Best Triceratops Figure?

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Yeah, I have the model in front of me here.  It does actually have toes so I wouldn't say it's elephant-like really.   The number of toes seems correct but the shape of the feet seem wrong.

Perhaps I should have put more emphasis on elephant-LIKE. Basically what I meant was all digits were sculpted to look the same and squarely planted on the ground, much like an elephant foot but not like a real Triceratops.

Ah, gotcha.

So now which has the more accurate frill ? The WS 's is a lot wider than the Battat...almost feels like a JP one.

[tyrantqueen]

That's the back foot right ?  Looks really similar to the Battat's feet.

No, the manus is the hand. The pes is the foot

Sorry too many technical terms to keep up with.. lol

This image matches the Battat's back feet but not the front.

The Battats were accurate for their time, but even they weren't above errors. If you look at the feet of the blue Favorite Ltd. Triceratops, they match this illustration pretty well.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

That's the back foot right ?  Looks really similar to the Battat's feet.

No, the manus is the hand. The pes is the foot

Sorry too many technical terms to keep up with.. lol

This image matches the Battat's back feet but not the front.

The Battats were accurate for their time, but even they weren't above errors. If you look at the feet of the blue Favorite Ltd. Triceratops, they match this illustration pretty well.

I actually don't own that one..it looked really thin for the robust way I imagine this animal to have looked in life.  :/

[tyrantqueen]

That's the back foot right ?  Looks really similar to the Battat's feet.

No, the manus is the hand. The pes is the foot

Sorry too many technical terms to keep up with.. lol

This image matches the Battat's back feet but not the front.

The Battats were accurate for their time, but even they weren't above errors. If you look at the feet of the blue Favorite Ltd. Triceratops, they match this illustration pretty well.

I actually don't own that one..it looked really thin for the robust way I imagine this animal to have looked in life.  :/

Neither do I, but the feet are correct afaik, even if they didn't make it as bulky as it should have been. See Scott Hartman's Triceratops also:

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I have Scott's skeletal..is that an officially fleshed version by him ?

[tyrantqueen]

I have Scott's skeletal..is that an officially fleshed version by him ?

Yes, see here: http://jerseyboyshuntdinosaurs.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/interview-with-artist-and-scientist.html
It was also printed in a book, by him, titled ABC Dinosaurs.

[Gwangi]

Yeah, I have the model in front of me here.  It does actually have toes so I wouldn't say it's elephant-like really.   The number of toes seems correct but the shape of the feet seem wrong.

Perhaps I should have put more emphasis on elephant-LIKE. Basically what I meant was all digits were sculpted to look the same and squarely planted on the ground, much like an elephant foot but not like a real Triceratops.

Ah, gotcha.

So now which has the more accurate frill ? The WS 's is a lot wider than the Battat...almost feels like a JP one.

Now that I don't know offhand but I suppose it is something worth the research. If I'm not mistaken there is some variation when it comes to the frills of different individuals.

[wings]

I'm looking at the WS model..I can't see the elephant feet on it ?  This thread is a pretty good chance for me to see which Trike model would be good t base our 1:1 version on.

You might find this useful:

The diagram is actually wrong... the footprint silhouette is made by the back foot while the skeletal element is based off a forelimb (hand) (see http://cactus.dixie.edu/jharris/Iron_Springs_Dino_Tracks.pdf, figures 5a and 5b). The "handprint" lacks a fleshy "palm pad" as seen on the elephants.

[tyrantqueen]

The diagram is actually wrong... the footprint silhouette is made by the back foot while the skeletal element is based off a forelimb (hand) (see http://cactus.dixie.edu/jharris/Iron_Springs_Dino_Tracks.pdf, figures 5a and 5b). The "handprint" lacks a fleshy "palm pad" as seen on the elephants.

Okay, thanks for clarifying. I'll know not to use it in future reference. Is there something else that I could look at that is shows the correct arrangement of the foot?

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Yeah, I have the model in front of me here.  It does actually have toes so I wouldn't say it's elephant-like really.   The number of toes seems correct but the shape of the feet seem wrong.

Perhaps I should have put more emphasis on elephant-LIKE. Basically what I meant was all digits were sculpted to look the same and squarely planted on the ground, much like an elephant foot but not like a real Triceratops.

Ah, gotcha.

So now which has the more accurate frill ? The WS 's is a lot wider than the Battat...almost feels like a JP one.

Now that I don't know offhand but I suppose it is something worth the research. If I'm not mistaken there is some variation when it comes to the frills of different individuals.

That makes sense..there is a lot of variation in each individual I'm finding.

Most images show the side view, which doesn't show you the width.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I'm looking at the WS model..I can't see the elephant feet on it ?  This thread is a pretty good chance for me to see which Trike model would be good t base our 1:1 version on.

You might find this useful:

The diagram is actually wrong... the footprint silhouette is made by the back foot while the skeletal element is based off a forelimb (hand) (see http://cactus.dixie.edu/jharris/Iron_Springs_Dino_Tracks.pdf, figures 5a and 5b). The "handprint" lacks a fleshy "palm pad" as seen on the elephants.

Ah..now I see where my confusion was.

I'm still surprised at how long the claws are too.

[wings]

...I'm still surprised at how long the claws are too.

In terms of the exact claw/hoof size, it is hard to say for certain since they vary (http://archosaurmusings.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/bony-claw-%E2%89%A0-actual-claw/); unless we have some well preserved imprints of Triceratops hoof "sheaths" (I'm not sure if we have any yet at this point in time).

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Seems like most portray them as rather rounded ..in Hartman's illustration and the sketch above they seem pretty sharp.

[tyrantqueen]

Seems like most portray them as rather rounded ..in Hartman's illustration and the sketch above they seem pretty sharp.

I think any dinosaur or bird that is terrestrial (even theropods) would have very blunt claws on their feet. Most birds that have very sharp talons are ones which spend most of their time in the air, for example eagles.



Compared to a ground dwelling ratite:



Makes sense that claws that are in constant contact with the ground would get worn down. That's why felines can sheath their claws, because they need to keep them as sharp as possible for hunting. And also possibly why velociraptor kept its "killing claw" off the ground.

Triceratops was a herbivore so it's likely it wouldn't have needed killer talons anyway.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Hmm..unless it had a need for sharp nails ?

It's a good point.  I was mostly curious about them being portrayed that way and if there was any proof or logic behind it.

[wings]

Okay, thanks for clarifying. I'll know not to use it in future reference. Is there something else that I could look at that is shows the correct arrangement of the foot?

The arrangement is very much the same as the one shown on the diagram, here is one from youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBKS_Kp2izM

(so you can view the hand in all angles). The issue is not so much about the arrangement of the skeletal elements but the soft tissues surrounding it (hand); without the "palm pad" the back of the handprint would hollow out and form a slight concave profile (see https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/JIGE/article/viewFile/JIGE1010220165A/32708).  Also another element to watch out for from your diagram are the division of the toes; the separation of these them are too high up (the division runs up all the way into the palm area).

[Patrx]

I see! So, to clarify, the image TQ shared was basically correct; but for some reason featured an outline of a hindlimb footprint next to diagrams of the manus?

[wings]

I see! So, to clarify, the image TQ shared was basically correct; but for some reason featured an outline of a hindlimb footprint next to diagrams of the manus?

Yes and no, if you follow the diagram and flesh out the hands as the footprint silhouette then your model would be wrong. If you follow the fleshed out hands then it is still not quite right since the separation of the digits is way too high. However, if you are building a ceratopsian arm skeleton or creating a fleshed out foot of a ceratopsian then the diagram could be used as reference...

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Keeping this toy centric..so the Battat is more correct when looking at the feet ?

[tyrantqueen]

Keeping this toy centric..so the Battat is more correct when looking at the feet ?

I don't think so. Shouldn't the front feet be facing each other slightly? Similar to how theropod hands should be in a clapping position, but not so extreme.