Life-size Velociraptor

[Scar]

Were the Horizons life-sized? I never saw any of them in person.

Nope. The T.rex is about 1/20, while the Velociraptor and Dilophosaurus are approximately 1/6.

 

[dansdinosaurs]

Ah. Then it's scarcely a fair comparison, is it?

 

[Figurefreaks]

Nope. The T.rex is about 1/20, while the Velociraptor and Dilophosaurus are approximately 1/6.

Horizon kit? …I have this 1/5 Scale.

 

[Scar]

Ah. Then it's scarcely a fair comparison, is it?

Definitely a fair comparison. I wish I could find Dave's close-up shots of closer details, including the eyes, but he fits spectacular detail into staggeringly small pieces, and Studio OxMox really puts that bust to shame with life-size, paleontologically accurate replicas. The eyes need to convey life and personality, which in this bust they do not. As Ian Malcolm pointed out in "The Lost World" novel when eyeing a Velociraptor life-sized replica, it's simply all wrong; there's no menace. I'm a purist.

 

[Scar]

Horizon kit? …I have this 1/5 Scale.

If I were you, I'd have that bad boy painted up and mounted on a base. But that's me. Seems a waste to have all that detail just sitting around waiting to be fulfilled.

 

[silentman116]

Wow, those are really well done! Too bad Sideshow abandoned the JP license before we could get a similar raptor maquette (T-rex as well). Damn shame. The Dinosauria line is really impressive, but my collection is strictly movie memorabilia, so I've been avoiding it thus far. I wonder if things might have played out differently had Sideshow kicked off the JP line with a maquette or raptor bust instead of the diorama.

 

[Scar]

I wonder if things might have played out differently had Sideshow kicked off the JP line with a maquette or raptor bust instead of the diorama.

Doubtful. Now, had the diorama came off the production line looking like the artist's proof on the website? Definitely.

 

[silentman116]

Doubtful. Now, had the diorama came off the production line looking like the artist's proof on the website? Definitely.

Good point. I canceled my dio after seeing the disappointing production paint, as I'm sure many did. The Tyrannosaurus Rex versus Triceratops diorama turned out exceptionally well and still tempts me despite my movie collectible focus.

By the way, the repaint you commissioned on the JP dio is phenomenal!

 

[dansdinosaurs]

They do look pretty good. Are any of these still available for purchase, though? I'm guessing they fetch a hefty price.

 

[Scar]

Good point. I canceled my dio after seeing the disappointing production paint, as I'm sure many did. The Tyrannosaurus Rex versus Triceratops diorama turned out exceptionally well and still tempts me despite my movie collectible focus.

By the way, the repaint you commissioned on the JP dio is phenomenal!

Thanks. It took a LOT of searching not only for an artist of exceptional skill, but for one who already has a familiarity with JP dinos and what they should look like based on their appearances on film. The most worthwhile custom I've ever gotten.

They do look pretty good. Are any of these still available for purchase, though? I'm guessing they fetch a hefty price.

They usually do fetch a good price. Check eBay. He lists one every so often.

 

[dansdinosaurs]

He sells them himself. Ooh. Rough times, I guess. I still don't see the difference in the eyes that you mentioned, though. Maybe I could use a new pair of eyes myself.

 

[HdoubleD]

The "Deinonychus = Velociraptor" proposition was put forth by a few individuals, but never really gained a serious foothold. Firstly, a little background might help. There are so very many camps in evolutionary theory that use vastly differing criteria for what can, at a given point, constitute a new species. Given a great enough disparity in phenotypic traits, as well as production of viable offspring among such individuals, we can categorize them as distinct and separate in most cases. Now with the aforementioned hypothesis, the contention wasn't whether or not they were separate species, which they undoubtedly were, but whether or not they belonged to the same genus. A thorough cladistic analysis through phylogenetic bracketing has ruled that out conclusively at this point. Still, it was an intriguing concept, and Crichton took a good deal of creative license... may his brilliant mind rest in peace. I mourn daily that we will no longer have literary saplings which sprang forth from his imagination.

And in terms of Utahraptor VS Deinonychus for the JP Velociraptors, it depends on whether or not you are referring to the raptors in the book or movie. In the book they were certainly based on Deinonychus, but in the movie it's more variant. The skeletal remains of one specimen discussed was around 12 feet long, a good 50% larger than the average Deinonychus. Now based in the JP movie mythos, the argument could have been made that these were, more accuately, Utahraptors, and this was a male, the smaller and more gracile sex. It's not outlandish to say that the alpha female in JP which slew six other Velociraptors in an assertion of dominance, reached Utahraptor proportions. I would say that the JP Velociraptors were much more akin to Utahraptors than any other dromaeosaurid in every way, the TLW raptors were based on Deinonychus, and the JPIII raptors... well, I won't even get into that.




Gotta love that image. It goes a great way to illustrate a solid comparison, but the Utahraptor seems a bit out of proportion. I prefer this image.

You can see from the picture how everyone can settle on the JP movie Velociraptors really being Utahraptors "mislabeled" by the InGen team.

Great read guys, thanks for the input.

 

[Scar]

He sells them himself. Ooh. Rough times, I guess. I still don't see the difference in the eyes that you mentioned, though. Maybe I could use a new pair of eyes myself.

Rough times? In what sense?

In terms of the eyes, again I wish I had a better shot of the Velociraptor eyes that he painted. I'll fire an e-mail and see what I can get from him. But in terms of relation to the film counterparts...

And now...

The trophy bust looks very much like those sold by eBay seller jurassicpark2002, who oddly enough has used much better eyes than the ones pictured above. I'm just not that impressed, and it's entirely because the eyes appear so dull and devoid of life. There's no life to the piece, no menace, no substance, and it's all because of the eyes. Otherwise it's quite impressive. The eyes just seem unthinking for an animal that is intended to be imposing largely due to its cunning. That's where this piece fails for me. No offense intended to the individual with whom you transact. He's clearly done an excellent job; my contention is just that I think it could be better.

 

[dansdinosaurs]

The lighting in that particular photograph might be a factor, but I'm afraid I still don't see the difference. The color, the reptilian pupil, the shine... it all seems the same to me. I don't think there'd be much changing your opinion, but does this image seem any more agreeable to you? It looks to me like he used a different eye for this piece, though.

 

[Predrhone]

I think if the pupil were a bit less dilated... it would be more menacing.

 

[Scar]

The lighting in that particular photograph might be a factor, but I'm afraid I still don't see the difference. The color, the reptilian pupil, the shine... it all seems the same to me.

I guess I'm just more of a stickler for detail, then. It just doesn't look like a real eye, to me. Those on Stan Winston's raptors do. Seems certainly like an artist's depiction meant to try to appear as an eye, but if you held that up to an actual reptilian eye there isn't any comparison. With any piece I put into my collection, I hold it to exacting standards. It's why I end up either reselling items often when I purchase them, or have them repainted to great specifications, as in the JP dio, for example. A heavier layer of gloss over the eye, more veinous perforations, a forward-facing retina... all would do wonders. Just my opinion on the matter. With those changes it might be something truly spectacular! Can you pose it with the jaw open or closed, or is there a set position? It looks as if the muscle banding in the open jaw is molded, but I thought I'd ask as that would be a nifty feature.

One knows that the bust isn't of a real animal, but as magicians say, the audience knows the truth and wants to be fooled.

 

[Adoptedscot]

To me this one does look odd.
I think what has been mentioned is right, it looks lifeless (yeah I know its handmade) and the eye is wierd. It's almost as if they made the head first and then popped the eye in, which may be the way to do it, but not when its noticeable. The eye should be embedded in the socket, surrounded by the texture of the skin and that doesn't seem to happen here which make the eye altogether too big.
That and the pupil does look dilated and strange looking, to me at least.

In this pic it looks a little better for the embedding of the eye but the eye itself looks off.
It is a good looking piece though
x

 

[thx217]

As a MAJOR JP fan. That bust just like Scar said. Lifeless. It's a easy pass. The piece only look acceptable from the side. If you look at it from the front.....it's even less then acceptable.

The JP Raptor has TONS of "character"(if you know Stan the man cared about) shape in it. We can do pic by pic comparison all day, from the basic shapes, sizes and scale of the head, eyes, texture, teeth. There are more then enough references to show just that.

It's a good piece, but not for people who wants accuracy and authenticity. If I remember correctly, he also did a JP III(smaller eyes, color variation and quills) version, which also suffers from the same problem, missing the basic shapes of the animal.

Btw, the eyes can't be just painted over the resin or whatever. It will never pass as a kick ass piece.

Here are few examples of how "JP" Raptor should look like.










And this is the close up shot of the bronze piece that I own.

 

[Scar]

Bless you, THX. I was hoping that, as an avid fan of Stan The Man, you would see this thread and bring some beautiful pics to back what Shell and I have been saying.

Particularly what you said about the bust when viewed head-on - it doesn't look fierce, it looks comical. There's meant to be a palpable menace, which Stan got when crafting his Velociraptors. For those who read the book, you know that for every bit of guile and intelligence the raptors possessed, they vastly surpassed it in often irrational ferocity and savagery, going well out of their way to obtain prey for the sake of sport rather than appetitive urges. Stan's Velociraptors show that these creatures are indeed animals to be reckoned with. If the bust captured that even slightly, then it would be improved. Also, even the jaws themselves appear far too bulky, on the bust, rather than slender yet powerful. The picture of the Velociraptor pair in the foliage is a personal favorite; with the mouth open you see a ferocity, and closed and upright there is a troubling, calculating nature to the creature that should rightly make any terrestrial mammal more than a bit timid.

 

[dansdinosaurs]

The only pictures I posted revealed the side of the animal, though. How do you know what it looks like from the front?