That statement should start with “in the past”. Recent depictions I’ve seen have them fully fleshed and feathered using up to date methods to create as accurate as possible models.
yeah, we have some absolutely amazing art these days. i particularly love this type of depiction of dromaeosaurs: Just MASSIVE birds with teeth instead of beaks and huge claws, they feel very… cromulent…
They found preserved melanosomes. It was previously thought these were the remains of bacteria.
You can find details here, but I highly recommend reading Dinosaurs: New Visions of a Lost World by Michael J. Benton, who was one of the ones doing the research. The book is very fun to read (he’s got that typical dry british humour), does a great job of describing the history and current status of paleontology (which is apparently exploding in new discoveries right now) and it has absolutely lovely illustrations, including the one I linked above. And also this anurognathus that is the cutest thing ever:
I just ordered it. I had a girlfriend a few years ago and she was cleaning out some stuff. She found her old dinosaur stuff and asked me if i wanted it for my nephew. I asked her how outdated the things were. She looked at me pretty shocked and said: they are millions of years old, nothing has changed. I found that pretty funny
That post is of course a billion years old itself and the images created by shrink-wrapping are still in people’s heads. Feathers on dinosaurs are rarely what people think of first as well and the notion has been around for quite a while.
Ah, got it. Yes, but is that an argument against what I said? Both non-shrink-wrapped dinosaurs and dinosaurs with feathers haven’t reached the general public conscience (and I’d argue feathers as a concept are easier to convey, actually, so they should take less time). So when popular science like the post in the OP talks about what depictions “do” instead of “did”, it’s talking to the public.
Maybe they don’t fit under the term of “paleoartists” (they are artists of Paleolithic creatures) but the most popular modern depictions of dinosaurs are presumably the Jurrasic World movies, and I think they are almost universally lacking plumage. I’ve only seen the first, but the images I’ve seen I don’t have any feathered dinos. So, no. This is still an ongoing issue.
That statement should start with “in the past”. Recent depictions I’ve seen have them fully fleshed and feathered using up to date methods to create as accurate as possible models.
yeah, we have some absolutely amazing art these days. i particularly love this type of depiction of dromaeosaurs: Just MASSIVE birds with teeth instead of beaks and huge claws, they feel very… cromulent…
We even have ways to figure out their colouring in some cases now! Like this sinosauropteryx:
That’s cool. How did they figure out the colouring?
They found preserved melanosomes. It was previously thought these were the remains of bacteria.
You can find details here, but I highly recommend reading Dinosaurs: New Visions of a Lost World by Michael J. Benton, who was one of the ones doing the research. The book is very fun to read (he’s got that typical dry british humour), does a great job of describing the history and current status of paleontology (which is apparently exploding in new discoveries right now) and it has absolutely lovely illustrations, including the one I linked above. And also this anurognathus that is the cutest thing ever:
That’s cool. We’re going to look back at present views of dinosaurs with laughter it sounds like. Thanks for the answer. I’ll check out the book.
I just ordered it. I had a girlfriend a few years ago and she was cleaning out some stuff. She found her old dinosaur stuff and asked me if i wanted it for my nephew. I asked her how outdated the things were. She looked at me pretty shocked and said: they are millions of years old, nothing has changed. I found that pretty funny
omg look at it, it’s like a ferret with giant legs
That guy sounds snotty.
That post is of course a billion years old itself and the images created by shrink-wrapping are still in people’s heads. Feathers on dinosaurs are rarely what people think of first as well and the notion has been around for quite a while.
Feathers have been found on dinosaur fossils only “recently”, with the discovery of Sinosauropteryx in 1996
Sorry, not entirely sure what you’re saying?
I am claiming that the notion has been circulating only for the last 30 years.
Ah, got it. Yes, but is that an argument against what I said? Both non-shrink-wrapped dinosaurs and dinosaurs with feathers haven’t reached the general public conscience (and I’d argue feathers as a concept are easier to convey, actually, so they should take less time). So when popular science like the post in the OP talks about what depictions “do” instead of “did”, it’s talking to the public.
I mean the lizard dinosaurs are everywhere. Every toy, movie, even in schools.
Maybe they don’t fit under the term of “paleoartists” (they are artists of Paleolithic creatures) but the most popular modern depictions of dinosaurs are presumably the Jurrasic World movies, and I think they are almost universally lacking plumage. I’ve only seen the first, but the images I’ve seen I don’t have any feathered dinos. So, no. This is still an ongoing issue.