cross-posted from: lemmy.world/post/27837871
Artist Depiction
Submitted 1 week 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 week ago
SanndyTheManndy@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Phat lizards
Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Jurathicc park.
protist@mander.xyz 1 week ago
Geodad@lemm.ee 1 week ago
T-rex was probably a chonky feathered birb.
qyron@sopuli.xyz 1 week 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 week 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 week ago
I think the same thing whenever I watch my hens go out hunting.
Shou@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Kissable.
fnrir@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 week ago
Smash. Next question.
Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 1 week ago
And feathers… and feathered wings on its tiny arms…
Gladaed@feddit.org 1 week ago
Hippos are pretty metal though.
tetris11@lemmy.ml 1 week ago
Skeletor is the archetypical Man, and I will fight you on this.
Zentron@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Nyahahahahahah
polysexualstick@lemmy.world 1 week ago
You would love “All Yesterdays” (en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Yesterdays)
infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 1 week 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 week 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 week 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 week 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 week 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 week 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 week ago
The artist’s impression would more accurately convey the danger of hippos though.
Quill7513@slrpnk.net 1 week ago
i was gonna say. that’s who a hippo is even if that’s not what a hippo is