| Lythro's Typical Crap | |
|
|
Author | Message |
---|
Lythronax Veteran
Posts : 33 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2016-06-09 Location : Scotland
| Subject: Lythro's Typical Crap Mon Jun 20, 2016 4:59 pm | |
| Guess who's back? WIP - Definitive Tyrannosaurus rex for early 2016 | |
|
| |
SmugTheFab Dilophosaurus
Posts : 375 Reputation : 15 Join date : 2016-06-09 Location : In my den, rubbing my hands together and laughing maniacally.
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Mon Jun 20, 2016 7:05 pm | |
| Kool m9. Seriously tho, great work, man. _______________ Are you interested in a text-based Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom roleplay centered on Isla Nublar? Vote here!- Open, says smug:
Good job.
| |
|
| |
TheRexMan22 Veteran
Posts : 668 Reputation : 22 Join date : 2016-06-08 Location : Canada
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Tue Jun 21, 2016 1:30 am | |
| Just so much stunnig detail. Woulda' look at that leg! _______________ Have nothing to do with the deeds of darkness [color=#33ccff] | |
|
| |
Lythronax Veteran
Posts : 33 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2016-06-09 Location : Scotland
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Mon Aug 01, 2016 8:45 pm | |
| | |
|
| |
Spiegel Stegosaurus
Posts : 463 Reputation : 29 Join date : 2012-03-30 Location : Waverly, NY
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Mon Aug 01, 2016 8:49 pm | |
| You call this crap? haha I wish I had this sort of talent. Awesome work! _______________ Jurassic Role Play: Live The Legend Redux
| |
|
| |
Lythronax Veteran
Posts : 33 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2016-06-09 Location : Scotland
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Fri Jun 23, 2017 7:43 pm | |
| | |
|
| |
Rhedosaurus Veteran
Posts : 4959 Reputation : 140 Join date : 2016-06-08 Location : Armada, Michigan
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:09 pm | |
| - Lythronax wrote:
You are very talented for somebody so young. Needs to be slimmed down in the checks a bit, but other then that, it's an excellent piece of art. _______________ The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.
If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton
If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
| |
|
| |
Lythronax Veteran
Posts : 33 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2016-06-09 Location : Scotland
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Thu Sep 28, 2017 7:18 pm | |
| | |
|
| |
Rhedosaurus Veteran
Posts : 4959 Reputation : 140 Join date : 2016-06-08 Location : Armada, Michigan
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Thu Sep 28, 2017 7:31 pm | |
| _______________ The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.
If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton
If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
| |
|
| |
TheRexMan22 Veteran
Posts : 668 Reputation : 22 Join date : 2016-06-08 Location : Canada
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Sat Sep 30, 2017 9:59 pm | |
| - Rhedosaurus wrote:
- Lythronax wrote:
You are very talented for somebody so young. Needs to be slimmed down in the checks a bit, but other then that, it's an excellent piece of art. Lythro's alive woooooo Those drawings look amazing dude! Great job!! _______________ Have nothing to do with the deeds of darkness [color=#33ccff] | |
|
| |
Lythronax Veteran
Posts : 33 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2016-06-09 Location : Scotland
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:42 am | |
| Thank you all for the kind words! | |
|
| |
Lythronax Veteran
Posts : 33 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2016-06-09 Location : Scotland
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:43 am | |
| - Rhedosaurus wrote:
The T. rexes are really good. The second one needs some more muscles on it's legs, but that could be just the angle. As for the Spino, the head looks too much like a pelican. I guess it's me getting too used the 'new' Spinosaurus (2014-today) being more like a crocodile/gharial then anything else. The second one is actually T. bataar | |
|
| |
Rhedosaurus Veteran
Posts : 4959 Reputation : 140 Join date : 2016-06-08 Location : Armada, Michigan
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:26 pm | |
| - Lythronax wrote:
- Rhedosaurus wrote:
The T. rexes are really good. The second one needs some more muscles on it's legs, but that could be just the angle. As for the Spino, the head looks too much like a pelican. I guess it's me getting too used the 'new' Spinosaurus (2014-today) being more like a crocodile/gharial then anything else. The second one is actually T. bataar Oh, OK. It's just pretty hard to tell them apart. _______________ The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.
If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton
If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
| |
|
| |
TheRexMan22 Veteran
Posts : 668 Reputation : 22 Join date : 2016-06-08 Location : Canada
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:12 pm | |
| - Lythronax wrote:
- Thank you all for the kind words!
My spirit animal. _______________ Have nothing to do with the deeds of darkness [color=#33ccff] | |
|
| |
Lythronax Veteran
Posts : 33 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2016-06-09 Location : Scotland
| |
| |
Rhedosaurus Veteran
Posts : 4959 Reputation : 140 Join date : 2016-06-08 Location : Armada, Michigan
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Tue Oct 17, 2017 5:25 pm | |
| - Lythronax wrote:
Tyrannosaurus zhuchengensis AKA Zhuchengtyrannus. It's a well drawn piece, but again, as with that one other piece, it needs it's other leg to be drawn to make it more balanced. It just looks like it's standing on one leg. And don't we need far more fossil evidence to consider if Zhuchengtyrannus is a species of Tyrannosaurus? Call me old fashioned, but I always thought that we needed more evidence to make a determination. It's just that I've noticed that paleontology as a science go more into speculation and straying less and less toward hard evidence. Yes, I know that it has been dependent on speculation more then most other sciences, but even so, it's just that I'm seeing less and less stuff based on hard evidence and more and more flashy speculation presented as 'facts' in the past few years. _______________ The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.
If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton
If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
| |
|
| |
Lythronax Veteran
Posts : 33 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2016-06-09 Location : Scotland
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Tue Oct 17, 2017 6:59 pm | |
| - Rhedosaurus wrote:
- Lythronax wrote:
Tyrannosaurus zhuchengensis AKA Zhuchengtyrannus.
It's a well drawn piece, but again, as with that one other piece, it needs it's other leg to be drawn to make it more balanced. It just looks like it's standing on one leg.
And don't we need far more fossil evidence to consider if Zhuchengtyrannus is a species of Tyrannosaurus? Call me old fashioned, but I always thought that we needed more evidence to make a determination. It's just that I've noticed that paleontology as a science go more into speculation and straying less and less toward hard evidence. Yes, I know that it has been dependent on speculation more then most other sciences, but even so, it's just that I'm seeing less and less stuff based on hard evidence and more and more flashy speculation presented as 'facts' in the past few years. Ostensibly the family Tyrannosaurinae is made up of several genera which really have no reason to exist. For example, " Zhuchengtyrannus", although displaying one or two less derived features than " Tarbosaurus", is extremely similar in all respects with the material we have. It lived in the same place, and slightly earlier. Now, a genus cannot derive itself into another directly, but species can. I've proposed for a while now that taxonomy of prehistoric animals needs to modernise itself, as palaeontologists have enormous egos and like to name anything and everything as completely new things when with modern animals, they'd likely be under the same genus. Literally what I'm suggesting is that " Zhuchengtyrannus" & " Tarbosaurus" are within the genus Tyrannosaurus and directly speciated into the next more derived form as time went by, i.e T. zhuchengensis > T. bataar >(Bering Strait land bridge) > Tyrannosaurus rex gracillis > Tyrannosaurus rex robustus. Aside from skull morphology, there is very, very little different aside from the next species on being slightly more derived than the last. | |
|
| |
Rhedosaurus Veteran
Posts : 4959 Reputation : 140 Join date : 2016-06-08 Location : Armada, Michigan
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap Tue Oct 17, 2017 7:27 pm | |
| - Lythronax wrote:
- Rhedosaurus wrote:
- Lythronax wrote:
Tyrannosaurus zhuchengensis AKA Zhuchengtyrannus.
It's a well drawn piece, but again, as with that one other piece, it needs it's other leg to be drawn to make it more balanced. It just looks like it's standing on one leg.
And don't we need far more fossil evidence to consider if Zhuchengtyrannus is a species of Tyrannosaurus? Call me old fashioned, but I always thought that we needed more evidence to make a determination. It's just that I've noticed that paleontology as a science go more into speculation and straying less and less toward hard evidence. Yes, I know that it has been dependent on speculation more then most other sciences, but even so, it's just that I'm seeing less and less stuff based on hard evidence and more and more flashy speculation presented as 'facts' in the past few years. Ostensibly the family Tyrannosaurinae is made up of several genera which really have no reason to exist. For example, "Zhuchengtyrannus", although displaying one or two less derived features than "Tarbosaurus", is extremely similar in all respects with the material we have. It lived in the same place, and slightly earlier. Now, a genus cannot derive itself into another directly, but species can. I've proposed for a while now that taxonomy of prehistoric animals needs to modernise itself, as palaeontologists have enormous egos and like to name anything and everything as completely new things when with modern animals, they'd likely be under the same genus.
Literally what I'm suggesting is that "Zhuchengtyrannus" & "Tarbosaurus" are within the genus Tyrannosaurus and directly speciated into the next more derived form as time went by, i.e T. zhuchengensis > T. bataar >(Bering Strait land bridge) > Tyrannosaurus rex gracillis > Tyrannosaurus rex robustus. Aside from skull morphology, there is very, very little different aside from the next species on being slightly more derived than the last. I've heard that Tarbosaurus is considered a species of Tyrannosaurus by some, but I never heard about Zhuchengtyrannus being one, too. Again, with so few remains of it found, I think we should wait until more remains of it are found. It just reminds me of Horner's theory of Torosaurus being the full grown form of Triceratops, or at least those of males and how it's largely discredited by most people in part due to the lack of Torosaurus remains compared to the overwhelming amount of Triceratops fossils. _______________ The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.
If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton
If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
| |
|
| |
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: Lythro's Typical Crap | |
| |
|
| |
| Lythro's Typical Crap | |
|