Rebor Deinosuchus hatcheri 'Meta' w/ Appalachiosaurus montgomeriensis prey

[suspsy]

@REBOR_STUDIO, did you even bother to look at either Witton's article or the paper above? Honest question. I ask this because neither the dwarf caiman nor the American alligator have osteoderms similar to Deinosuchus'. I know this for a fact because I've handled live specimens of both. Not to mention that Deinosuchus is far removed from the alligatorid family just as Yutyrannus is far removed from tyrannosaurids. Check Figure 28 of this study.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02724634.2020.1767638#

Precisely. Why base the osteoderms on an extant caiman when we have plenty of information on Deinosuchus's osteoderms? It's not like we don't know the size, shape and orientation of them. And I don't see how Cuvier's dwarf caimans being supposedly "primitive" compared to extant species has any bearing on Deinosuchus's osteoderms when the latter is an entirely separate lineage.

Cus we still need to figure out how soft tissues may change the appearance of the animal? It quite necessary to find what we call "universal rules" of all crocodilian species so that we can make educated guesses for our own reconstruction.

Soft tissue doesn't radically alter the shape of osteoderms on modern crocodyliformes, so why would any prehistoric species be an exception? This is special pleading just like with the claws. At best you could argue that the precise arrangement of the osteoderms is still open to debate, but the unique shape and size  of Deinosuchus' is known for a fact. You've now been presented with two papers and one article stating precisely that.

[stargatedalek]

Modern crocodilian species including those from the Alligatoroidea superfamily clearly have vestigial claws on the forth and fifth digits in their embryonic state so we believe that Deinosuchus had them too, it's a Late retaceous animal after all and 80+ million years is long enough to turn teeth(yeah we know it's acutally premaxilla) into beaks so why not.

Plus you can simply trim them off if you don't like them, digits 4 and 5 are long enough and their claws are much thinner than the three main claws so cut them off, paint the super tiny cut surfaces with a black marker and voila, you got your preferred reconstruction

Hey I'll disagree on vestigial embryonic features reappearing with no decided purpose being likely, but ultimately fair enough. While it warranted mention it's something easily tweaked to be sure and feels like people are rubbing it in at this point.

Folks, I'm not normally one to jump in front of REBOR, but this is starting to look a little ridiculous. Yes citing modern caimans is, bizarre, when we have the originals preserved, but that's not helpful at this point to jump down their throats about it. I hope the osteoderms get tweaked, but just saying "well look it up better" is only so practical to an extent.

The more I look at this thing the better it looks. The osteoderms on the neck could do with being rounder, and the little "sails" on the osteoderms in general should be rounder, more like semi-circles and opposed to triangles. But aside from that...

Thank you! It's not like we are trying so very hard to sell this figure to you guys you know and it's totally OK if some people don't like it. We are simply trying to explain that we did put lots of thoughts into the sculpt and some of them are justified. There's no THE accurate Deinosuchus as nobody has seen a real one anyway so perhaps we can call those designs "preference" rather than "inaccuracy".

There is nothing wrong with inaccuracy, I'd go so far as to say I often prefer fantasy dinosaurs to accurate ones, but you can't simply use those terms interchangeably. Inaccurate reconstructions can be a lot of fun, but if something is inaccurate than it's inaccurate.

Again, I say that as someone who in many cases prefers inaccurate designs.

And, per your example of the alligator osteoderms, I must admit that is a shocking degree of difference with the cornified skin on them! I take back my comment about the shape not being round enough. Though I would still say they should probably be a big longer front to back on each scute, as even if the shape changes that wouldn't end up looking smaller.

*edit*
They should probably be a bit taller too. While the shape can be dramatically different, that won't make them shorter. The bone still has to fit inside, even if the outside shape is completely different.

Soft tissue doesn't radically alter the shape of osteoderms on modern crocodyliformes, so why would any prehistoric species be an exception?

I feel like that has actually been proven that it rather dramatically can.

[REBOR_STUDIO]

Modern crocodilian species including those from the Alligatoroidea superfamily clearly have vestigial claws on the forth and fifth digits in their embryonic state so we believe that Deinosuchus had them too, it's a Late retaceous animal after all and 80+ million years is long enough to turn teeth(yeah we know it's acutally premaxilla) into beaks so why not.

Plus you can simply trim them off if you don't like them, digits 4 and 5 are long enough and their claws are much thinner than the three main claws so cut them off, paint the super tiny cut surfaces with a black marker and voila, you got your preferred reconstruction

Hey I'll disagree on vestigial embryonic features reappearing with no decided purpose being likely, but ultimately fair enough. While it warranted mention it's something easily tweaked to be sure and feels like people are rubbing it in at this point.

Folks, I'm not normally one to jump in front of REBOR, but this is starting to look a little ridiculous. Yes citing modern caimans is, bizarre, when we have the originals preserved, but that's not helpful at this point to jump down their throats about it. I hope the osteoderms get tweaked, but just saying "well look it up better" is only so practical to an extent.

The more I look at this thing the better it looks. The osteoderms on the neck could do with being rounder, and the little "sails" on the osteoderms in general should be rounder, more like semi-circles and opposed to triangles. But aside from that...

Thank you! It's not like we are trying so very hard to sell this figure to you guys you know and it's totally OK if some people don't like it. We are simply trying to explain that we did put lots of thoughts into the sculpt and some of them are justified. There's no THE accurate Deinosuchus as nobody has seen a real one anyway so perhaps we can call those designs "preference" rather than "inaccuracy".

There is nothing wrong with inaccuracy, I'd go so far as to say I often prefer fantasy dinosaurs to accurate ones, but you can't simply use those terms interchangeably. Inaccurate reconstructions can be a lot of fun, but if something is inaccurate than it's inaccurate.

Again, I say that as someone who in many cases prefers inaccurate designs.

And, per your example of the alligator osteoderms, I must admit that is a shocking degree of difference with the cornified skin on them! I take back my comment about the shape not being round enough. Though I would still say they should probably be a big longer front to back on each scute, as even if the shape changes that wouldn't end up looking smaller.

Soft tissue doesn't radically alter the shape of osteoderms on modern crocodyliformes, so why would any prehistoric species be an exception? This is special pleading just like with the claws. At best you could argue that the precise arrangement of the osteoderms is still open to debate, but the unique shape and size  of Deinosuchus' is known for a fact. You've now been presented with two papers and one article stating precisely that.

I feel like that has actually been proven rather dramatically.

And one more thing we would like to point out that is osteoderms arrangements on different individuals of even the same species can be vastly different from each other. We've studied hundreds of reference photos for our GNG American alligator project and noticed that some individuals have more or less rows of osteoderms than others, some change from 4 osteoderms to 6 osteoderms on the second row of back scales but some change on the third row, and rows that change from 6 osteoderms to 8 osteoderms are even more unpredictable, not to mention that some individuals got their osteoderm ridges and vertical scale gaps prefectly lined up but some have curved or even stepped vertical scale gaps.

So that "accurate" diagram merely serves as a suggestion, a very broad guideline if you will therefore cannot represent all individuals of the species.

[stargatedalek]

And one more thing we would like to point out that is osteoderms arrangements on different individuals of even the same species can be vastly different from each other. We've studied hundreds of reference photos for our GNG American alligator project and noticed that some individuals have more or less rows of osteoderms than others, some change from 4 osteoderms to 6 osteoderms on the second row of back scales but some change on the third row, and rows that change from 6 osteoderms to 8 osteoderms are even more unpredictable, not to mention that some individuals got their osteoderm ridges and vertical scale gaps prefectly lined up but some have curved or even stepped vertical scale gaps.

So that "accurate" diagram merely serves as a suggestion, a very broad guideline if you will therefore cannot represent all individuals of the species.

Also very noteworthy! And the pattern seems pretty close to begin with anyway.

[suspsy]

I feel like that has actually been proven that it rather dramatically can.

Not enough to justify the shape and size of the osteoderms on this model, which has been my point for awhile now. I looked at those alligator images too, and while I do see what they're getting at, the fact remains that Deinosuchus' osteoderms still wouldn't have resembled an alligator's, or a caiman's, or any other extant crocodyliform. This is noted by Witton, Cossette, and Brochu.

And one more thing we would like to point out that is osteoderms arrangements on different individuals of even the same species can be vastly different from each other. We've studied hundreds of reference photos for our GNG American alligator project and noticed that some individuals have more or less rows of osteoderms than others, some change from 4 osteoderms to 6 osteoderms on the second row of back scales but some change on the third row, and rows that change from 6 osteoderms to 8 osteoderms are even more unpredictable, not to mention that some individuals got their osteoderm ridges and vertical scale gaps prefectly lined up but some have curved or even stepped vertical scale gaps.

So that "accurate" diagram merely serves as a suggestion, a very broad guideline if you will therefore cannot represent all individuals of the species.

Again, the arrangement or precise number of the osteoderms is not the topic of debate here. I certainly haven't brought either of those up. Anyone who's studied or worked with modern crocodyliformes knows full well that variation occurs among individuals. But even if we allow for taller or more triangular keels on a living Deinosuchus, it still doesn't account for the fact that the ones on that model are simply not big enough or round enough. I'm sure it'll sell briskly regardless, but it will be a marvellous day when some company finally produces a Deinosuchus figure which features that unique body texture as well as the correct skull.

[stargatedalek]

I dunno, those alligator osteoderms look equally round. Doesn't change the fact these are too small for the boney osteoderm to fit inside though.

[Halichoeres]

Regarding archosaurs with clawed fourth and fifth fingers, I remember a prominent palaeontologist on Facebook saying an ornithopod species was an example of this, and also @Doug Watson provided examples of this here: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=7110.msg211856;topicseen#msg211856

Yup, and Sarahsaurus had a fourth manual ungual. Perhaps some other early sauropodomorphs did too. A lot of the earliest archosaurs and stem-crocodiles have missing or incomplete forelimbs, so it's really difficult to be sure when the claws on digits IV and V were lost, but they were almost certainly lost independently in crocodiles and dinosaurs.

That said, Deinosuchus is firmly nested within the crown-group Crocodilia, all of which lack claws on digits IV and V, so there is no reason to expect it would have had them.

[Willaim bratton]

Rebor have printed thier Deinosuchus, and restarted thier Sarcusuchus sculpt. They updated their Sarcusuchus integument but unfortunately didn't correct the inaccurate Deinosuchus integument

[Carnoking]

I don't care much about the Deinosuchus. I just want that Appalachiosaurus accessory....

[Thialfi]

Well well..

[Over9K]

Size comparison photo from REBOR's FB page...

[Shonisaurus]

It's huge, how beautiful!

[SenSx]

The Deinosuchus is really huge.
What scale do you think it is ?
It is 43,5 cm long, so from my calculation, it should be at 1/28 if you consider Deinosuchus to be able to reach a max 12 meters.

According to Rebor, it should be available around next Christmas.

I wonder if it will have different paint jobs.

[Shonisaurus]

The Deinosuchus is really huge.
What scale do you think it is ?
It is 43,5 cm long, so from my calculation, it should be at 1/28 if you consider Deinosuchus to be able to reach a max 12 meters.

According to Rebor, it should be available around next Christmas.

I wonder if it will have different paint jobs.

Thanks for the info. It is a very suitable figure to buy at Christmas parties, I still give it to myself.

[Pliosaurking]

Here's the deinosuchus painted up and wow! It looks great! https://www.facebook.com/reborstudio/photos/pcb.5090479864412314/5090467514413549/?__cft__%5B0%5D=AZUb7XKGlsGPEfeL0eHPtmt9f-_onjIcjDmA9Tu-ZFqqqFsSjm0IlK5_cnIWyw0KRqyY4gNMY6F77BPGUz26gyE9ojJid3qW1B--49cQkOprFROlwyPC426WHpMK5TPvuCvn-BCpLl4Xpw99kwjrLQw0nb5BrUUR37el57uZp8iH6_yrBfNhGipN8fq6f4MlMbvxbypN1V-SANy2g_CDcWL5&__tn__=*bH-R

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Still wish they made a living Appalachiosaurus..

[Over9K]

[Carnoking]

I still just want that dead Appalachiosaurus 😂

[Shonisaurus]

I love that deinosuchus and that appalachiosaurus carcass hope to get it from shop.modellpferdeversand.de along with the livyatan and lingwulong from PNSO. My goals are exotic prehistoric animals or rather rare in terms of collecting.


I hope that Rebor releases a sarcosuchus soon and that it would be my best sarcosuchus made to date even ahead of other brands.

[SenSx]

Wow finally, my most anticipated purchase of this year.

This is a more natural tone, and I guess they will match the hatchling colors with the swamp version, if so, it will be very hard to choose.

Sarchosuchus might be coming at the end of the year as well.