Zbrush Dinosaurs and 3D Prints

[wings]

This is not supposed to be a double post but I figured no one would notice this if I just edited this (http://www.app.pan.pl/archive/published/app28/app28-063.pdf) into the last comment. It's a paper on hadrosaur trackways.

[Himmapaan]

But one thing that I'm certain is that the last comment on the three claws or less is wrong. Here is one example which I've mentioned on another post (http://www.scielo.br/pdf/aabc/v83n1/v83n1a15.pdf, Figure 4) and also this is mentioned on Mallison's blog (http://dinosaurpalaeo.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/more-of-urzeit-park/).

Ha, that's certainly interesting! I suppose even palaeontologists can't keep up with everything. 

Drew, I reckon doing two claws on yours seems like a perfectly legitimate solution, for the present at least. Certainly there's enough evidence to suggest that many. And perhaps they do indeed vary among hadrosaurs, as Wings says, which puts a more complicated twist on the matter than I'd realised.

[wings]

Ha, that's certainly interesting! I suppose even palaeontologists can't keep up with everything. 

Drew, I reckon doing two claws on yours seems like a perfectly legitimate solution, for the present at least. Certainly there's enough evidence to suggest that many. And perhaps they do indeed vary among hadrosaurs, as Wings says, which puts a more complicated twist on the matter than I'd realised.

Most scientists or even enthusiasts do make this assumption because the only surviving archosaurs today the crocodilians; only three of their digits have nails/claws. And the second group, the birds; their hands/wings are too modified for solving this problem. We just don't have enough archosaur groups to make such generalization.

@ Gorgonzola
Rather than us telling you what seems logical; I think the only question that you'll need to ask yourself is whether you prefer the soft tissue (no nail/hoof) or the ungual-like phalange tip of some digits (nail/hoof) interpretation. While writing this I just have another thought, let's say they do have hooves which is "solid" and probably not too pliable so I would assume that at least some prints would have shown these hoof marks (like this elephant one http://www.kruger-national-park.de/media/krugernationalpark/big5/elefant-elephant/elefantenabdruck-1g.jpg, the arrow points to the foot direction and we can see the slightly bulged outline of their hooves; or this one http://lh3.ggpht.com/_N0ikQNckBBk/TGkUIRYYENI/AAAAAAAAJSc/pZ2FO4t_Gcc/s1600/IMG_3163.JPG) but I honestly never seen a paper describing these "hoof" marks on any hadrosaur tracks. To me the front of the hand print was never well defined and kind of irregular (I would assume that if there is something hard on the front border of the hand then at least some of these front footprint borders would be repetitive or at least very similar.). This is not supposed to persuade your decision but it is just another random idea for you to consider.

[Himmapaan]

Oh, yes, I agree with Wings. I certainly don't mean to sound as though I was pressing you to have claws in my earlier comment. I think I was 'thinking aloud' about my own preference, rather.

[wings]

I've managed to find a free online paper on hadrosaur footprints (http://www.robertmsullivanphd.com/uploads/166._Lucas_et_al__Hadro_tracks_.pdf). And also here are some line illustrations from Lockley and Wright (2001).



Unfortunately, these still won't solve the current question on the hand prints. Since the shape of the hooves (if they did exist) doesn't really contribute to the overall outline (part of the front margin) of these prints it seems. The only logical reason that I can come up with from looking at these is that either they don't touch the ground or they are "soft" and "flexible" that they can change shapes along with the fleshy pads as the weigh of the animal transfers to them during locomotion (not sure whether this sounded logical though...).

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Looks like it might come down to preference. I know back when I did my baby Para the consensus we reached was one solid " mitten " with the finger on the side and no claws at all.

[Gorgonzola]

Yeah, it's certainly very fascinating, and a bit overwhelming.  I guess this is the sort of thing to expect when trying to nail the likeness these guys - all sorts of discussion about what may or may not have been.

For my part, I ended up settling on having claws - I just honestly prefer how it looks, plus it's less headaches at this stage than trying to massage out the mittens I did form and make it work.  I'll just need to be extremely mindful of proportions and anatomical structures in the future when I box model so I can take care of all these bits waaaay early on and not have them bite me later.  I guess consider it a lesson in getting as much reference as possible before diving in, yeah?

In anycase, here's a preview!  I'll put up individual pics later, but for now a small group of Paras moving along.

[wings]

So you've ended up with the animal having hooves on the hands. Based on what you have now do you think it is still possible for these hands to replicate any of the hand print shapes from above (subtriangular, semilunate or oval)? 

Looks like it might come down to preference. I know back when I did my baby Para the consensus we reached was one solid " mitten " with the finger on the side and no claws at all.

Rather than calling it a preference, I think it is more like an evaluation and we are weighing out the evidence presented to choose the one that sounds more logical. In this case I do agree with you in about the hands being encased into a fleshy mitten because if there is any rigid elements involved in the front border even partially (like the hooves in the 3D model); I just don't see how I could bend these front borders to recreate the hand prints shown from the above comment. Also there doesn't seem to be any indication of nails/hooves from specimens found with integument attached on their hands. Finally, have you ever seen a hoof marks on any hadrosaurian tracks? You will find hoof marks from the back feet from time to time but hoof mark on a hand print was never reported on a hadrosaurian. You can blame this on the substrate (the soil) for not preserving a clear impression of the hands but all I'm asking is just one... Due to these reasons at this time I still think the "mitten" idea is a more suitable solution for the present situation.

[jtn144]

I'll tell you what I think, that's a very nice set of Hadrosaurs, which I will be happy to purchase when available. Great job, gorgonzola!

[Gorgonzola]

So you've ended up with the animal having hooves on the hands. Based on what you have now do you think it is still possible for these hands to replicate any of the hand print shapes from above (subtriangular, semilunate or oval)? 

I'd most certainly like to try.  I think I can round out the front of their hands a bit more so the toes don't stick out as noticeably, since that was something I noticed I had with mine regardless.  I also got rid of the pads on the back of the hands, so the shape resembles the tracks much closer now, it's just at the moment the hooves are still a noticeable feature.

[Gorgonzola]

Fiddling about with one of the models, I think the best time for me to adjust the hands a bit more would be when I go to hollow the models.  I dunno what the familiarity with Zbrush's workings is around here, but the short story of it is I can clean up the mesh a bit and fix some of the pinched geometry down there when I get to it.

Wings, I think I misread your post originally, so let me see if I can take another whack at a response.  Honestly, looking at the tracks and trying to get the hands to match it at the very least hides much more hoof than one thinks, and definitely alters the shape of it to look MUCH closer to the footprints you've kindly supplied.  I have to say your analysis is probably right though, because at least with my own amateur fumblings once I flesh out the hand a bit more there's still a bit of an indication of a hoof or two in the handprint, which doesn't seem to appear in any of the tracks that you've supplied.

They definitely approach subtriangular or semilunate shapes, that much is for sure, but at least on my own model you can point out digits...II and III, in the handprint.  I'll get a shot of one of the hands so everyone can see what I'm rambling about.

As for the rest of the poses, here they are!  These are pretty much done, barring the hand stuff we've been chatting about (I feel like I'm flip-flopping on this more than a politician does... )  I even threw in another little scene of the two hooting paras.

[radman]

Yeah, it's certainly very fascinating, and a bit overwhelming.  I guess this is the sort of thing to expect when trying to nail the likeness these guys - all sorts of discussion about what may or may not have been.

For my part, I ended up settling on having claws - I just honestly prefer how it looks, plus it's less headaches at this stage than trying to massage out the mittens I did form and make it work.  I'll just need to be extremely mindful of proportions and anatomical structures in the future when I box model so I can take care of all these bits waaaay early on and not have them bite me later.  I guess consider it a lesson in getting as much reference as possible before diving in, yeah?

In anycase, here's a preview!  I'll put up individual pics later, but for now a small group of Paras moving along.

These are just terrific!  I wish I had something to add about the anatomical details regarding hooves, toes etc, however, that's certainly not my area of expertise, but I'm sure whatever you go with will be super, they all look good to me. I also think that fossil evidence is open to multiple lines of interpretation, they're fossils, after all. I hope you will also include the honking, leg-licking and resting poses, as well as some female or juvy poses of these as well, at sometime.  Meanwhile, some slight tweaking would result in a whole 'nother herd of Saurolophuses/Hypacros/etc as well?  Honestly, I'm not sure how closely these were related, still, can't wait to see this bunch up on Shapeways!  These will result in some of the best dioramas ever, I'm sure!

[Gorgonzola]

These are just terrific!  I wish I had something to add about the anatomical details regarding hooves, toes etc, however, that's certainly not my area of expertise, but I'm sure whatever you go with will be super, they all look good to me. I also think that fossil evidence is open to multiple lines of interpretation, they're fossils, after all. I hope you will also include the honking, leg-licking and resting poses, as well as some female or juvy poses of these as well, at sometime.  Meanwhile, some slight tweaking would result in a whole 'nother herd of Saurolophuses/Hypacros/etc as well?  Honestly, I'm not sure how closely these were related, still, can't wait to see this bunch up on Shapeways!  These will result in some of the best dioramas ever, I'm sure!

Thanks!  I have the rest of the poses up for the display right above you, so no worries on them being left out.

I'm almost afraid to open this can of worms since we're still talking about footprints, but what do we know of sexual dimorphism with Parasaurolophus?  I know some of the other lambeosaurines have records of dimorphism, but Paras as far as I know seem absent (I do have a very limited knowledge of this though.)  I know there was that truncated small crest that's used as a female Para by some folk, but that seems to be agreed upon to be a different species altogether from P. walkieri (while the one that has that small crest is referred to as P. cyrtocristatus? Larger specimen at the very least.)

I'd like to get some juveniles in there, but maybe not initially.  Gotta take a break from this hadrosaur species once I put it up on Shapeways.  I'm planning to tackle Cryolophosaurus next, and I already have a fun idea for an aggression pose.  Not like, snarling teeth, running sort of aggression pose, I mean the sort you would see between two males contesting for territory or mates.  Peacock showmanship, so to speak.

[postsaurischian]

  Wow, all those Paras - unbelievable - almost too much .

Here we go! The Dinosaur designing future is now. The opportunities seem to be unlimited .
Is this the beginning of the end of the major Dinosaur toy producers?

[Jodee]

Absolutely killer!  Very nice work.  Is this dinosaur grouping an example of one unique model with various poses?

Jodee

[tyrantqueen]

This is just too cute

Here we go! The Dinosaur designing future is now. The opportunities seem to be unlimited .
Is this the beginning of the end of the major Dinosaur toy producers?

I hope more artists produce work for Shapeways. It's great to have artists making models because fans/consumers have an input on what models are made and how the final product turns out.
Most companies are influenced by pop culture and whatever they can use to make the most money.

Btw the Para sitting on its haunches reminded me of this Paul Heaston artwork:


Not that this is a bad thing, since Pheaston is an epic artist.

[Gorgonzola]

Oh ho man, I am so glad I hit close to that mark.  I was initially thinking of tucking its arm up under it like how a cat does when it gets into that position, but after fiddling with it it didn't seem plausible.

Jodee, yeah, that's a perfect example actually.  The Parasaurolophus is just one neutral model that I posed into ten different models.  There's some cleanup afterwards (an example being I had to fill out the thighs a bit on the crouching Paras because they became too distorted from the posing), but otherwise that method really saves a lot of time.

I'm with you guys on Shapeways, I can only hope that the process becomes cheaper over time so larger sculpts are more cost effective than what they are right now.

[STORMnlNIJMEGEN]

This wil be a hell of a serie,,wel done

make it scale 1/35

[neuro]

Draw me like one of your French girls .

Anyway, awesome work!

[brontodocus]

Congrats, these are all so tempting!