arvalis's avatar

Some Cool Dinosaurs

By arvalis
3K Favourites
Here's a quickie done as break from commissions. My three favorite theropods drawn from memory. T-rex is my favorite animal in general though, and red is my favorite color; so that's how that happened.

PhotoshopCS5: 5 hours
Dinosaur Concepts©RJ Palmer
Image size
6824x1454px 3.46 MB
anonymous's avatar
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Kieraeopteryx's avatar
Why is the spinosaurus running on its hind legs?
arvalis's avatar
arvalisProfessional Digital Artist
This was done in 2012 and the short leg spinosaurus paper came out in 2014. Although I dont think a quadruped locomotion was possible for spinosaurus. 
Kieraeopteryx's avatar
Well its been proven to be true that spinyboi walk on all fours cause spinyboi was front heavy and some guy gave some paleontologists some spinosaurus back legs which were short for a 50ft dino !
arvalis's avatar
arvalisProfessional Digital Artist
It has not been proven at all. There is a lot of controversy over the 2014 paper. 
Kieraeopteryx's avatar
Are you sure ? (Cause I'm not but in think it would be more likely in my opinion)
Silerenth's avatar
SilerenthHobbyist Traditional Artist
(Maybe just let the artist be?)
Toostig's avatar
wasn't spinosaurus body very elongated?
its torso was barrel shaped and abnormally long which i don't see back in this drawing.
your dinosaurus are wrong made a video about spinosaurus explaining its torso was quite wide but not deep like tyrannosaurs which it does have in this drawing.
you can also see that back in Franoys drawings of spinosaurus.
but with my knowledge, the torso is inaccurate and should be way longer but not as deep or as broad as t.rex.
arvalis's avatar
arvalisProfessional Digital Artist
This is a very old and inaccurate drawing.
lord-of-teeth's avatar
lord-of-teethHobbyist Artist
Jedi-master-Dragon's avatar
Jedi-master-DragonProfessional Digital Artist
Unfortunately, that is not what spinosaurs looked like.  I don't know when you drew this but they are much more quadrupedal.  Also the T-rex should have feathers.  Still pretty good looking.
CanisLunticus's avatar
CanisLunticusStudent General Artist
Let people draw dinosaurs the way they want to? c.c 
Jedi-master-Dragon's avatar
Jedi-master-DragonProfessional Digital Artist
Why is that a question?
arvalis's avatar
arvalisProfessional Digital Artist
I drew that five years ago. Yes T. rex should be feathered, but no, spinosaurus definitely should not be quadrupedal.
Jedi-master-Dragon's avatar
Jedi-master-DragonProfessional Digital Artist
Science says otherwise.
arvalis's avatar
arvalisProfessional Digital Artist
No, it doesnt. Almost every other paleontologist that looked at the paper and remains says the quadruped thing is BS. It would break its wrists, theropod forelimbs, especially spinosaurus ones arent design to handle that weight.
ObeyM's avatar
It's unlikely that spinosaurus walked on all 4's, but the hind limbs have been reduced, making spinosaurus shorter in reality.
arvalis's avatar
arvalisProfessional Digital Artist
Jedi-master-Dragon's avatar
Jedi-master-DragonProfessional Digital Artist
Well that's not what I heard.  I'm not a paleontologist so I might be wrong.
LeonPitigala66's avatar
It was true but was latter disproven. Read this blog post by Scott Hartman for more info…
Jedi-master-Dragon's avatar
Jedi-master-DragonProfessional Digital Artist
Ok.  Seems legit, I guess.
Blomman87's avatar
Yes you are wrong. And filament should be the word.  It is a actual decline in the Taxa somewhere at Xianguanlong the (reversal to ancestral integument).    There is zero evidence in the fossil record of anything preserved.  

Bell et call abstract made a little side note " if"  they would have filaments ( later more advanced Tyrannosaurinis )  
Wich was qouted here "if they have it should be on the dorsum" and every "qoute on qoute" experts " over here at  DA jumped on the bandwagon.   

The basal Yutyrannus Huali have some filaments from the branch Proceratosauridae over 60 million years earlier in a different geogoloical time and formation, sidenot to this is that even in the publication is not sure what kind of structure they see.  

This is the problem with D.A and general with people that likes dinosaurs and such a iconic genera as the Tyrannosaurs they tend to see something and hear something from secondary sources or even worse and they latch on and "refuse to look further into the subject and read the publications that is written in the litterature  

Nore do the majority like 98% of the people understand phylogeneticbracket - Taxanomy -  and what evidence it at hands and science dont base anything on theories. To make the matter worse is that some peoplegoes so far that they use reference from some of the top experts in the field as some sort of shield even if they never did any scientific publication or proved hypothetis to prove anything they "might think is possible" Even the best in the field do have to produce hypothetis to debunk otherwise is just personal thinking.

The most noticed excuses for the stupid word "feather"  wich in right terminology is filament are mainly this:

1. Taphonomy :  in order to deduct that variable you would have to determine a range of temperatures for the rivers that actually buried tyrannosaurs and test enough to cover that range reasonably well. Not to mention other factors like the range of thickness for tyrannosaurid skin, sizes, stage of decomposition they each were when they started rolling, how such large animals managed to roll with such long legs, the size of the river, the amount of silt in the river, the speed of the water, and the presence or absence of scavengers (just off the top of my head). It would take several years of work just to bring this idea up to the level of ordered speculation,

2. Coexisting filaments using modern avian birds as reference: Modern bird do not resemble the integument in what we see in non avian dinosaurs from the genera Tyrannosaurs ( the picture is unclear what exactly we see in Y-Huali we don't know because the evo devo hasn't been done on them yet. And in that case can't call them feathers because they don't match the morphology, developmental processes, or other correlates known for accommodating feathers in avian birds. Sure filament can coexist but like i stated above the reversal from a more complex structure is published and sometimes evolution goes from more complex to less and Scales is just as much as integument "feathers"  and from every single impression preserved we dont se any filament structure nore do we see anything that resembles a follicle.

So to the null hypothetis is valid and T.Rex and its relatives is scaly the rest is either speculations or wishful thinking wich science dont care about.

If someone wants to debunk it he or she 
has something to dispute, he needs to go through the same basic requirements as all the original publications did if she/he intends to dispute it

So what Thomas Carr established the null hypothetis and Bell et al published is still valid.
So when for example trey the explainer produced both his integuments video he manage to stir the pot with wishful thinking because nothing he said was not only personal theories it was not scientific validated. using theories based on plausabilities.

Then again paleoartist or enthusiast can paint whatever they like to, but to be scientific accurate (up to date) the filaments should be excluded in the late Tyrannosaurinis.
View all replies
MarArta's avatar
Dinosaurs are  really beautiful and photogenic creatures hihi
JurassicFire's avatar
Finally the humans are actually running
MirianB's avatar
I love the Trex. 

It's like god sat back and said "Hey.. Hey look what I've made. He will be one of the greatest predators the world will ever know. See, I've given him huge teeth, and massive jaws. I've also pissed him off.. Ask me how I've pissed him off. Well I'll tell you... I've given him tiny arms." And then god sits back snickering to himself.
anonymous's avatar
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In