New Fleshy - SUE

[Die_Maulquappe]

Wow ...the new Fleshy - SUE (Field Museum Chicago) by Blue Rhino Studios.




In reality, it is much beefier and stocky than Jurassic Park.
What a machine ^^

With lips, skin (no fluffy Megachicken - thx), and original battlescars.

The Blue Rhino Studio models are amazing.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EeQcy6CXkAEZ8gm?format=jpg&name=large
https://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/museums/ct-ent-sue-trex-model-fleshy-field-museum-ttd-0731-20200731-pwrqztnucvfi7cezupshvwix7y-story.html
https://blockclubchicago.org/2020/07/30/what-did-sue-the-t-rex-look-like-when-alive-new-field-model-shows-dino-with-skin-eyes/

Next please...Fleshy MAXIMO

[laticauda]

Looks cool

[Libraraptor]

At last a credible and not an antropomorphized, gory, far-too-feathery or shrink wrapped adult T.rex ! One of the most likely looks I have ever seen.

[Dinoxels]

I like how it feels like a classic Tyrannosaurus Rex reconstruction, but at the same time it's really accurate.

[SidB]

I like the final image of Sue on the stump, shaking hands with a prospective voter, while enjoying a nice light snack. He's not practicing social distancing, but at least has a mask.

[Jose S.M.]

Although I prefer the feathery look that was on trend a couple of years ago and I wished that it was the more accurate option, this reconstruction is wonderful! I'm going to have to get used to more scaly rexes again, this is going to break my brother's heart as he also loves feathered Tyrannosaurus.
This is life sized right? Most impressive to me than it's length and height is it's bulk. This was a definitely beefy creature.

[stargatedalek]

While I find feathers to be more parsimonious, this is still a lovely and perfectly defensible design. Wonderfully fleshed out and even with an appropriately bulky underside.

I'm less a fan of the subdued nasal crest and planked posture though. Yes it's posed to be picking up prey, but that this was the pose they picked for the centrepiece statue still implies this would be a standard walking position to the average viewer.

[Die_Maulquappe]

It has only some partial scales, the overall body skin looks more like some normal leathery skin.
This animal has 1,5 -2x the wight of an african elephant.
I've seen several paleontological lectures on it. Apart from stubble like the hair of elephants or a kind of ornamental cam for display, a complete plumage is not really possible with the T.rex if he does not want to cook himself.
Unless he had lived in the cold like the mammoths, which he didn't. It is also possible that in the course of their size development / growth they have gone through different phases from with feathers (young animals) to a few feathers adults.
I just think that some dinosaurs had feathers (which has been proven) and some hardly any or not. The media go to extremes as soon as a new report comes in ... what cheese is!
Of course it was colder at the end of the Cretaceous but where T. rex lived it was relatively warm.
An ostric is feathered and lives in africa...yes...his weigt is 1,2% of a T.rex.

When the earth was still hot and dry, the dinosaurs grew large and the mammals remained small and nocturnal for a long time.
There are also readings on it.
Body volume, heat development, metabolism ...
For example, that mammals lose an incredible amount of water through urine, a disadvantage that birds do not have ...
Your feces are very dehydrated and water stays in the body even though they excrete toxins.

[Loon]

To put it nicely, this has to be one of the most bizarrely named threads I've ever seen. I like the sculpture, though. Hopefully the traveling exhibit makes its way to LA at some point. I'd prefer it to the Jane Goodall exhibition we were supposed to have here.

[Die_Maulquappe]

To put it nicely, this has to be one of the most bizarrely named threads I've ever seen. I like the sculpture, though. Hopefully the traveling exhibit makes its way to LA at some point. I'd prefer it to the Jane Goodall exhibition we were supposed to have here.

Lol then I have it done right^^

SUE´s new nickname for this Version of heris Fleshy...so ?!

[stargatedalek]

It has only some partial scales, the overall body skin looks more like some normal leathery skin.
This animal has 1,5 -2x the wight of an african elephant.
I've seen several paleontological lectures on it. Apart from stubble like the hair of elephants or a kind of ornamental cam for display, a complete plumage is not really possible with the T.rex if he does not want to cook himself.
Unless he had lived in the cold like the mammoths, which he didn't. It is also possible that in the course of their size development / growth they have gone through different phases from with feathers (young animals) to a few feathers adults.
I just think that some dinosaurs had feathers (which has been proven) and some hardly any or not. The media go to extremes as soon as a new report comes in ... what cheese is!
Of course it was colder at the end of the Cretaceous but where T. rex lived it was relatively warm.
An ostric is feathered and lives in africa...yes...his weigt is 1,2% of a T.rex.

When the earth was still hot and dry, the dinosaurs grew large and the mammals remained small and nocturnal for a long time.
There are also readings on it.
Body volume, heat development, metabolism ...
For example, that mammals lose an incredible amount of water through urine, a disadvantage that birds do not have ...
Your feces are very dehydrated and water stays in the body even though they excrete toxins.

It's ridiculous to compare dinosaurs to elephants, or feathers to fur. African elephants weigh about the same as Tyrannosaurus, the highest records pushing 9 tons, while most estimates for Tyrannosaurus place it just over 8 tons. Elephants live in a warmer environment, as Hell Creek was a forested coastal area in a temperate climate, not a sun exposed Savannah with portions of range including deserts.

Elephants should have absolutely no bearing on frankly any discussion regarding dinosaur anatomy. Feathers are plenty capable of distributing heat to cool an animal down, fur is not. Exposed skin as a temperature regulation method actually works better if the animal has feathers, because it allows areas with muscles close to the skin to release heat directly into the air and areas without to release additional heat through the circulation in the feathers.

And before someone inevitably mentions ostriches, Yutyrannus absolutely dwarfs them and has a full covering of feathers. Elephant birds and moas dwarf ostriches and had full feather coatings. Ostriches partially bald nature is not a size related adaptation, it's to aid them in heat regulation while running.

[Tyto_Theropod]

What a magnificent beast!  This has to be the one of the most gorgeous, if not THE most gorgeous, Tyrannosaurus restoration I have ever seen.  Like everyone else I love the bulk to it.  This is a real animal with muscle and fat, not a shrinkwrapped zombie.  Its little birdy eyes are so full of life, too.  It looks like those huge barrelled sides might be rising up and down, like it could casually stroll off its plinth and through the hallways.  My hats go off to the sculptors!

My personal criticisms would be that the colour's a bit bleh.  I have no objection to brown - plenty of animals are brown, after all - but it could maybe do with a bit more variation, maybe minimal brighter colours or a few more different shades of brown.  Then again, this animal was very likely an ambush predator, so maybe a drab colour scheme is the most realistic for it.  I don't object to the absence of feathers, though.  I know that's the subject of fierce debate at the moment, but currently I don't think there's really enough evidence to conclusively prove either so both feathered and featherless interpretations are still perfectly valid.  Most people are probably going to err on the side of scales because of the skin impressions from T. rex and other Tyrannosaurid species, but of course those don't exclude the possibility that Tyrannosaurus had feathers rather than scales (or indeed bare skin, or a combination of two or all three) on areas of its body not represented by the 'Wyrex' skin impressions.  For my money few small, sparse filaments might not have been amiss, but I understand that these would have been hard to model.

I do agree with @stargatedalek that the pose could easily be misinterpreted as its normal position.  From what I've read, the current understanding is that Tyrannosaurs were typically a bit more upright when just walking about, spines pretty diagonal but tails still off the ground.  Having said which, I do love the fact that this captures Sue doing something, rather than just standing around.  It feels like this could be a snapshot of their life, doing what a predator does.  I actually think it could use a tiny (emphasis on TINY) bit more blood on the prey, but I also appreciate that they haven't gone for sensationalist levels of gore.  After all, perhaps the animal (an Edmontosaurus?) died naturally and Sue just found the body and picked it up to take somewhere quiet, or, given the size ratio, is about to just swallow it whole.

But geeky nitpicking aside, I love this and part of me now wishes I could cross the Atlantic and see it in person - I'm sure it would be far more impressive than just looking at photographs!  When I first saw it, I admit that my brain went, "WOW.  This is What A T. rex Should Look Like."  But of course science marches on and the poor thing will probably be outdated in twenty years' time.  Sometimes I feel that making dinosaur models is like painting the Forth Bridge...

Although I prefer the feathery look that was on trend a couple of years ago and I wished that it was the more accurate option, this reconstruction is wonderful! I'm going to have to get used to more scaly rexes again, this is going to break my brother's heart as he also loves feathered Tyrannosaurus.
This is life sized right? Most impressive to me than it's length and height is it's bulk. This was a definitely beefy creature.

It looks life-size to me, but bare in mind that the man in the first image is on the far side of the model, so he looks smaller than he would be if he was standing right by its head.  And speaking of the man in the first image, thanks to S @SidB, I can't unsee him shaking hands with them!

[SidB]

@Tyto_Theropod , sorry to have injected a political aspect into this discussion, as we all endeavor to avoid these types of conversation as per forum rules of course. In any case, I have absolutely no idea which party she is representing. I don't imagine that either the donkey or elephant would be open to her brand of politics : extreme democratic behavior - everybody on the menu, regardless of anything.

[PrimevalRaptor]

I'm still more of a fan of feathered tyrannosaurs but hot damn, this is such an amazing reconstruction, really feels alive! The accompanying mural is also incredible from what I saw on their Instagram.
(Now if only they'd produce a toy version of this masterpiece! )

[Die_Maulquappe]

It has only some partial scales, the overall body skin looks more like some normal leathery skin.
This animal has 1,5 -2x the wight of an african elephant.
I've seen several paleontological lectures on it. Apart from stubble like the hair of elephants or a kind of ornamental cam for display, a complete plumage is not really possible with the T.rex if he does not want to cook himself.
Unless he had lived in the cold like the mammoths, which he didn't. It is also possible that in the course of their size development / growth they have gone through different phases from with feathers (young animals) to a few feathers adults.
I just think that some dinosaurs had feathers (which has been proven) and some hardly any or not. The media go to extremes as soon as a new report comes in ... what cheese is!
Of course it was colder at the end of the Cretaceous but where T. rex lived it was relatively warm.
An ostric is feathered and lives in africa...yes...his weigt is 1,2% of a T.rex.

When the earth was still hot and dry, the dinosaurs grew large and the mammals remained small and nocturnal for a long time.
There are also readings on it.
Body volume, heat development, metabolism ...
For example, that mammals lose an incredible amount of water through urine, a disadvantage that birds do not have ...
Your feces are very dehydrated and water stays in the body even though they excrete toxins.

It's ridiculous to compare dinosaurs to elephants, or feathers to fur. African elephants weigh about the same as Tyrannosaurus, the highest records pushing 9 tons, while most estimates for Tyrannosaurus place it just over 8 tons. Elephants live in a warmer environment, as Hell Creek was a forested coastal area in a temperate climate, not a sun exposed Savannah with portions of range including deserts.

Elephants should have absolutely no bearing on frankly any discussion regarding dinosaur anatomy. Feathers are plenty capable of distributing heat to cool an animal down, fur is not. Exposed skin as a temperature regulation method actually works better if the animal has feathers, because it allows areas with muscles close to the skin to release heat directly into the air and areas without to release additional heat through the circulation in the feathers.

And before someone inevitably mentions ostriches, Yutyrannus absolutely dwarfs them and has a full covering of feathers. Elephant birds and moas dwarf ostriches and had full feather coatings. Ostriches partially bald nature is not a size related adaptation, it's to aid them in heat regulation while running.

An large bull today weights 6 -6,5 tons ...there are no record breakers like 10-11 ton Henry (Smithonian) anymore btw.
This was an exeple due...by the way an exemple from a lecture of
Royal Tyrrell Museum of Palaeontology and for exemple this lecture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whxn9Cc1_Ho&t=1636s

So if you don´t get me wrong.
I think these dues have a bit (far more) knowledge than you and me

[Die_Maulquappe]

It has only some partial scales, the overall body skin looks more like some normal leathery skin.
This animal has 1,5 -2x the wight of an african elephant.
I've seen several paleontological lectures on it. Apart from stubble like the hair of elephants or a kind of ornamental cam for display, a complete plumage is not really possible with the T.rex if he does not want to cook himself.
Unless he had lived in the cold like the mammoths, which he didn't. It is also possible that in the course of their size development / growth they have gone through different phases from with feathers (young animals) to a few feathers adults.
I just think that some dinosaurs had feathers (which has been proven) and some hardly any or not. The media go to extremes as soon as a new report comes in ... what cheese is!
Of course it was colder at the end of the Cretaceous but where T. rex lived it was relatively warm.
An ostric is feathered and lives in africa...yes...his weigt is 1,2% of a T.rex.

When the earth was still hot and dry, the dinosaurs grew large and the mammals remained small and nocturnal for a long time.
There are also readings on it.
Body volume, heat development, metabolism ...
For example, that mammals lose an incredible amount of water through urine, a disadvantage that birds do not have ...
Your feces are very dehydrated and water stays in the body even though they excrete toxins.

It's ridiculous to compare dinosaurs to elephants, or feathers to fur. African elephants weigh about the same as Tyrannosaurus, the highest records pushing 9 tons, while most estimates for Tyrannosaurus place it just over 8 tons. Elephants live in a warmer environment, as Hell Creek was a forested coastal area in a temperate climate, not a sun exposed Savannah with portions of range including deserts.

Elephants should have absolutely no bearing on frankly any discussion regarding dinosaur anatomy. Feathers are plenty capable of distributing heat to cool an animal down, fur is not. Exposed skin as a temperature regulation method actually works better if the animal has feathers, because it allows areas with muscles close to the skin to release heat directly into the air and areas without to release additional heat through the circulation in the feathers.

And before someone inevitably mentions ostriches, Yutyrannus absolutely dwarfs them and has a full covering of feathers. Elephant birds and moas dwarf ostriches and had full feather coatings. Ostriches partially bald nature is not a size related adaptation, it's to aid them in heat regulation while running.

An large bull today weights 6 -6,5 tons ...there are no record breakers like 10-11 ton Henry (Smithonian) anymore btw.
This was an exemple dude...by the way an exemple from a lecture of
Royal Tyrrell Museum of Palaeontology and for exemple this lecture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whxn9Cc1_Ho&t=1636s

So if you don´t get me wrong. Or you understand me wrong and what I wanted to say...
I think these dues have a bit (far more) knowledge than you and me

[stargatedalek]

I'm not going to watch a 45 minute video from 2015 that isn't actually about the topic at hand just to find what was presumably an offhand comment about feathers.

Just because someone knows a lot about bones doesn't mean they know a lot about reconstruction and vice versa. I'd be lost if you showed me a bone and asked me to tell you what it was, or if I was forced to excavate a fossil it would probably end up shattered. But I would not be surprised if I'm more versed in life reconstruction than a lot of degree holding paleontologists, because that isn't their job, just like identifying and safely handling fossils isn't my job.

They shouldn't be expected to do everything, and for a paleontologist working with the bones usually takes priority. That's the part they train and take courses for.

As I said earlier, a bald Tyrannosaurus is perfectly defensible*, but I've heard hundreds of arguments against feathers and none of them, whether from amateurs or experts, have been based on anything genuinely substantive. Most of them boil down to people not understanding how either feathers or ostriches work, and the rest are bad faith arguments about minuscule and indeterminate texture fossils extrapolated to an entire animal or blanket statements that "the world was hotter then".

*Nothing about Tyrannosaurus implies it needed feathers, so the argument they could have lost them to conserve resources is perfectly plausible. But just because it's plausible doesn't make it more likely.

[Die_Maulquappe]

I'm not going to watch a 45 minute video from 2015 that isn't actually about the topic at hand just to find what was presumably an offhand comment about feathers.

Just because someone knows a lot about bones doesn't mean they know a lot about reconstruction and vice versa. I'd be lost if you showed me a bone and asked me to tell you what it was, or if I was forced to excavate a fossil it would probably end up shattered. But I would not be surprised if I'm more versed in life reconstruction than a lot of degree holding paleontologists, because that isn't their job, just like identifying and safely handling fossils isn't my job.

They shouldn't be expected to do everything, and for a paleontologist working with the bones usually takes priority. That's the part they train and take courses for.

As I said earlier, a bald Tyrannosaurus is perfectly defensible*, but I've heard hundreds of arguments against feathers and none of them, whether from amateurs or experts, have been based on anything genuinely substantive. Most of them boil down to people not understanding how either feathers or ostriches work, and the rest are bad faith arguments about minuscule and indeterminate texture fossils extrapolated to an entire animal or blanket statements that "the world was hotter then".

*Nothing about Tyrannosaurus implies it needed feathers, so the argument they could have lost them to conserve resources is perfectly plausible. But just because it's plausible doesn't make it more likely.

This is one of arund 50 of these lectures...and I watched most of them. And some of them are about the feather stuff.
Sry I read books and watch such lectures instead of playing pro paleontologist...by watching action dokumentations or reading half knowledge comments on youtube.

If you are a recognized scientist in this section - I apologize.
But otherwise...

BTW:
In this specific letcture it´s about the digestive apparatus...compared to mammals.
In another the metabolism is comapred to birds, reptiles and mammals plus in consideration of body weight and ambient temperature of the geological age.

An giant animal full cover feathered or haired, no matter if mammal, bird or dinosaur in a not cold enviroment (on land) makes no sens.
This is one summary in some of these lectures... for the impatient.

[stargatedalek]

This is one of arund 50 of these lectures...and I watched most of them. And some of them are about the feather stuff.
Sry I read books and watch such lectures instead of playing pro paleontologist...by watching action dokumentations or reading half knowledge comments on youtube.

If you are a recognized scientist in this section - I apologize.
But otherwise...

"Sry I read books"? Are you serious with that?

You're the one who tried to start stuff with me. I didn't say anything to you until you came at me swinging. I said I preferred something you don't like, and so you tried to show off by citing the same examples that everyone else does. And then when I tried to counter with (only some of) the reasons those examples don't hold up, instead of attempting to refute or address anything I said you started with "well we aren't experts" to try and downplay anything I could possibly say.

Maybe you could actually try thinking for yourself instead of just "well experts said"-ing your way through every conversation you don't like? Especially if you're going to go around starting them. It's important to take researched experts seriously, but that doesn't mean you need to blindly follow their conclusions if the data they present is subjectively interpretable.

An giant animal full cover feathered or haired, no matter if mammal, bird or dinosaur in a not cold enviroment (on land) makes no sens.
This is one summary in some of these lectures... for the impatient.

Sorry for having things I'd rather do with my time than watch a 45 minute Youtube video because someone I don't know couldn't be bothered to write his own point.

[Loon]

Sry I read books and watch such lectures

This reads like a Gene Ray quote.