Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
Stan 'n Sue comparison by ScottHartman Stan 'n Sue comparison by ScottHartman
With Stan and Sue now overhauled, I decided it was time to dust off the idea of comparing T. rex specimens. Eventually I'll update all of them (and add some new ones in), but for the next month or two this will have to suffice. Thanks to better scaling I can corroborate the femoral length of both specimens as published in Hutchinson et al's 2011 paper on computational analysis of tyrannosaur limb and body dimensions, as well as the overall length of FMNH PR2081 (Sue).

On the other hand I am unable to replicate the length estimate they provide for BHI 3033 (Stan). Stan's skeletal, as restored here, has a length of 11.28 meters, half a meter shorter than the 11.78 of the scanned mount. The discrepancy seems to stem from how long the reconstructed distal caudals are in the mount, as well as some very odd spacing in the scan (i.e. the mount) between the neck and skull. Otherwise the individual elements match up quite well between the scan and my reconstruction (which is good, because scan data rarely suffers from scaling errors).
Add a Comment:
 
:iconrhysdylan01:
RhysDylan01 Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2018  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
What length have you restored FMNH PR 2081’s skull here? I know restorations of the uncrushed skull vary from 144 to 152 cm. 
Reply
:iconjouletrix:
jouletrix Featured By Owner Jul 2, 2018  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
is stan a sub adult? just curious
Reply
:iconmetal-lark:
Metal-Lark Featured By Owner Aug 24, 2017
I've seen comparisons of the two skulls. Do you know why Stan appears to have longer teeth than Sue?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Aug 26, 2017  Professional Digital Artist
You mean the cast? The Stan cast has many of the teeth slipped out of the socket with large amounts of the root exposed, making the teeth look bigger than they really are.
Reply
:iconmetal-lark:
Metal-Lark Featured By Owner Aug 27, 2017
oh okay! that's what i was meaning, i've seen side by sides and Stan's teeth looked so gigantic compared to Sue's

thank you for explaining
Reply
:iconasuma17:
Asuma17 Featured By Owner Edited Aug 19, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
Mmm I don't know I starting to sense a misconcept about Stan's height.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2016
Stan is 3.3-3.4 meters tall at the hips on the image.
Reply
:iconasuma17:
Asuma17 Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
Stan is still taller from what I've looked at.  If somebody were to remeasure all the T.rex skeletons then you'll see whole a different ball game.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2016
on this image Sue is slightly taller than Stan. Scott measured the individual bones so we can be sure its right.
Reply
:iconasuma17:
Asuma17 Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
Well when I go to Black Hills and I measure the original Stan skeleton along the Sue and the 18 yr old Thomas...we'll surely see.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2016
your going to measure the mounts?
Reply
:iconasuma17:
Asuma17 Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
I'm going by the measurements without the mounts. I did a measurement of Fran the Acrocanthosaurus awhile back and it stands at least over 4ft even with the spine. However the Acrocanthosaurus from the Texas Museum approximately stands around over 8.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2016
were are your measurements coming from?

Don`t trust the museums size figures, unless you have no other choice.
Museums have a bad habit of lying..
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconsekley:
Sekley Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2016
What he's saying is not to trust mounts. Scott Hartman and other paleontologists stress that most mounts aren't accurate or even articulated true to the anatomy. Like you'll find Camptosaurus with a head too small, Tyrannosaurus with oversized sacrum, etc. He even mentioned less than 5% of mounts get the arms and legs properly put together.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Edited Aug 8, 2016  Student Digital Artist
Hi Scott, I've measured your Stan both in photoshop and in GIMP and it resulted in a 11.3 meters animal. Why do you have it at 10.9 in the image? Is it a mistake? 
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2016
it was a typo, the actual lenght is 11.28 meters
Reply
:icontheropod1:
theropod1 Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2015  Student Traditional Artist
How come the description sais it’s 11.28m long, while on the image itself it reads "10.9m" for stan?
It seems that the measurement given in the description is the correct one, as that corresponds closely to the what can be measured in the comparison (and I think my measurement is pretty accurate, using the same technique I’m getting a correct 12.3m length for sue, measured along the vertebral collumn, and I also got a correct femur length for stan).

Someone is referring to it further down this page, but I don’t speak Spanish and google translate didn’t give me any answers either.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2015  Professional Digital Artist
Oh jeez. Sorry, I think 10.9 was the old text (before I updated it). Stan is about a meter shorter than Sue, as you've measured yourself.
Reply
:icontheropod1:
theropod1 Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2015  Student Traditional Artist
Thanks for the clarification :)
Reply
:iconarchanubis:
Archanubis Featured By Owner Jun 29, 2015
So, is Sue bigger than Stan due to being different genders, or just because Sue is an older T. rex?  I've heard both explanations for Sue's larger size.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 30, 2015  Professional Digital Artist
Sue is older - quite literally the oldest T. rex known (~29 years at time of death). Whether they were different genders, and if so whether that would matter for their relative size isn't known at this time, despite lots of claims to the contrary on the interwebs.
Reply
:iconarchanubis:
Archanubis Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2016
Also didn't realize Sue has part of her neck missing.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2016  Professional Digital Artist
Yeah - given the continuity of it I think that was probably the part that was exposed and eroding out of the hill when Sue Hendricks found it.
Reply
:icondanilodino:
danilodino Featured By Owner May 1, 2015
ScottHartman   Dudas Tengo Unas. ¿Cuánto mide el cráneo del T-rex "Stan"? Y la Imagen Estima El Largo Stan en 10,9 Metros y en LA DESCRIPCION 11,28 metros. 
                          Para aclarar mis dudas about Stan
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner May 4, 2015  Professional Digital Artist
No tengo las medidas prácticas en este momento, pero yo medí un elenco de Stan varias veces para este esquelético, por lo que no debería estar fuera por más de un centímetro o más en cualquier dimensión . El cráneo de Stan es muy grande en relación con el cuerpo ( y sobre todo el cuello) , pero la serie preseacral es realmente completo , así que no tengo ninguna razón para dudar de las proporciones , inusual aunque parecen .
Reply
:icontheomnivore:
TheOmnivore Featured By Owner Dec 22, 2013
There need to be more mounted T. rexes in Europe.

The only one in my general area is the one at Senckenberg, and that one has very oddly mounted forelimbs.
Reply
:iconspinozillarex:
SpinozillaRex Featured By Owner Oct 1, 2013
i've been thinking about the difference in between t.rex skulls and i've come to ask, are there any t.rex skulls that match sue's? or is sue the only one found with a broad skull (in comparison to stan's and other tyrannosaurids)?
Reply
:iconhetaliadenmark:
HetaliaDenmark Featured By Owner Aug 3, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
Wow, I didn't think stan was missing that much.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Aug 4, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
Yeah - of course the whole thing is always restored for mounts (no one wants to buy a partial mount) and the specimen hasn't otherwise been described in detail, so it's not easy to figure out which parts are real at first glance (luckily BHI has kept good records here).
Reply
:iconaaronpirates:
aaronpirates Featured By Owner Jul 22, 2013
sue will kick his ass
Reply
:iconblade-of-the-moon:
Blade-of-the-Moon Featured By Owner Jun 3, 2013  Professional Traditional Artist
Alright thanks bud. Mine was looking like it had a pretty long snout compared with skull images I was finding else where online like the one I posted and I was starting to wonder if that was more correct or not. I've spent way too much time with Jurassic Park as my ideal image of a T-Rex I think. ;)
Reply
:iconblade-of-the-moon:
Blade-of-the-Moon Featured By Owner Jun 2, 2013  Professional Traditional Artist
I'm working on a 1:1 Rex head ( hopefully for a future full body piece ) and I've been using your newer " Stan " model for it. I was comparing yours with this image : [link]

I've been told this is a very good model to work from, but is it my imagination or does your updated Stan have a longer skull shape now ? Particularly in the snout ?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Jun 3, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
My skull is based on a 3D scan dataset that was reconstructed to take out some of the distortion that individual bones had the in back half of Stan's skull. The photo you link is also pretty good (it's a more recent generation Stan skull - older casts had more distortion in them), but you can still see that the quadratojugal is too low (look at the gap between it and the squamosal!) which means the jugal is still somewhat distorted (and the photo suffers from parallax, which is a common problem when working from public photos of dinosaur bones).

So yes, the skull on my most recent construction is a little lower, but the reasons for it are evident in that photo you linked, plus the photo itself is making the discrepancy look a bit worse than it really is.
Reply
:iconspinozillarex:
SpinozillaRex Featured By Owner Mar 28, 2013
what are the specimen names for these fossils of the bigger T.rex's? or at least whats their length/hight?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 29, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
They don't have names, we're talking about fragmentary remains here.
Reply
:iconspinozillarex:
SpinozillaRex Featured By Owner Mar 29, 2013
Oh sorry :P, didn't know that, my mistake.
Reply
:iconpaleo-reptiles:
Paleo-reptiles Featured By Owner Mar 26, 2013
Five T.rex by scott Hartman:
[link]
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 26, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
Yes, you've sleuthed down my older version but alas they are somewhat out of date.
Reply
:iconsomnium-23:
Somnium-23 Featured By Owner Mar 25, 2013
Is it true that only three complete Tyrannosaur skulls have ever been found?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 25, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
Off hand - There's the AMNH skull, Sue, and Stan are very complete. But it sort of depends on whether you're insisting on 100% completeness. There's a decent chunk of MOR 555's skull, and Peck's Rex also preserves substantial skull portions. The subadult Duffy specimen has a skull that is 70%. And of course if you assume that Jane is a juvenile T. rex (and you probably should) almost all of its skull is preserved (along with the Nanotyrannus type skull, if you want to throw it in).

So there are really a lot of skulls that are complete or have substantial portions known, but it's true that pristine complete skulls are rare - heck, even Stan has some skull bones tweaked, and Sue of course had a skull that was crushed something awful, despite the completeness.

Alas, that's the sort of thing that happens when you leave all the bodies outside for 65 million years :-/
Reply
:icontheropod1:
theropod1 Featured By Owner Mar 23, 2013  Student Traditional Artist
That looks absolutely great!
Is is just my eyes or is the skull shape also different?
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 23, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
The skull is a bit different - nothing dramatic, but an update none-the-less.
Reply
:iconirkenarmada1:
Irkenarmada1 Featured By Owner Mar 23, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
This is awesome. It's clear that Sue would wear the pants (or the dinosaur analogue) in any of her relationships. :P
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 23, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
Assuming it's really a "her".
Reply
:icongrumpytyrantrum:
GrumpyTyrantrum Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2014  Student
True, we can't really assume any of the T.Rex's genders.
Reply
:iconkronosaurus82:
Kronosaurus82 Featured By Owner Mar 23, 2013  Professional Artist
Astounding job as usual mr Hartman. :)

I as a "mesozoic enthusiast" comic drawer – back when I was working on my dinosaur books – did my own modest study about theropod size, scaling them according to published skull lengths and comparing them each other. And I was very surprised noticing how much the total lengths I found were smaller than the published ones, even considering my probable errors. I checked my results also scaling your skeletals (which were one of my most important benchmarks back then :) ) and I had almost the same differences in length.
So I asked myself why published total lengths are so different from the "actual" ones (at least the ones there were on my sources back then).
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 23, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
I think there is a natural tendency to use the largest available length and mass estimate in popular books (we're talking about dinosaurs here!), and then when those estimates appear in multiple places people start to accept them as independent verification.
Reply
:iconkronosaurus82:
Kronosaurus82 Featured By Owner Mar 27, 2013  Professional Artist
I actually used size data published on scientific articles and websites (such as Dinodata and Theropod Database). :)
I just saw you made a comparison between your newest Sue and Giganotosaurus and it gave quite surprising results for me! Giga had way longer legs (and a way shorter skull also) than I thought! Maybe an old "theory" I read on a book years ago it's true: someone said that large theropod genus had comparable size, and thus 12/13 meters were actually their maximum size or so... ^_^
Reply
:iconbensen-daniel:
bensen-daniel Featured By Owner Mar 23, 2013
One of the things that surprised me about the Sue mount in the Field Museum was how long and low it is, with short legs like a giant corgi.
Reply
:iconscotthartman:
ScottHartman Featured By Owner Mar 23, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
Part of that is the way they posed the mount (in particular one ankle is too flexed relative to the knee - ouch!), but your overall impression was spot on.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×
150 Purchase Purchased Download Purchase Soon
1.8 MB ZIP File. Includes JPG
Stan 'n Sue comparison.jpg
2.1 MB
Add Your Rating! Thanks for Rating! Change Your Rating




Details

Submitted on
March 22, 2013
Image Size
2.2 MB
Resolution
6000×4134
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
15,405
Favourites
170 (who?)
Comments
139