concerned mainly with the errors of other sculpts, like the size of the thumb claws, arrangement of the teeth - we DO have snouts of Spinosaurids that make it quite clear that there were quite HUMONGOUS teeth in the upper snout just ahead of the rosette, which is almost always missed by the sculptors. I mean, think Smilodon-like sabers, just not curved. As far as the sail goes, anatomical accuracy is critical - the sails could not have had holes in them (except perhaps from wounds) as they would have been covered by tendons and skin just in order to keep them secured. (They are too thin to support the 'hump' theory, in this paleo-artist's opinion). So there is no final design yet - except that accuracy will trump anything else. Scott Hartman's skeletal reconstruction - the best one done for a Spinosaurus - will be the guide. But variation within reasonable probability will be done as well where needed to enhance the artistic appearance. The pose will not be a running pose, but something even more awesome. (Think: "You want some of this? Come and get it!!")
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 20, 2009 17:26:19 GMT
Well, I'm not saying anything about your educated guessing ;D but to drop the kind of dough that Kinto is asking instead of waiting for this one would make you mad because you would then have to get both. And the Kinto Spinosaurs are FAR from accurate in many details, not the least of which are the jaws, if I recall.. Trcic made a rearing Spino (don't know if that's the one you're thinking of) the same size as the one we're making, but from the photos I've seen, its not REALLY a Spino because its too massive, and the arms are all wrong (ditto the missing extra-large thumb claw) The head is hard to properly critique as I've not been able to find a profile shot of it. Trcic is a great artist, but he's not a paleontologist who actually examines bones and is familiar with physical anatomy of living creatures to boot (relation of muscles, tendons to bones, how to 'read' the shape and size of the muscles based on size/location/shape of skeletal attachment points for those muscles, etc. Here is where I emphasize again the difference between paleo-artists and our paleo-artist who is also a paleontologist. You can debate who is your favorite artist, but NO ONE does more ACCURATE sculpts than our man. Period.
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 20, 2009 17:48:07 GMT
Just received an update from our sculptor, a portion of which is quoted below...I think it will make you guys very, VERY happy: QUOTE: "By the way, the feel that I am going for with this guy is that he is "the big, old, tough- as- nails, badass Spinosaurus that all of the younger spinosaurs keep their distance from". He controls the largest territory, and all others beware.... sort of like crocodiles do... The largest males control the largest sections of river, and they don't tolerate male intruders. The ladies are welcome, as long as they realize that he is boss. This Spinosaurus is that guy. Also, I want you to note how his head is turned a little to the side. I am following a Todd Marshall illustration marshalls-art.com/pages/ppaleo/largepaleo/largepg16/Spinosaurus.htm a little bit here. " Gang: note the words "TODD MARSHALL" in that quote. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Dec 20, 2009 17:56:07 GMT
So there is no final design yet - except that accuracy will trump anything else. Scott Hartman's skeletal reconstruction - the best one done for a Spinosaurus - will be the guide. Hang on - the same Scott Hartman you decried for drawing a thin-ankled Tyrannosaurus? Surely some mistake? Nah, just kidding. I'm really looking forward to seeing this. You're right about Spino having some really long (but straight!) teeth near the front of its jaws that are often missed.
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 20, 2009 18:03:14 GMT
So there is no final design yet - except that accuracy will trump anything else. Scott Hartman's skeletal reconstruction - the best one done for a Spinosaurus - will be the guide. Hang on - the same Scott Hartman you decried for drawing a thin-ankled Tyrannosaurus? Surely some mistake? Nah, just kidding. I'm really looking forward to seeing this. You're right about Spino having some really long (but straight!) teeth near the front of its jaws that are often missed. I derided his PAINTING which failed to take account for the MASSIVE tendons and ligaments + skin that enveloped the ankles to give them the requisite strenth. I have no problem with his skeletal reconstruction.
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 20, 2009 18:06:51 GMT
Look, I hate criticising great artists and Salas in one of my favorites for his sheer VOLUME of production. I have his Argentinosaurus. But his Spino is old school and teh head in particular has problems. With all due respect to Max, I do not think it will be in the same ballpark as the one we are creating.
|
|
|
Post by Blade-of-the-Moon on Dec 20, 2009 21:37:34 GMT
I will see how McVey's looks...I'm collecting the Dinosauria pieces as my main dino-focal-point right now. Sideshow's price for a maquette is about 199.00 and that's built, painted, along with a base. 18" is smaller than the Carnotaurus they produced..so I'm sure McVey's Spino will be quite large..but I DO love the feeling that your sculptor's words are conveying...following Marshall's work is a great idea, one I pray McVey shares, as it is my favorite interpretation of the animal. This image made into a statue or kit would suit me just fine : You can see the little holes between the spines in the sail sections.
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 22, 2009 3:00:17 GMT
Blade, that drawing makes it look a bit like a hedgehog, don't you think? Practically speaking, all those little spikes would make for a VERY breakable resin sculpt.
I know Marshall is pushing the envelope here, but to have that kind of detail and have it indestructible you would probably have to do a very large scale and use metal wires for the finer spikes.
Time and cost prohibitive, I am afraid....
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Dec 22, 2009 8:28:46 GMT
Of course, once again, I must point out we have next to no skeletal material for this animal. We are basing almost all of it on similar animals, and that leaves the interpretaion of "accurate" wide open. Your emphasis on claw size, for instance. Of course we know bary had oversized ones, and sizing it up to spino size is tempting, and I know the theory behind that. But, you cannot really say any figure or toy had them the wrong size, because we do not have any portion of a spino's hands. Or arms, shoulders, hips, legs, fee, tail, neck. head neck socket, most of the skull, most of the sail, or most of the ribs and abdomen. That is all gone. Sail shape is open to interpretation, cause we have never found all of it.
I feel, really, that when the thing has never been done accurately, it means just that they don't suit you particularly, but accurate is not a measure any figure will ever live up to until we find these missing pieces. Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 22, 2009 14:25:55 GMT
Kevin - You are partly mistaken. There are a lot more partial Spinosaur bones than you might think - a lot of it in private collections. The Italian find gave us the entire top jaw, for example.
And the existence of an allegedly 8-foot Spino skull in a private collection has practically been confirmed to me personally by Tom Holtz, who was invited to study the thing for an upcoming paper, and has examined it thoroughy (though he did not mention the size or completeness of the specimen.)
And our man knows many of the paleontologists who have actually examined this and other material.
P.S. Suchomimus ALSO has an enlarged thumb claw. This part to me is a non-brainer. The function of such a claw for a fish eater to spear 1000 pound fish we know existed in that ecosystem is obvious.
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Dec 22, 2009 14:29:42 GMT
have any of these pieces been photoed and documented? If not, then shame on the private collectors, for this is highly valuable and sorely needed documentation...I despise the practice of private collections, for the most part, and this is why.
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 22, 2009 14:55:02 GMT
have any of these pieces been photoed and documented? If not, then shame on the private collectors, for this is highly valuable and sorely needed documentation...I despise the practice of private collections, for the most part, and this is why. Tom Holtz is working on a paper (or whatever they call it) on one of these specimens that he was invited to study. Of course, til the paper is 'out' he could not share any details with me. Some have been photographed and some pics are available if you look hard in Google. But the most complete pieces like the one Tom was allowed to examine, no, not yet.
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 22, 2009 15:46:05 GMT
have any of these pieces been photoed and documented? If not, then shame on the private collectors, for this is highly valuable and sorely needed documentation...I despise the practice of private collections, for the most part, and this is why. Private collections aren't bad. But when you keep useful scientific information from, well, scientists who could really use that information, it certainly isn't a good thing …
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Dec 22, 2009 17:27:26 GMT
I'm not saying they shouldn't get to keep them, I just thinkl they should let the material be examined and documented. i don't see keeping it to themselves, like a secret, and I think it is sefish to do so.
|
|