David Silvas New Kickstarter: Articulated Dinosaur TOYS

[Dinoguy2]

When I've glued parts of figures together in the past using superglue, white marks would often form around the glued area.  That's the main reason I'm not keen to glue them myself.  I would also be worried about messing up the figure by unintentionally applying too much or too little glue.  Since these figures aren't easy to replace due to their price and limited quantities, if the primaries aren't glued to the finger, I think I won't glue them together...

it's not hard and there are my types of ahesives one could try , if you decide to give it a go when the time comes just me know.

David said out of the ones he's sculpted so far, only the Velociraptor and Saurornitholestes lack lips (meaning the Atrociraptor, Tsaagan and Balaur have lips), and he had planned to give lips to most of the raptors.  Like someone else said in the comments, I think it's not very likely some dromaeosaurids had lips and some didn't.  I think it would bother me if the raptor figures I have from this series have two contradicting beliefs on how they look, which would mean when their mouths are closed some will have teeth hanging outside their mouths while others won't.  I do find dromaeosaurids having lips more convincing than them lacking lips.  I'm glad David says adding lips to the few raptors that would have lacked them is a fairly simple modification he's leaning towards.

Why not just make them more beaks with recessed teeth?

...Because they didn't have beaks? 

Even enantiornithines didn't have beaks, with one or two exceptions. Beaks are a feature of ornithuromorphs.

http://dinogoss.blogspot.com/2011/01/theropods-that-fit-bill.html
http://dinogoss.blogspot.com/2011/04/youre-doing-it-wrong-birds-with-teeth.html

I hate to say it, but they should probably look like this:


Which the Tsaagan figure etc. seem to get right.

[stargatedalek]

If therizinosaurs, ornithomimids, and oviraptorosaurs had beaks I see no reason dromaeosaurs or enantiornithines couldn't have. Yes they wouldn't have been synonymous with those of modern birds (but neither were the aforementioned groups), and yes they wouldn't have grown in the same way, but it's hardly an unreasonable idea to suggest they could have had beaks in some capacity.

As Martyniuk pointed out they probably lacked a single keratinous sheath, but that doesn't mean they didn't have a beak (you can see his Hesperornis still clearly possesses one, just not structured in what we've come to expect as the traditional way).

Nor should we overlook our other beaked friends; chelonians, parrot fishes, pufferfish, and even to an extent the armor coating of many catfish offer a host of other examples of how an animal can develop a beak or beak-like sheath. Just because they weren't identical to those expected in a dinosaur doesn't mean dromaeosaurs lacked beaks, or even that beaks were unlikely (consider the huge benefit they would offer to RPR hunting).

*edit* Reading both articles in full it doesn't seem at all that Martyniuk is suggesting dromaeosaurs (let alone enantiornithines) lacked beaks, but is rather pointing out the common error of paleoart displaying teeth erupting from the keratinous sheaths.

[Fembrogon]

After all that hype I had building up, I couldn't actually contribute to the Kickstarter because I don't have a credit card yet. 

That said, I'm delighted to see how successful it's been, and I look forward to getting these figures when they get released! 

[Dinoguy2]

If therizinosaurs, ornithomimids, and oviraptorosaurs had beaks I see no reason dromaeosaurs or enantiornithines couldn't have. Yes they wouldn't have been synonymous with those of modern birds (but neither were the aforementioned groups), and yes they wouldn't have grown in the same way, but it's hardly an unreasonable idea to suggest they could have had beaks in some capacity.

As Martyniuk pointed out they probably lacked a single keratinous sheath, but that doesn't mean they didn't have a beak (you can see his Hesperornis still clearly possesses one, just not structured in what we've come to expect as the traditional way).

Nor should we overlook our other beaked friends; chelonians, parrot fishes, pufferfish, and even to an extent the armor coating of many catfish offer a host of other examples of how an animal can develop a beak or beak-like sheath. Just because they weren't identical to those expected in a dinosaur doesn't mean dromaeosaurs lacked beaks, or even that beaks were unlikely (consider the huge benefit they would offer to RPR hunting).

All the groups you mention have obvious osteological correlates with beaks or eve in some cases preserved beak keratin. Hesperornis has a clear shelf separating the outer beak from the inner teeth. If the teeth of dromaeosaurs were inset you'd see it in the fossil, like you do in therizinosaurs and ornithischians and hesperornithids. No inset, no beak. Hesperornis and Honshanornis even has a predentary on the lower jaw to support a beak. This is the kind of evidence you need before suggesting enantiornithes, or dromaeosaurs, or tyrannosaurs, or Spinosaurus, or sauropods had beaks.

And I'm sorry, but to suggest enantiornithes had beaks is ludicrous. We'd have found evidence for this among the thousands of fossils by now, as we have for Confuciusornis and the other groups you mention.

I'm not sure what advantage a beak would offer RPR that teeth don't, though pterodactyloids have tiny beaks wedged in between the front teeth so I guess stranger things have happened. But such limited beaks would have no bearing on how visible the teeth are, nor would they replace lips.

*edit* Reading both articles in full it doesn't seem at all that Martyniuk is suggesting dromaeosaurs (let alone enantiornithines) lacked beaks, but is rather pointing out the common error of paleoart displaying teeth erupting from the keratinous sheaths.

If there is no bony shelf to support the keratinous sheath, then he sheath must cover the "gums", and where else are the teeth supposed to erupt from? All known beaked animals have either a bony sheath or lack teeth or both, to support the underlying architecture of the beak.

And speaking of turtles, there are some species that have both beaks AND lips!

[stargatedalek]

I'm just saying that it isn't impossible they had a keratinous sheath in some capacity, I wasn't suggesting they should obscure the lips or gums.

When I listed those other groups I meant genetic relations not anatomical ones, that was my bad I should have specified.

RPR is based on the same behavior of modern raptors yes (actual question, I know it sounds sarcastic)? Hence I was thinking the ability to peck at prey held beneath would allow the animal to attack the prey without putting its jaws at risk while the prey is still struggling.

As for enantiornithines, just because of a wealth of fossils doesn't indicate that we know every detail about them. A lack of evidence is not evidence.

I don't see how the presence of beaks and lips in turtles is evidence that dinosaurs couldn't have had beaks and lips (in a different arrangement obviously, consider it a "proof of concept" for the co-appearance of features).

Again, I'm not trying to say either group should be depicted with beaks, or that beaks are more likely, I'm just saying that until someone finds skin or scale impressions from their snouts it can't be ruled out that they had some form of covering. I wouldn't actually depict either group with beaks, but I don't see why it's wrong to suggest it.

[Sim]

quick question: do they charge extra for shipping for the stretch goals? like I want to get velociraptor so I have to pay $45 (raptor plus $10 ship to USA.) If I pledge the extra $30 for the accessory forest pack is the ship cost already covered in the 10 bucks for the raptor shipping or will I have to add another $10 later for the accessory pack?

In the "Stretch goals" section of the campaign page it says, "no additional shipping is required when adding to a raptor figure pledge tier".  So I don't think you would need to add shipping for the accessory pack if you're also getting the Velociraptor figure.  I've pledged for the Velociraptor + shipping for it, two stretch goal raptors, and three accessory packs.

thank you, unfortunately I found out later they dont accept PayPal so I had to change plans and can only get the one raptor figure at this time. Really wanted an accessory pack but Ill just have to wait til the after the campagn to see if any accessory packs will be left over to purchase directly at the sculptors website.

You might be able to add an accessory pack (or anything else) to your current order of the one raptor figure when the BackerKit surveys are sent out in about a month.

[Dinoguy2]

I'm just saying that it isn't impossible they had a keratinous sheath in some capacity, I wasn't suggesting they should obscure the lips or gums.

How exactly could an animal have both lips and a keratinous sheath? Are you saying it would like the the turtle picture, with lips and then a beak and THEN also teeth below that...?

When I listed those other groups I meant genetic relations not anatomical ones, that was my bad I should have specified.

It's possible the fact that so many dinosaurs have beaks might mean their facial skin was somewhat more cornified than usual, making them predisposed to evolving beaks in a genetic sense. But beaks are a common trait among all dinosaur groups and pterosaurs too, so this would be an ornithodiran thing, and anything you say about that cornified skin would apply equally to dromeosaurs, enantiornithes, tyrannosaurs, sauropods, etc. Cornified skin =/=beak.

RPR is based on the same behavior of modern raptors yes (actual question, I know it sounds sarcastic)? Hence I was thinking the ability to peck at prey held beneath would allow the animal to attack the prey without putting its jaws at risk while the prey is still struggling.

I don't know what this has to do with beaks, though. Raptors don't peck at the prey they restrain, they tear at it wit their hooked beaks. They need hooked beaks because they don't have teeth. Generally, animals with hooked teeth don't need hooked beaks. Pterodactylus has beak-free toothy jaws (as proved by UV studies) and then a tiny beak in between the two front teeth. That sort of thing might be possible for dromaeosaurids, but there's no evidence for it. Memo Koseman painted something like that once, IIRC. But, Pterodactylus' teeth are straight, not curved, so its beak served a purpose-the beak could tear, the teeth could pinch. Beaks evolve for a reason, not just to make something look like a bird.

As for enantiornithines, just because of a wealth of fossils doesn't indicate that we know every detail about them. A lack of evidence is not evidence.

But you need some kind of reason to even suggest they would have beaks in the first place, other than the fact that they were generally bird-like in some other ways. Nobody has ever proposed enantiornithines had beaks. You might as well say sauropods had beaks. Is it possible? I guess, but what reason would there even be for suggesting such a thing? (Also, I'm pretty sure a few of them have been studied under UV, which revealed those tiny beaks in some pterosaurs).

We have thousands of enantiornithine fossils with no beaks, and it's not like beaks are rare in bird fossils. We know Schizooura had a beak and there's only one specimen of that. Same for things like Yanornis, and Hongshanornis, known from only a couple specimens each, but at least one or two preserve the beak. If most enantiornithines had beaks we'd know it.

I don't see how the presence of beaks and lips in turtles is evidence that dinosaurs couldn't have had beaks and lips (in a different arrangement obviously, consider it a "proof of concept" for the co-appearance of features).

I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm saying it would have to be some kind of bizarre, alternate arrangement different from anything alive today. And you need extraordinary evidence for that kind of extraordinary claim.

Again, I'm not trying to say either group should be depicted with beaks, or that beaks are more likely, I'm just saying that until someone finds skin or scale impressions from their snouts it can't be ruled out that they had some form of covering. I wouldn't actually depict either group with beaks, but I don't see why it's wrong to suggest it.

False dichotomy. Nobody is saying they had scaly snouts. I think if they did, we'd have found that by now too! It's more likely they had flexible if cornified skin on their faces, like birds, turtles, and crocs. No known archosauromorphs have scaly faces, that's a lizard thing.

[empire3569]

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/992645470/beasts-of-the-mesozoic-raptor-series-action-figure/posts/1595713

Newest update has a new shared parts diagram and build your own raptor kits; looks like he decided to give the dromaeosaurus really large primaries (the same as baluar) so I'm pretty pumped about that!

[Sim]

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/992645470/beasts-of-the-mesozoic-raptor-series-action-figure/posts/1595713

Newest update has a new shared parts diagram and build your own raptor kits; looks like he decided to give the dromaeosaurus really large primaries (the same as baluar) so I'm pretty pumped about that!

I made the following comment on that update:

Hi David, it's nice to hear from you!

For the Dromaeosaurus to be accurate, I think it will need to have a new lower jaw. Dromaeosaurus was the first described dromaeosaurid, and most of the skull was preserved with this original specimen! However, it turns out Dromaeosaurus is quite an unusual dromaeosaurid, not just in the upper half of its skull, but in its lower half too. The front of Dromaeosaurus's lower jaw appears to curve forward a bit! This is similar to what Utahraptor's lower jaw has been hinted to be like by the recent new Utahraptor fossil finds! Here's a comparison of the skulls of Dromaeosaurus and Atrociraptor, it's not just the shape of the jaws that looks different, their teeth are different as well!:

Dromaeosaurus: http://www.paleofile.com/Dinosaurs/Theropods/Dromaeosaurus.asp
Atrociraptor: http://www.paleofile.com/Dinosaurs/Theropods/Atrociraptor.asp


David has replied saying, "thank you for the advice and reference! You bring up a good point. It's very likely that I could do an additional jaw for Dromaeosaurus since there will be two different ones to use it. (and on that note- expect the kestrel Dromaeosaurus to have smaller primaries and less feathery feet.)
And now that I'm looking at this, I think the Linheraptor should share a jaw with Tsaagan since they're so similar.
Always tweaking to make improvements. "

In his next reply on that update, David said, "still not set on the primaries yet for Dromaeosaurus, but was thinking of making them slightly different sizes between the two versions, this regular one having the larger ones. I'll have to see how it looks when it's together."

[empire3569]

I'm interested in the winter model, not the summer one, so I hope he keeps the large primaries on that one!

[empire3569]

New pictures are up for the Balaur, and it looks INCREDIBLE! I think I am definitely going to up my pledge for this one with the backerkit

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/creativebeast/beasts-of-the-mesozoic-raptor-series-action-figure/posts/1610842

[Silvanusaurus]

Yeah, I had my doubts about the Balaur because of the toned down sculpt, but the colours on this fellow look beautiful, enough to sway me back towards picking it over the others.

[Dobber]

Indeed, Balaur looks wonderful! I WAS considering skipping this one, but that's not going to happen now 

Chris

[Arul]

Balaur is my favorite now love the color. I can only hope somebody from indonesia import this raptor set 

[LophoLeeVT]

I LOVE IT!!! MUST HAVE!!!

[Sim]

New pictures are up for the Balaur, and it looks INCREDIBLE! I think I am definitely going to up my pledge for this one with the backerkit

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/creativebeast/beasts-of-the-mesozoic-raptor-series-action-figure/posts/1610842

In a comment on that update, David said this:

@Faelrin- you bring up an interesting point. I do have interest in making feathered hands for the other raptors as well, but am not set on omitting the scaled hands either. I've seen reconstructions using both methods, but have yet to find solid evidence for either. If any of you can offer your thoughts on this I'd like to hear them, as at this point I can see some of these benefiting from a feathered-hand look more so than others. I will say that with the lips, it was a matter of doing them all one way or another, but with the hands I wonder if it's feasible that we could have seen both scaly or feathered among the species.

So if anyone has thoughts they'd like to share about this, let David know!

[Shadowknight1]

It's getting harder and harder to decide between Balaur, Adasaurus, and the Kestral Dromaeosaurus.

[Sim]

David posted this on the Creative Beast Studio Facebook page:

[Dobber]

Loving the Sauronitholestes Langstoni's crest and look. 

Also, While I didn't care for the fan choice Zhenyuanlong originally, I kind of like how the artwork looks. Hope for an update soon to see more.

Chris

[DinoLord]

I look forward to seeing the prototypes. It's going to be challenging to limit myself to a few...