headers
Guy Leahy | 1 Jan 2006 01:24
Picon
Favicon

Re: Kong Credits

According to the latest issue of Cinefex magazine, the
Kong special effects technicians do not appear to have
used any scientific consultants for most of the
animals.  They did conduct some research on gorillas
to try to make Kong appear reasonably accurate.
The sauropod and dromaeosaur ("Venatosaurus") were
based on designs from an earlier intended 1996 remake
of Kong which Universal Pictures cancelled in 1997
because the studio feared the film would be lost
amongst other big monster pictures which were in
production at the time (the Godzilla and Mighty Joe
Young remakes.)  One sentence from the article
shouldn't surprise anyone on the DML who has seen the
film: 

"Designs (for the dinosaurs) deliberately departed
from paleontological research."

Another quote from the article from Peter Jackson in
regards to the sauropod design:

"Everybody calls these things 'Apatosaurus' these
days" Peter Jackson remarked. "It will always be
'Brontosaurus' to me! We  made a traditional one, not
quite a tail dragger."

The Kong effects design team wanted the dinosaurs to
look more like the original 1933 Kong dinosaurs than
those of Jurassic Park.   They did base the V-rex head
on a T. rex skull, but added "bony protrusions" to the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Dann Pigdon | 1 Jan 2006 02:43
Picon

Re: Adamantisaurus, new titanosaur in January 2006 Palaeontology


Tommy Bradley wrote:
> 
> _Adamantisaurus_ huh?  Can't wait to find out the origin of that name.  The
> fictitious material X-Man Wolverine's claws are made of?

I believe it was named by one of the excavation team who happened to be
a Drow. Apparently the bones began to disintegrate on contact with
sunlight... :D

(There's nothing like a bit of D&D humour to start off the new year...)

--

-- 
___________________________________________________________________

Dann Pigdon
GIS / Archaeologist         http://heretichides.soffiles.com
Melbourne, Australia        http://www.geocities.com/dannsdinosaurs
___________________________________________________________________
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Rodlox R | 1 Jan 2006 04:34
Picon
Favicon

Happy New Year


I apologize in advance if this sounds too culture-centric, but -

Happy New Year!
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Cliff Green | 1 Jan 2006 06:42

Season's Greatings to DML

Dear List,

    We just returned from viewing King Kong. A wonderful fantasy, and, IMHO, hardly worth discussing it's
scientific impurities on a list like ours.

     I hope everyone has a wonderful and safe New Years.

Love,

Cliff
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Mickey Rowe | 1 Jan 2006 09:01
Picon

Dinosaur List Administrative Message

This file was last touched (I changed the next two paragraphs) December 8, 2005

// My migration from Psychology to Lifesciences is proceeding (albeit
// at the pace of a proverbial snail).  I've noted that at the top of
// all of the  DML pages at psych.ucsb.edu.  I'm no longer syncing those
// pages with changes made at lifesci.  Always remember
// www.dinosaurmailinglist.org as your starting point and this won't
// matter.  But speaking of syncing...  
//
// I think it's been a while since I synced this e-mail with the web page
// version of the administrative rules.  Always check the web page for the
// latest version...  I'll try to get around to making this current some
// time this month so that the next time it goes out you can give it your
// full confidence.
//
// If you're new... we have implemented a filter designed to block all
// MIME or html coded portions of messages.  We had to do this to
// prevent viruses from circulating through the list.  In order for
// your messages to reach everyone, and more importantly in order for
// your messages to appear in the archive, you *MUST* send them as
// plain text only.  If you have any doubts about whether or not you
// are doing this, please check the archives to see how your messages
// are appearing.  If you do not know how to format your mail as plain
// text only, please see: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
//
// For more explanation about the filter and MESSAGE TRUNCATED errors, 
// please see: http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/~rowe/dinosaur/MessageTruncation.html
// As I noted previously, I've added instructions on how to see the plain 
// text alternative for a few programs: Pine, AppleMail, Juno, and Netscape.
// Check out the MessageTruncation page if you want to see those instructions
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
MKIRKALDY | 1 Jan 2006 17:03
Picon
Favicon

TaxonSearch online

Posted for Paul  Sereno.
_____

TaxonSearch online

TaxonSearch  (www.taxonsearch.org) was recently launched and an inaugural 
file (Stem  Archosauria 1.0) posted to harness the greater precision that 
phylogenetic  taxonomy offers--without recourse to the straightjacket of authority or 
a  unitary taxonomy and as an alternative (or enhancement to) the slow and  
distributed nature of printed publications.  It is an attempt, in other  words, 
to create a research tool that (1) enhances access to a wide range of  
information on suprageneric taxa and (2) hopefully encourages exchange and  
consensus.

The details behind the logic and terminology of phylogenetic  systematics are 
available in a recent publication (Sereno (2005) and an  explanation of 
TaxonSearch in another (Sereno et al., 2005).  The  compilation covers all 
suprageneric taxa within Archosauria outside the crown  taxa Crocodylia and Neornithes 
and excluding taxa within  Pterosauromorpha.

I look forward to your responses to this interactive  tool in general, as 
well as any specific comments about any taxon record.   Posting of such 
commentary will begin early in 2006; posting new files will be  possible later in 2006 
after feedback/testing of the site and its current  compilation.

Best regards,

Paul  Sereno
______
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jay | 1 Jan 2006 18:03
Picon
Favicon

Re: Even more last papers for 2005


Forgot this one:

freely availible at :
http://palaeo-electronica.org/2005_2/neutron/neutron.pdf

 Schwarz, Daniela, Vontobel, Peter, Lehmann, Eberhard H., Meyer, Christian A., and Bongartz,
Georg, 2005. Neutron Tomography of
Internal Structures of Vertebrate Remains: A Comparison with X-ray Computed Tomography.
Palaeontologia Electronica Vol. 8, Issue
2; 30A:11p, 800KB;
http://palaeo-electronica.org/paleo/2005_2/icht/issue2_05.htm

ABSTRACT

Neutron tomography has been applied as a novel, non-invasive technique for 3-D visualization and
characterization of internal structures of vertebrate remains. Whereas X-ray computed tomography
maps regions of different densities within an object, neutron tomography is sensitive to
differences in the concentration of some light materials like hydrogen. Compared to X-ray computed
tomography (CT), the image quality of neutron tomography (NT) is strongly influenced by the resin
materials used for the reconstruction and conservation of the objects. Stabilizing metal
inclusions in bones leads to a strong scattering of X-rays in CT, whereas these inclusions can be
better penetrated and therefore lead to less disturbing contrasts in NT. The maximum cross-section
of rocks and fossilized bone material that can be penetrated by X-rays in a medical CT scanner is
approximately 40-50 cm, whereas neutrons can penetrate rocks or fossilized bone material with a
cross-sectional thickness up to about 12 cm. The spatial resolution of NT (0.1-0.27 mm) is better
than in a medical CT scanner (0.35-0.5 mm). In the special case of the studied sauropod vertebrae,
the density of the fossil bones, the high amount of marly sediment matrix within openings of the
bones, and the presence of multiple fractures filled with glue decreased the quality of the
neutron tomographic images. On the other hand, neutron tomographic images displayed a detailed
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
tholtz | 1 Jan 2006 18:49
Picon
Favicon

RE: Adamantisaurus, new titanosaur in January 2006 Palaeontology

> _Adamantisaurus_ huh?  Can't wait to find out the origin of that name.
> The
> fictitious material X-Man Wolverine's claws are made of?  I doubt it. :-)
> "Before Adam lizard?"  Not bloody likely.

Presumably "diamond lizard". Adamant = diamond. Hence, adamantium = a
fictional remarkably strong metal.

Happy New Year, everybody!

                Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
        Senior Lecturer, Vertebrate Paleontology
Department of Geology           Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland          College Park Scholars
        Mailing Address:
                Building 237, Room 1117
                College Park, MD  20742

http://www.geol.umd.edu/~tholtz/
http://www.geol.umd.edu/~jmerck/eltsite
Phone:  301-405-4084    Email:  tholtz <at> geol.umd.edu
Fax (Geol):  301-314-9661       Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Michael Habib | 1 Jan 2006 21:18

Re: Kong Credits

> Some of the Spider Pit critters were based
> on real insects...

Granted, not really a comment on dinosaurs, but for those with 
arthropod interests as well: The tactile navigation and movement of the 
centipedes looked exactly like real centipedes (and was nice and scary 
to boot).  The spindly spider creatures were scaled-up vinegaroons, and 
the giant orthopterns leaping onto Driscoll appear to be scaled-up 
wetas.  Wetas, for those who don't know, are very large, 
freeze-tolerant crickets native to New Zealand that happen to terrify 
Peter Jackson (which probably influenced their inclusion in the movie). 
  I felt that all of those animals looked and moved fantastically well 
in the movie.

So, to make a more general point (one relevant to the dinosaurs): Weta 
did very well with any animals (scaling physics aside) for which they 
had direct, living analogs (or really, homologs).  The Weta digital 
crew generally likes to have living models for their creatures when 
possible.  Even in LOTR they used a lot of 'on site' animals for sounds 
and looks (for example, they took the time to catch wild spiders and 
bring them into the studio to help model Shelob in Two Towers).  The 
dinosaurs, of course, don't fall into this direct analog category so 
well, and so had a unique suite of issues.

So, I'm going to shift the subject a little bit and propose this 
question to the list (should be fun and interesting):

What are the top five suggestions that you would make to a special 
effects studio regarding the recreation of dinosaurs for film?
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Richard W. Travsky | 1 Jan 2006 22:05
Picon
Favicon

Re: Kong Credits

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005, Guy Leahy wrote:
> According to the latest issue of Cinefex magazine, the
> Kong special effects technicians do not appear to have
> used any scientific consultants for most of the
> animals.  They did conduct some research on gorillas
> to try to make Kong appear reasonably accurate.

Andy Serkis, who "modeled" for Kong, studied gorillas both
at the zoo and in Rwanda.

See  http://www.theonering.net/scrapbook/view/14583

> [...]
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane