|
Post by Radman on Dec 15, 2009 23:59:45 GMT
Now ... THIS looks like the "REAL DEAL"!!!!!!!!!!!! This picture looks very cool - looks like a CGI pic stuck in a diorama with a painted background. Do you have more info on how it was greated?
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 16, 2009 1:44:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 16, 2009 1:56:23 GMT
SBELL:
Can you post a good (large) photo of the cast of Scotty's skull at the TRex Research Center for us?
The ones on the web are tiny. Also, how long is the skull? I agree that it looks much more compact and more nut-cracker-like than your usual TRex skull.
I hope that your hints turn out to be accurate regarding this perhaps being THE most powerful and massive Theropod yet discovered. Can't wait to see the skeleton!!!
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Dec 16, 2009 2:01:43 GMT
Looking at the below image the antorbital fenestra does look a lot shorter than on, say, AMNH 5027 and Sue. Really fascinating. Maybe this provides retrospective justification for the skull of the JP/Papo iteration! I get the impression this picture might be a little out of date though.
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Dec 16, 2009 2:23:29 GMT
Looking at the below image the antorbital fenestra does look a lot shorter than on, say, AMNH 5027 and Sue. Really fascinating. Maybe this provides retrospective justification for the skull of the JP/Papo iteration! I get the impression this picture might be a little out of date though. You can't trust that photo. The skull was cast before the brain case was found--as well as much of the nasal. Plus the various parts were not necessarily put together in the most accurate way. As for the skull vault--even with the adjustments, it almost is that high. The nasal area is still quite blocky (romanesque) although not quite so much. We know this because a half-cast of the right side was done in May: The man in the middle is the RSM paleo technician that did the casting--on the left is a volunteer, on the left is a term employee. As for the claims to size--this is based on Phil Currie's assessments--judging by the insanely massive femur, Scotty is huge (according to Phil, second only to the type of Giganotosaurus in mass) although she is neither taller nor longer.
|
|
|
Post by bucketfoot on Dec 16, 2009 2:34:37 GMT
Judging by the second photo, it looks a bit longer than the original cast, but just as robust.
4 or 4 1/2 feet long?
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Dec 16, 2009 2:36:00 GMT
Cheers sbell. The text in the article where I found that photo did say that, since they'd found more of the skull, it was longer than they'd imagined.
The cast being held in the photo above does make the skull look a bit lower, but it still looks pretty deep for Tyrannosaurus. And that supraoccipital crest looks huge (hope I've got the correct term there, I'm no anatomist!).
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Dec 16, 2009 3:01:22 GMT
Judging by the second photo, it looks a bit longer than the original cast, but just as robust. 4 or 4 1/2 feet long? I can't remember off hand--about an inch shy of Sue, whatever that is, I think.
|
|
|
Post by dinonikes on Dec 17, 2009 1:43:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sid on Dec 17, 2009 11:41:10 GMT
That CG Rex could not be the absolutely BEST CG Rex ever made (that's the JP one, sorry ;D), but it's surely the second best one to date... Really, really impressive And regarding Scotty, i wanted to ask if it's already known if it was a "he" or a "she"
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Dec 17, 2009 14:34:38 GMT
That CG Rex could not be the absolutely BEST CG Rex ever made (that's the JP one, sorry ;D), but it's surely the second best one to date... Really, really impressive And regarding Scotty, i wanted to ask if it's already known if it was a "he" or a "she" Scotty is probably a female.
|
|