HOME | DD
SpinoInWonderland β Cedarosaurus weiskopfae
#palaeo #macronarian #prehistoriccreature #cretaceousdinosaur #cedarosaurusweiskopfae #palaeoart #prehistoricanimal #prehistoriclife #prehistoriccreatures
Published: 2014-02-12 11:37:11 +0000 UTC; Views: 6508; Favourites: 95; Downloads: 35
Redirect to original
Description
Cedarosaurus weiskopfae - Not named after treesTemporal range: Early Cretaceous, Barremian, around ~125-130 Ma
Length: Est. around ~16 metres
Probable mass: Around ~11-13 tonnes?
Etymology: Weiskopf's reptile from the Cedar Mountain Formation
Cedarosaurus weiskopfae is a species of brachiosaurid sauropodomorph which lived in North America. It shows similarities with Brachiosaurus and the English brachiosaur Eucamerotus. It was named after the Cedar Mountain Formation, not the trees. It's species name is in honour of the late Carol Weiskopf, for her work in both the field and the laboratory. It was found with ~7 kilograms or ~2203 cubic centimetres of gastroliths, used to grind up food since saurischians can't chew.
It was featured in the documentary Dinosaur Revolution, where it defeated a pack of UtahraptorΒ to save a baby Cedarosaurus.
___________
Based on 's Cedarosaurus
___________
UPDATE(9/12/2015): Skin retextured and face redrawn. I also added an inflatable resonating chamber. The nostrils were moved forward in accordance with this diagram . Apparently the nares extended well beyond the nasal fenestrae, and since the nostrils would have been located in the front area of the nares, they were moved accordingly.
Previous version for comparison and contrast
UPDATE(9/21/2016): Softened shading
Previous version
UPDATE(3/20/2017): Completely remade using 's Cedarosaurus. It turned out that Scott Hartman's Cedarosaurus wasn't a Cedarosaurus at all, but was actually his Giraffatitan (which was basically a rehash of GSP's) with an Abyosaurus head.
Previous version based on ScottHartman 's reconstruction for comparison and contrast.
Related content
Comments: 16
Some art tips:
1: I'd change around that shading around things like the legs, it's hard to see where they flow into the body.
2: While I do like smooth animals I think this is a bit too smooth, I'd add some wrinkles around areas like the knee, armpit, base of the neck, thigh, footpads, around the throat, and behind the head. And I do spot those small wrinkles around the ear.
3: Upping the contrast in the shading can do wonders for the plasticity, I recommend darkening the shadows and adding some lighter areas where the light hits the creature most directly.
4: Reflected light is not to be ignored.
5: If you really want plasitcity I'd add some shadows on the ground.
π: 0 β©: 1
1: Eh?
2: Stylization and what can I say, I like my dinosaurs kinda smooth Β
3a: My past works from pre-March 2016 did have greater contrast, but I decided that the reduced contrast of my new shading technique looked better. My previous shading style made the belly dark to the point that even with white belly skin, it looked practically black
The color patterns is probably also drowning out some of the contrast, as it's a bit countershaded with a lot of dark areas and spots on it's back. Shading should be clearer in this WIP image taken before the colors and textures were added.
3b, 4 & 5: Well, the light source in my isolated life restorations is a bit abstract. As for shadows on the ground, well, this is an isolated drawing/painting without a background, so ground shadows are omitted along with the ground itself.
Thanks for the tips anyway.
π: 0 β©: 1
1: There's a line there but it's still rather hard to see unless you zoom in.
2: The lack of wrinkles works against it in my opinion
3:The coloration could be working against it yes.
3b, 4 & 5:Β As with the wrinkles I'dΒ say abstract lighting works against it.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
So it was cedarosaurus and utahraptors ? I thought those were deinonychus and brontomerus due to the kicking thingy.
π: 0 β©: 1
From pretty much every source I can find about it, it was Cedarosaurus and Utahraptors.
π: 0 β©: 0
Are you aware that Scott Hartman's Cedarosaurus is about 20% to big? For comparison, here is Paleo King's skeletal reconstruction for reference.
π: 0 β©: 1
I just measured, Scott Hartman's Cedarosaurus has a ~185-centimeter femur while it's femur is actually more like ~139.5 centimeters based on the Theropod Database (which, oddly, despite it's name, has sauropodomorphs now). About ~32.62% too large in linear dimensions.
theropoddatabase.com/Macronariβ¦
Usually I would rely more on Scott Hartman's skeletals rather than Nima's ones though.
π: 0 β©: 1
You're welcome. But why the slight distrust of Nima's skeletals?
π: 0 β©: 1
I just trust Scott Hartman's more.
π: 0 β©: 1
Hartman doesn't list specimen numbers on his skeletals or account for erosion or protrusions in most of them - so good luck guessing what's based on a single individual, what's composited, what's omitted (like some of the HMN SII material in his Giraffatitan), what's speculative, and what's smaller than it should be. He also hasn't done shaded rigorous skeletals in years. Carry on
π: 0 β©: 1
That was over a year ago, my views on yours vs his skeletal reconstructions has changed a lot since then, in part due to you bringing up some of his skeletals' deficiencies such as the ones you mentioned in that comment
π: 0 β©: 1
Haha I know, I'm just giving you shit.
π: 0 β©: 0
