Gastornis

[crazycrowman]

"(And you're right, especially since it may not have been flesh ripping at all--some papers argue it was an herbivore!)"

I have heard that quite a few times, (even in that article), particularly about the OZ dromornithids, due to various features of the birds anatomy that didn't quite fit the "active predator" mold. I think there was even a TV program that had it on along with some other prehistoric Australian animals. I personally would be surprised if at least the OZ species were not at least omnivores, of not herbivores.

I think I am just going to go with dromornithid for as close to a generic name as I can get then.

I did find this though. Would calling dromornithids "Thunder birds" be appropriate ? (I know here in the USA, "Thunder bird" is often relegated to the world of "Indian symbols", fast cars and "cryptozoology"

www.amonline.net.au/birds/factsheets/thunder_birds.htm

[therizinosaurus]

No, Crazycrowman, don't bring the dreaded topic of cryptozoology up again!

[thagomizer]

Aug 28, 2008 2:04:09 GMT crazycrowman said:

"(And you're right, especially since it may not have been flesh ripping at all--some papers argue it was an herbivore!)"

I did find this though. Would calling dromornithids "Thunder birds" be appropriate ? (I know here in the USA, "Thunder bird" is often relegated to the world of "Indian symbols", fast cars and "cryptozoology"

www.amonline.net.au/birds/factsheets/thunder_birds.htm

I don't see why not, especially since Brontornis may be one!

[Tyrannax]

Has this thread went from discussing the bird I just drew to what to call them How about we meet in the middle and call them birds and continue with the pros and cons of my drawing!!!!!!!

Why don't we just call dromeasaurs birds while we are at it? I mean it is apparent they had feathers all over there body. So much that it made a mammoth look like the hairless Siamese cat from austin powers. I'm sure every one on the forums agrees with me....hahahaha... Just Kidding! Don't kill me ;D

[tomhet]

Guys, please don't derail threads anymore.

[crazycrowman]

"Has this thread went from discussing the bird I just drew to what to call them How about we meet in the middle and call them birds and continue with the pros and cons of my drawing!"

I would be glad if one of the images I produce would spark a conversation where people could learn about the subject of my work from it. But thats just me. I am sorry for derailing the thread, I did not see that to be the case, as we were discussing gastornis.

As for being critical of your work, as I suggested studying the details and structure of feathers of modern birds, especially those similar in form and related to the dromornithids, would be a great way to learn how feathers lay on an animals body and move with the animal. Its how I learned (and am always learning more) to illustrate feathers.

"Why don't we just call dromeasaurs birds while we are at it?"

I see that you said you were kidding, but that was actually discussed in a former thread about feathers. Who is a bird exactly depends on where camp you agree with on what line defines something as a bird. If I remember correctly, to some camps dromeasaurs ARE considered birds.

[tomhet]

Aug 28, 2008 7:05:19 GMT crazycrowman said:

I did not see that to be the case, as we were discussing gastornis.

tyrannax clearly felt that the thread had been derailed.

Besides, we discuss topics like this one in the 'Dinosaurs' section.

[crazycrowman]

Ok, sorry for derailing the topic then.

[Tyrannax]

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy when crazycrowman talks about birds because I find them interesting. He is actually making me think about whether I want to study birds as well as reptiles and paleontology. I just don't like the arguments that are sparked by disagreement. Thats when this thread does derail...

[crazycrowman]

"Don't get me wrong, I enjoy when crazycrowman talks about birds because I find them interesting. He is actually making me think about whether I want to study birds as well as reptiles and paleontology."

:-) *Twirls little banner* YAY :-) More power to the birds! They kind of go along with paleontology and reptiles anyway, as even for the folks who believes against the evidence that modern birds are not dinosaurs, that would still make them some sort of highly derived archosarian "reptile".

"I just don't like the arguments that are sparked by disagreement. Thats when this thread does derail..."

Sorry bout that! I did not feel Thag was being argumentative, and I am glad he corrected me, as I was using the incorrect term when I taught at schools, nature centers etc, and was spreading improper information by calling them all "Terror Birds". Now I will use "Thunder Birds" and "Terror Birds" instead. One can't learn and move forward if no one steps up to correct you when you are indeed incorrect. Granted, Tomhet is right, this would have probably been more appropriately discussed over on the dinosaur board rather then here under your artwork.

[therizinosaurus]

Sooooooooo...nice gastornis drawing

[crazycrowman]

Here are a couple photos of some birds that are modern dromornithid "relatives" as opposed to "terror bird" relatives. These are in the same order as the dromornithids. I figure combined with the seriama photos, you can use them as visual references to draw ideas from (I don't know about anyone else, but I commonly use colors/patterns of modern species to decide how to color/structure my paleo-art as well).


Magpie geese, the sole members of the family Anseranatidae.


The Crested Screamer, a member of the family Anhimidae.


And the Cape Barrens Goose...(I love these guys, and they are really cool birds to work with) These are generally lumped into the family Anatidae, but no one can really decide where this one belongs under that label.

Are these helpful/useful to you ?

[Tyrannax]

Very, especially he last one. It's anatomy matches that of gastornis almost. I actually found that drawing birds for a change is really fun and different.

[therizinosaurus]

Wow, those pics make me want to start drawing birds!

[thagomizer]

Regarding the drawing, which is pretty good overall, why the cracks in the beak? It almost looks like it bit a rock thinking it was a nut

Reminds me of Triceratops paintings (and the one in Jurassic Park) where the horns look all cracked and fragmented, exactly like the fossils. Which are rock. In life they'd be covered in keratin, with maybe a little wear and tear from combat. But bird beaks should be a bit smoother. Especially if it's a carnivore, and is just eating soft meat. But even parrots and toucans, which eat really hard food, don't have big cracks in their beaks, they just get a bit scratched up.

But that's just based on what I've seen, maybe crowman knows differently?

[Tyrannax]

I didn't know what to do to the beak to make it more realistic, so I thought cracks would make it look cool by having such a strong bite force to brake its own beak. hehehehehe I still think it's cool, but do realize that birds, all of them, have smooth beaks which don't "crack" under normal natural circumstances lol.

[crazycrowman]

"But bird beaks should be a bit smoother. Especially if it's a carnivore, and is just eating soft meat."

Hawks, Owls and Eagles are predator species and actually have rather weak bite pressure. Even the Seriamas bite pressure is not particularly strong. They don't need strong beaks, they use their feet and talons to do most of the killing, and then their beaks like knives to then butcher a carcass. Many birds like Herons and Egrets reply on a sharp point to spear prey.


Other birds that are predators but do not hunt with their feet, like Corvids, or Penguins or Gulls have rather strong bills, as they kill and butcher using primarily their beaks. It is for them kind of an all purpose tool. Many of them, like Corvids can and do use their feet to secure prey and fight, but not as a primary "weapon". You can see how smooth and sleek Brahms bill looks in this photo. All birds constantly whet their bills against perches and rocks to keep them clean smooth, and in shape. The also grind the beak together as well, sharpening the edges against each other. Most birds beaks have a smooth polished look because of these combined behaviors, though some species can look a good deal rougher then others.


Here you can see Matilda the Kookaburra and she also has a smooth bill, though, her bills has flaking edges like a horn, you can see the wear and the new material "growing in". She relies on strength of bill pressure to kill. He beak is not particularly sharp compared to many other species. This is typical of the "woodland" kingfisher species.

"But even parrots and toucans, which eat really hard food, don't have big cracks in their beaks, they just get a bit scratched up."


Toucans bills are actually not meant for eating hard food, and are actually quite weak and fragile. They are used more like a pair of giant tweezers. Hornbills have much stronger bills then Toucans. Here is a photo of Zazu, the Von Der Deckens Hornbill. (These are an omnivore, eating about 60% insects and small animals, and the rest fruits/ some nuts) Even though stronger then a toucans bite, the Hornbill beak is much sharper then it is strong. I call them flying steak knives. Zazu can slice up and dispatch his prey by beating it against a perch like the kingfishers do, or using his very strong neck muscles to pound it until it stops moving.


Macaws and Large parrots are the exception to the smooth bill look :-) They have thick and strong beaks that are always being intensely worked on hard objects. They chew very hard and the species that are the most heavy chewers beaks often appear to be in rough shape. My big Millifons Macaw, Crash, can even smush a steel parrot bell, and is constantly going gnawing through her perches and branches. You can see her beak is in a constant state of growth with the edge being ragged from whatever she has been chewing. She always has a sharp and strong inner edge to work against food though. Even though they have incredible power in these structures, they can also do very fine tasks with bill and tongue, and pick up tiny objects with care.


Some tortoises beaks look pretty "rough" as well - This is a close up of Sahara the Sulcata Tortoises beak, and you can see the edge is constantly being worn. This species also has a naturally serrated bill edge. (These are herbivores, but you don't want to get bit by one of these - you would loose whatever they get a hold of!) Sulcatas eat alot of tough food, and can snip through tree branches, cactus pads, carrots, and other similar foods with ease. I have always wondered if ceratopsid bills may have looked something like tortoise beaks.

Beaks are always constantly growing, and the animals that have them to constantly be keeping up with good bill "hygiene" as an overgrown or split beak can = death by starvation. This not only happens to birds but can happen to tortoises and turtles as well. :-)

[thagomizer]

I figured you'd have the scoop, thanks!

[Tyrannax]

Interesting...lets just pretend my bird had a bite force of about 20,000 lbs, like a T-rex lol ;D