cross-posted from: lemmy.world/post/27837871
Artist Depiction
Submitted 1 year ago by FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/bb66c3ea-6a52-4069-8d71-ba73fffc0e4a.jpeg
Comments
lugal@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
SanndyTheManndy@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Phat lizards
Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Jurathicc park.
protist@mander.xyz 1 year ago
Geodad@lemm.ee 1 year ago
T-rex was probably a chonky feathered birb.
qyron@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
Great-great-great-great-great-grandmother chicken.
And most probably females would be bigger than males and hold territories.
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
the irony of it all is that t-rex specifically seems to have been naked, and i mean naked as in it literally just had a bunch of regular skin like a plucked bird.
JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 1 year ago
I think the same thing whenever I watch my hens go out hunting.
Shou@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Kissable.
fnrir@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
Smash. Next question.
Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 1 year ago
And feathers… and feathered wings on its tiny arms…
Gladaed@feddit.org 1 year ago
Hippos are pretty metal though.
tetris11@lemmy.ml 1 year ago
Skeletor is the archetypical Man, and I will fight you on this.
Zentron@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Nyahahahahahah
polysexualstick@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You would love “All Yesterdays” (en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Yesterdays)
infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
Scrolled down to make sure someone had mentioned this! Fantastic and professional spotlight on the potential follies and pitfalls of paleontological art. And if you want to do some Lovecraft-level psychic damage to yourself, the same artist from that book has a “speculative evolution” sci fi art book called All Tomorrows in which they envision the multifarious biological forms that humans are forcibly evolved into in the future by a malicious alien race.
Draconic_NEO@mander.xyz 1 year ago
I think that many of the people who do depictions of prehistoric creatures lack imagination so they do the bare minimum they possibly could to “imagine” the skeleton as a living creature. Imagination is absolutely required to get a good depiction of them that looks lifelike and not creepy and unrealistic.
emeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
I mean if i had never seen a hippo before i would argue that the artists depiction looks more realistic than the actual hippo does. Theyre freaky cartoonish looking things that don’t really loon like any other animals, certainly not one of the most dangerous animals in existence.
frezik@midwest.social 1 year ago
Any which way they go with it would be a guess based on limited information. They’re most likely going to be wrong, and if they were exactly right, we wouldn’t know it.
FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
Honestly they should probably do like 2-3 potential pictures side by side so readers are aware of the uncertainty.
Draconic_NEO@mander.xyz 1 year ago
Of course it’ll be wrong, my point is to try making it look more like a living thing than a living skeleton. When comparing skin wrapped designs to living creatures (even mythical ones) they just look wrong. Most creatures don’t look shrink wrapped. Really imagining what prehistoric animals is more art than science, you use science to try and know roughly what they looked like but that’ll only get you so far, you need to use imagination or creativity.
I mean we can create depictions of mythical animals that have never lived and will never live, why not use some of that skill to try and depict prehistoric creatures in a way that’s more life-like, because the shrink wrap technique isn’t more accurate, it’s lazy, not believable, and also aesthetically unappealing.
Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
The artist’s impression would more accurately convey the danger of hippos though.
Quill7513@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
i was gonna say. that’s who a hippo is even if that’s not what a hippo is