this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

Funny

14377 readers
809 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Draconic_NEO@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The term "artist" here is being used kind of loosely. They're doing the bare minimum you need to turn a skeleton into a living creature. Good artistic representations require a lot more imagination, beyond what we scientifically know. You can get clues by looking at already existing animals and how they relate to their skeletons. Which gives an idea of how much not bone material those creatures might have. No you won't know exactly how much they did, but that's not really being represented by skin wrapping either is it. Better to try and go for something believable rather than the bare minimum.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I want to take it one step further.

And no, I don't care if there's good reason to believe that Tyrannosaurs weren't fluffy like owls, I still want a decent artist's depiction of a T. rex with owl-level fluff.