Archives
As science research and my own knowledge and artistic ability have progressed, I've removed many drawings from this gallery. Rather than let them fester on a hard drive somehwere or in buried piles of sketchbooks, I thought I'd turn them into a public service by critiquing the inaccuracies in my own past drawings.
Family Oviraptoridae (Aves, Oviraptorosauria):
(Inaccurate drawings from August 2006. This was my attempt to illustrate the subtle differences between the skulls of various oviraptorids and see how they would translate into life appearance. Unfortunately, one thing I didn't think about much was the morphology of the beak. Thanks to some discussions on DinoForum and later reading Jansen's 2008 thesis on the topic, it's clear that the beaks in this attempt are wrong. While it's possible that they were as extensive as shown, incorporating much of the 'snout'and crest in addition to the usual jaw tips, they also would likely have been flush, upper and lower edges meeting smoothly, not overlapping. I also should have done a bteer job deliniating the beak from the adjoining soft tissue--right now, it looks like the beak encloses the corners of their mouths, rendering the jaw hingeless and unable to open.)
Scansoriopteryx heilmanni (Aves, Scansoriopterygidae):
(Inaccurate drawing from 23-Apr-2006. The issues surrounding this painting hinge both on inaccuracy and taxonomy. When I painted "Upon Branch", I was following a few online arguments that kept Scansoriopteryx and epidendrosaurus as seperate genera, this one being Epidendrosaurus. But I failed to separate out all the supposed differences between the two. It is now almsot universally recognized that these tow are the same animal, and with further research I convinced myself that the arguments I'd followed were flawed. I hedged my bets on the tail here (Epi's was long, while Scansor's was supposedly short), but the long retrices stemming from near the tail base are wrong any way you slice it--like many other early avialans, Scansoriopteryx appears to have had a long, bony tail tipped with a fan of feathers. Also, while the epi fossil didn't preserve and wing feathers, the Scansor one seems to have them. The skull is poorly preserved in both, but the discovery of close relative Epidexipteryx showed that I got this wrong: the skull should betall and box-like, with large forward-pointing teeth, not narrow-snouted and bird-like.)
Sinopterus youngi (Pterosauria, Tapejaridae):
(Inaccurate drawing from 1-June-2003. The main inaccuracy in this graphite Sinopterus illustration is the wing attachment. While the exact point of attachment is still controversial, almsot everyone agrees that it should be somewhere on the leg, rather than at the hip or torso. There's evidence that in azhdarchids, the wing was broad and attached at or near the ankle. Since tapejarids like this are pretty closely related to azhdarchids, in an updated Sinopterus drawing I would probably choose an ankle attachment and much broader wing chord.)
Nyctosaurus sp. (Pterosauria, Nyctosauridae):
(Inaccurate drawing from 6-May-2003. A drawing of one of the most outlandish looking pterosaurs fails to be outlandish enough. The colorful 'sail' I depicted stretching between the otherwise antler-like crests of Nyctosaurus was later found to have no basis in relaity. Many pterosaurs with huge bony projections on their skulls, specifically the tapejarids, tend to have large, sail-like, soft tissue extensions of weight-saving keratin. The transition point between bone and keratin is usually obvious, and not present in Nyctosaurus, so it almost certaily was bare antler all the way. Studies of potential 'wind-surf skimming' by these pterosaurs also showed that such a sail would do more to hinder feeding over open ocean than help, or at least add no benefit. Also, further specimens showed that the backward-pointing antler was almost as long as the vertical one, forming an unweildy-looking fork larger than the animals entire body. Pterosaurs are werid.)
Tupandactylus imperator (Pterosauria, Tapejaridae):
(Inaccurate drawing from 2003. Another giant-crested pterosaur, also with an inaccurate soft-tissue crest. This one is less egregious than Nyctosaurus, because here the bony spars did in fact support a large, light extension. However, like some other artists I mistook this for a skin-membrane sail, when it actually was made of keratinous, hardened fibers and blended seamlessly into the bone, with no taught, skin-like connection at the prong tips. Rather, the back of the crest was rounded like in the related Tapejara navigans.)
Alioramus remotus (Theropoda, Deinodontidae):
(Inaccurate drawing from 7-Feb-2003. A strange deinodontid, Alioramus remotus is known only from a partial skull, the top-front of which is missing. Many early reconstructions gave it a narrow, longirostrine snout. I decided to buck the trend and reconstruct it with a more boxy snout like those of its close relativesTyrannosaurus and Albertosaurus, with speculative lacrimal horns similar to those of Gorgosaurus sternbergi (the distinct spiky ridge running along the snout was always a known feature). However, later discoveries of the related species Alioramus altai proved the long-snouted versions correct, so this drawing was tossed in the bin. Another bit of speculation was the array of feather-like structures on the arm. While still within the realm of possibility for deinotonts, they almsot certainly would not have had this herring-bone pattern characteristic of the penneceous feathers of birds.)
Pterodactylus antiquus (Pterosauria, Pterodactylidae):
(Inaccurate drawing from May 2002. I went on a kick of trying to invoke butterflies in the wing patterns of my pterosaurs during 2002, resulting in animals that look like rejects from Through the Looking Glass. This illustration of a juvenile Pterodactylus antiquus (based on a specimen previously referred to as Pterodactylus micronyx) was intended to reflect then-new developments in the appearance of Pterodactylus, notably the shaggy 'mane' on the neck, keratin crest, and webbed feet. Sadly, in addition to the garish patterning a few other details here are wrong, such as the wing membrane attaching at the torso rather than the leg, the pointy wingtips, and even orientation of the eye (it wan't possible to rotate the eyeball independent of the head in these things, as in dinosaurs, as far as I know). If I were re-doing this today I'd also probably choose a more streamlined, aerodynamic form to the pycnofibre coat rather than conforming to the shape of the underlying musculature.)
