|
Post by webdragon on Nov 20, 2008 4:36:54 GMT
I've been lucky enough to see some of Rader Studios' work in person, it's amazingly lifelike and organic, the models have a lot of character to them even when unpainted. Yay for good paleo sculpture!
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Nov 20, 2008 5:19:32 GMT
"I've never heard of this before. I have heard of Tyrannosaur skin impressions, but they only covered small areas. The skin is described as lightly pebbled and similar to that seen in mummified hadrosaurs."
Same here. 0-o If that is the case, it would be major news to me. I was aware of skin impressions that you mentioned, and they look more like crocodilian skin then anything else. I am not saying they didn't/couldn't have sported feathers, I know its suggested that they had feathers of some time at least at some stage of their lives. I am just not aware of any T rex specimen found with anything even resembling feather impressions...
Thag ? anyone who knows more about this, am I in the dark here ?
|
|
|
Post by tetonbabydoll on Nov 20, 2008 5:24:20 GMT
I'd have to check, but I'm not sure they are claiming it is a REX, just a tyrannosaur. By that criteria aren't Dilong and Guanlong primitive Tyrannosaurs. Perhaps the artist just made the leap based on those? I like the sculpts...the trike is cool. BUT, it is enough for me to just see the pic. It is what, 1'35 scale? Or bigger maybe. They hava a 1/35 Stego. And a Baryonyx...
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Nov 20, 2008 5:35:48 GMT
I am more then pretty sure that Dlong has been reclassed as NOT being a tyrannosauroid. Maybe the sculpt was made before that time.
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Nov 20, 2008 7:29:10 GMT
He's stretching the truth just a bit. I'll shed some light on this issue: It is extremely rare to find fossilized skin or other decomposable material on full grown Tyrannosaurs, or any animal for that matter, but some skeletons have been preserved with skin that appeared to be pebbly, which is common of other dinosaurs .An early tyrannosaur, Dilong paradoxus, which is was found in China, has been preserved with spur-like structures, possibly (And probably unlikely) the beginning of feathers. Some scientists think that young tyrannosaurs had feathers too, at least until they grew older and lost it all. The specimen, by the way, probably wasn't as closely related to Tyrannosaurus as most think. This is because Tyrannosaurus Rex was native to only North America. It was closer in relation with Tarbosaurus, which was found in China, Mongolia, etc. However, some scientists argue that they were both the same species and had access to both areas. From looking at their skulls, it looks to me that Tarbosaurus has many differences as far as the skull goes. If, you want to see the skulls, just look it up. ;D Any pics of Dilong's skull btw? Does this help..?
|
|
|
Post by tetonbabydoll on Nov 20, 2008 7:36:35 GMT
Nope,I already knew all that. On what basis did they reclassify Dilong, and when? See, there was a ton of hype when they found it and classified as a tyrannosaur, and a media frenzy about the feathers. But now that the feathers and even classification are in doubt, nothing. I;m just saying....
|
|
|
Post by Tyrannax on Nov 20, 2008 7:38:43 GMT
Nope,I already knew all that. On what basis did they reclassify Dilong, and when? See, there was a ton of hype when they found it and classified as a tyrannosaur, and a media frenzy about the feathers. But now that the feathers and even classification are in doubt, nothing. I;m just saying.... The feathers are in doubt, but the classification is stable. We are sure it's an early Tyrannosaur.
|
|
|
Post by Meso-Cenozoic on Nov 20, 2008 10:42:56 GMT
Cool! I've seen those sculps before. I especially like the Diplo! But, whew, little too pricey and big to store for me! I agree with Cordy though. I would love to see Papo do an ultra sized sauropod! Maybe a 3 foot Seismosaur. I bet they could price it for no more than $50. Maybe something like this...
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Nov 20, 2008 13:25:12 GMT
He's stretching the truth just a bit. I'll shed some light on this issue: It is extremely rare to find fossilized skin or other decomposable material on full grown Tyrannosaurs, or any animal for that matter, but some skeletons have been preserved with skin that appeared to be pebbly, which is common of other dinosaurs .An early tyrannosaur, Dilong paradoxus, which is was found in China, has been preserved with spur-like structures, possibly (And probably unlikely) the beginning of feathers. Some scientists think that young tyrannosaurs had feathers too, at least until they grew older and lost it all. The specimen, by the way, probably wasn't as closely related to Tyrannosaurus as most think. This is because Tyrannosaurus Rex was native to only North America. It was closer in relation with Tarbosaurus, which was found in China, Mongolia, etc. However, some scientists argue that they were both the same species and had access to both areas. From looking at their skulls, it looks to me that Tarbosaurus has many differences as far as the skull goes. If, you want to see the skulls, just look it up. ;D Any pics of Dilong's skull btw? Does this help..? I don't think anyone is claiming that Tarbosaurus bataar and Tyrannosaurus rex are the same species, but that they belong in the same genus (Tyrannosaurus). It seems to depend--for marketing, some touring companies like to use Tyrannosaurus; for toy collections and movies, Tarbosaurus (which is still considered valid anyway, last I heard).
|
|
|
Post by therizinosaurus on Nov 20, 2008 14:46:37 GMT
Was Guanlong a tyrannosaur? I thought it was originally described as one, but then the taxonomy changed.
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Nov 20, 2008 14:51:38 GMT
Was Guanlong a tyrannosaur? I thought it was originally described as one, but then the taxonomy changed. I think it is treated as a tyrannosaurOID, as opposed to tyrannosaurID proper--so it is a basal relative, but not actually a tyrannosaur.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Nov 20, 2008 16:58:15 GMT
"The feathers are in doubt," Uh...not that I ever heard aside from this lists "feather haters" "but the classification is stable. We are sure it's an early Tyrannosaur" I thought it was classed as something pre tyrannosaur, but that does not necessarily make it a tyrannosaur. I know its only Wiki, but I found this, putting it in a different grouping then the tyrannosaurids - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilong_(dinosaur)"Turner and colleagues, in 2007, reanalyzed the relationships of coelurosaurian dinosaurs, including Dilong, and found that it was not a tyrannosauroid. Rather, they placed Dilong two steps above the tyrannosauroids in their phylogeny; more advanced than Coelurus, but more primitive than the Compsognathidae. www.sciencemag.org/cgi/data/317/5843/1378/DC1/1?ck=nck
|
|
|
Post by bolesey on Nov 20, 2008 19:29:20 GMT
If that's the case, it's still entirely reasonable to speculate that Tyrannosaurs may have had some form of feather-like covering.
|
|
|
Post by Meso-Cenozoic on Nov 20, 2008 21:20:02 GMT
While I'm at it with the ultra giant Sauropod requests, I wouldn't mind a great full 1/40 scale Argentinasaurus! Love this painting (except for maybe the Linda Blair-like head turn!) with the pack of Giga's chasing it. Great size comparison!
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Nov 20, 2008 22:45:08 GMT
^ I bet that thing if it were made into a toy would be no less than $70. I mean, it's not like it is one of those "thin" sauropods, argentinasaurus looks pretty stocky. Imagine all the plastic that would go into a toy like that.
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Nov 21, 2008 0:35:28 GMT
"If that's the case, it's still entirely reasonable to speculate that Tyrannosaurs may have had some form of feather-like covering."
Oh, I agree, I just thought that I might have somehow missed a T rex found with feathers or something like that - I think I may have misinterpreted what was being said in the initial post.
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Nov 21, 2008 0:42:22 GMT
It seems like more hollow sauropod figures should be done. The Great Dinos line from Safari isn't what you'd call small, and they stay reasonably priced because they're not solid all the way through.
|
|
|
Post by tetonbabydoll on Nov 21, 2008 0:48:24 GMT
The Great Dinos Apatosaurus IS nice, but needs a little tweaking quality wise. And, with some of the larger Sauropods, making them in scale would still result in two foot plus figures. Along the size of my Brachio. That would still get expensive , and difficult for some of us to display, especially if there were more than one produced at that size.
Unfortunately, I think that is the only way for the big ones to be distinctive. Those little Japanese titanoaurs are nice, but there is nothing about them that tells them apart from apato etc. It is their shear SIZE that makes them stand out......
I do think it is time for Papo to try a sauropod.....
|
|
|
Post by bolesey on Nov 21, 2008 1:29:20 GMT
Oh, I agree, I just thought that I might have somehow missed a T rex found with feathers or something like that - I think I may have misinterpreted what was being said in the initial post. yeah I still don't know about that... He does specifically state T.rex skin impressions. Google hasn't turned up anything. One would think that if such a find existed, it would be major news.
|
|
|
Post by tetonbabydoll on Nov 21, 2008 1:31:12 GMT
:-/One would think...it is the type of story the news media would be all over. And Nat geo, and the Science chanel...
|
|