Commissioning a Model of a Drawing made by Dan LoRusso

[Takama]

Ok On the Dinosaur Studio Facebook page, there is this drawing that the late and great Dan LoRusso had made that i thoght would make a great figure.



He said it was not intended for the Toy line, but I convinced him to consider it anyways for the future. Unfourtanatly we all know what happend. But I still would like to see a figure of this drawing being made.

So I would like to Commission Someone(Currently Classified) to make a model of this species with the simaler anatomy indicated in this drawing.

My Qustion is simple.  Is what im doing wrong? The animal is Shamosaurus, which is known from a skull, and some postcranial remains.   And i always wanted to see Dan make this drawing a reality. So is it wrong that i have someone make a model based on the anatomy of this drawing? 

[Kovu]

If I remember correctly, he left behind a wife? If you could contact her and ask permission, perhaps that would be the best way to go? She would theoretically be next of kin and the one to make decisions on what happens to his artwork.

If its just a single model for your own private use, I believe that it would technically fall under "private use", since you're not making any money off of it, therefore it wouldn't be a commercial endeavor. I imagine that you wouldn't *technically* need to ask permission if its in this context.

On the other hand, if its for the Animasaurus line, I'd imagine you would need permission from the family, or at least have them in the loop. Perhaps you could do it as a special charity model? I looked up his obituary and the family asked that, in lieu of flowers, donations be made to the Millet Fund/ Tufts Medical Center. Perhaps the proceeds of the sale of the models goes to the medical center, in particular their oncology wing? Kind of like A Dan LoRusso Memorial Model, again, providing you have permission of his widow/family.

Here's the Medical Center's contact info as it appears in his obituary:

Millet Fund/Tufts Medical Center, in c/o Dr. Kellie Sprague, 800 Washington Street, Boston, MA 02111.

As always, just my two cents. Do with it what you will.

[Takama]

Its not for the Animasaurus Collection.   But for a alredy established Collection run by a evean younger man.

I wish to see Kayakasaurus make this model for his 1:40 Protocasts line

[Kovu]

Same deal. Contact his widow and ask permission. Do it as a charity model for cancer research/treatment. I can't see anyone taking offense to that, but more importantly, it would support lifesaving work that could hopefully lead to a cure for this dreadful disease.

[Takama]

Sent a Message to his son on Facebook. 

If I am not able to make this Drawing into a Figurine then i have a Back up idea based on this



Either way I want a Shamosaurus

[Kayakasaurus]

There are tons of ankylosaur drawings done in the same style, as far as we know, that could be exactly what the real animal looked like. Not to mention that is just one side of the animal, a sculpt is 3D with a lot more info than is in that sketch. I usually use around 20 different references, and it comes out looking more like one of them than the other. Not to mention, I'm not talented enough to make it look exactly like that, not that I'm trying to. also the pose will be different. There isn't anything proprietary about the sketch, it sticks to a general ankylosaurian build and what is considered scientifically accurate, there really isn't anything to copy.

That said, I think it's a nice sketch, and I wouldn't be doing this one anytime soon, got other Dinos to finish up 

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

Agreed with Kayakasaurus. If an animal is generally what is believed to be accurate, I wouldn't see why it is copyright infringement, etc as long as it isn't copying a specific aspect of the inspiration, like the exact pose or stylization (colors, etc). A static pose like that wouldn't be a problem, I would assume. I'm no expert, though.

By the way, Takama, it looks like we think very much alike in species choice inspiration. 

[Sim]

Shamosaurus fossil remains can be seen in this blog post: http://pseudoplocephalus.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/know-your-ankylosaurs-mongolian-odds.html

And the skull and armoured neck rings of Shamosaurus are illustrated here: http://www.paleofile.com/Dinosaurs/Armor/Shamosaurus.asp

Neither of the two Shamosaurus reconstructions Takama posted seem to have a head and neck armour that's correct.

Sent a Message to his son on Facebook. 

If I am not able to make this Drawing into a Figurine then i have a Back up idea based on this



Either way I want a Shamosaurus

Searching for "shamosaurus" on Google images brings up places where that reconstruction is said to be of Shamosaurus.  Searching for "gobisaurus" on Google images brings up places where that reconstruction is said to be of... Gobisaurus!  To me it looks more like a generic ankylosaurid..

What Shamosaurus's tail is like is not known, including whether it had a tail club.  In the blog post How the ankylosaur got its tail club, it's shown shamosaurines (Shamosaurus and Gobisaurus) probably didn't have a tail club knob but did have a tail club handle.  This seems most likely for Shamosaurus due to its close relationship to Gobisaurus which has this kind of tail, and Shamosaurus's temporal range being within the yellow range in the image below:


The two Shamosaurus reconstructions (Dan LoRusso's and the one that is being used to represent both Shamosaurus and Gobisaurus) when considered as a shamosaurine reconstruction are both outdated.

I think if one wants to create a good, accurate figure of a prehistoric animal, finding out what is known of the animal and using that as the starting point for the figure is necessary.  For parts of the animal that aren't known finding out what is plausible would follow.  Reconstructions by other people can be very valuable references, but if one just bases their reconstruction on someone else's, inaccuracies of the original reconstruction(s) can be copied, and new mistakes may also be made.

I like what Kayakasaurus said about him not trying to make his reconstruction look exactly like Dan's, and that there really isn't anything to copy.  There's not much to admire about prehistoric animal reconstructions that basically just copy those by other people, regardless of how good they are, as the people who copied did little to no work in reconstructing the animal represented in their figure.  I find the best figures are ones where the artist made their own interpretation of the prehistoric animal, following the process I described in the previous paragraph, like Dan LoRusso and Greg Wenzel have done.