Styracosaurus Maquette

[Scar]

All of the skulls together and separate from the statues seems like it would really skew perspective. Seems as if they were intended to be displayed alongside the statues, and that's the route I intend to take.

 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Whatever you prefer of course..

I'm just saying it's possible..if one wanted to...I don't know how I would display them until the chance arises..there may be a space issue or anything. Hard to say right now what my preference will be.

 

[Agent0028]

All of the skulls together and separate from the statues seems like it would really skew perspective. Seems as if they were intended to be displayed alongside the statues, and that's the route I intend to take.

I think you're right. I moved them to sit with the statues, but if that display doesn't grow on me I'll probably drop the exclusives and just get the regs to save a bit of money.

BTW Friday night my company christmas party was at our local science center and we ate dinner in the dinosaur exhibit room.

 

[Scar]

BTW Friday night my company christmas party was at our local science center and we ate dinner in the dinosaur exhibit room.

Sounds like an awesome party. I probably would have been too distracted by the prehistoric company to converse with the human company. I'd be that annoying guy snapping the flash photos, but it would be of all the exhibits in close up shots of various features.

 

[Agent0028]

I may have taken some time to read the information panels while other people were dancing...

I also may have made a joke about using the T-Rex tooth's serrated edge as a knife since they didn't give us good ones to cut our steak. I owe the knowledge of that to you guys.

 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

lol

Did you get any pics ?

 

[Scar]

Well today I have the time to sit down and type out a coherent review of the Styracosaurus, but unfortunately the freezing rain today is rendering picture-taking a bit difficult. So in short, review today, pictures to come!

Dinosauria Review #4: Styracosaurus maquette

There are aspects of this piece in creative interpretation which I absolutely adore, and others which I feel could have been improved upon.

Overall, I will credit SS for infusing this piece with personality. It's not one individual aspect of the piece which serves this purpose, but the cumulative effort of the various facets, encompassing both sculpt and paint application in a marriage which results in a dinosaur that really comes alive upon close inspection.

Regarding the sculpt, the stance of the Styracosaurus was a superb choice. The backstory conveys this animal to be a bull Styracosaur who perhaps worked a bit too much on his mating display as opposed to his ability to fight rival bulls for dominance within the herd. This acts as a double-edged sword - the animal displays vibrant sexually dimorphic traits and puts the energy into engendering such traits, relaying to females of his species that he has favorable genes, capable of producing flamboyant characteristics and still surviving in a predator-rich environment. Despite being displaced by other male Styracosaurs for dominance, he retains the position of herd sentry, a crucial position upon which the entire herd hangs its metaphorical hat for protection. The overall sculpt accentuates his position within the herd; despite this individual organism not being an alpha male, the piece exudes an air of dominance and fearsomeness. This Styracosaur is the archetypal guardian of the herd. Imagine an approaching pack of marauding Troodons intent on sneaking among the herd to steal away with eggs and infants, though before they can attain their goal they happen upon this animal. The Styracosaur stands atop a mound of loosely packed earth, positioning his body sidelong to any encroaching foes, his head held erect; the result is an animal which is making itself appear as large and imposing as possible to any potential threats, while simultaneously surveying the surrounding area with as broad an efficiency as possible.

The body itself is studded with protuberances and dermal protrusions both along the flanks and running the length of the spine from the cervical vertebrae to the most posterior caudal vertebrae. The result is a body with a barbed exterior which parallels (although to a much less dramatic extent) the impressive skull with its lance-like horns. This herbivore is no bit less threatening than any of the carnivores we've seen in the line, and although smaller than the Triceratops it evinces just as much raw power, and arguably a much greater sense of regal dominance just by the nature of its posture. Admittedly it's often the subtle nuances, the tiny minutia which artists opt to put into the statues, that I latch onto with fascination and admiration. Case in point - I love that Krentz sculpted the Styracosaurus with its nostrils flared. The thin membranous nares positioned directly behind the beak are wide possibly either in an attempt to take in as much sensory smells in the surrounding environment, or out of agitation regarding an impending threat. The beak as well is impeccably realistic. While designed for foraging, you know if it latched on in a quarrel, that beak could do some damage (speaking as a man who has bitten by numerous herbivorous birds as bears the scars to prove it). I really like the weathering on the beak and the way in which the gnatotheca fits into the rhinotheca. There is also an abundance of folds and creases in the flesh across the body which remind me of two of today's large herbivores in particular - the elephant and the rhinoceros. Neither hesitate to defend themselves aggressively against perceived threats and that's exactly the impression evinced by this Styracosaur.

Now that I've told you what I like about the sculpt, I will say I don't like everything about it. The dorsal, lateral, and anterior regions sport a glut of detail, but that seems to slacken off when we reach the feet of the animal. I know Dan mentioned this concern previously on the T.rex VS Triceratops diorama, and although I don't feel it's an overwhelming or apparently obvious aesthetic on that diorama, here it's definitely noticeable. Take a moment, look at the piece, and compare the level of detail across the animal's head and body to the detail on the lower legs and feet. There's no contest. It just seems as if it could have done with some pebbling or creasing to ensure that observers see those extremities as biological extensions of the organism, and not merely anchors to the base. Just a thought, but I feel a bit more time could have been taken there. Another nitpick of mine is on the horns of the Styracosaurus. If you have the flagship VS dio, look at the horns on the Triceratops. The keratin overlaying the horns is weathered and rough. The Styracosaurus horns appear too smooth, almost polished by comparison. From all of the apparent encounters this organism has had, according to its backstory, the horns do look awfully pristine. The keratin on the Triceratops and Carnotaurus horns look the way one would expect - with divots, outgrowth, and evidence of exposure to the elements. Where it's the most apparent for me is on the orbital crests. Bear in mind by alluding to the Triceratops as a comparison this is NOT by any means a critique of David Krentz's style as opposed to Adrian Taboada's; as evidenced by the T.rex maquette, we see that Krentz is easily, EASILY capable of a degree of detail which is either on par with or vastly surpassing most if not all of his peers. The man can most definitely set the standard for lively, realistic dinosaur statues, as we saw in the T.rex maquette and in Krentz's own independent work (his Einiosaurus "Buffalo Bull", "Judith" the Gorgosaurus, and "Rex Mundi" the T.rex come to mind).

Just quickly, I would like to touch on the base. here we have an excellent continuation of the trend for what we've seen in Dinosauria bases thus far - an advanced level of natural realism. The earth beneath the Styracosaur's feet seems literally to give way before our eyes, the animal sinking slightly into its defensive position, unconsciously "digging in" for a coming assault. An excellent selection to enhance the story and personality of the animal.

What's my favorite aspect of the piece? The paint application. Wow. Simply amazing. Earlier I mentioned all of the protuberances across the central body mass - the dorsal surface of the body and anterior portions of the legs are speckled; this could easily serve as both cryptic coloration (camouflage) and aposematic (warning) coloration. Cryptic coloration is easy enough to deduce, such that this breaks up the body pattern and would prove extremely useful to conceal an animal which shares its territory with Tyrannosaurus rex. Aposematic coloration is a fine likelihood in the sense that the animal is covered with the aforementioned protrutions, as well as that menacing crest of horns. The color could well make the most vulnerable region of the animal (its exposed back) appear as it it is well-defended. Again regarding defense, that frill is astounding! It is quite vibrant, and could well be a sexually dimorphic display to signal virility, but equally plausible is the color pattern being elevated away from organs though still in an armored region to draw the attention of predators and make them uncertain of where they should attack to deal the most lethal blow. Predators are not ignorant of cephalization. Numerous studies have been done to show that predatory species search for the eyes on an organism to locate the head and then subsequently attack; so many sensory organs as well as the brain all located in one region. A sound attack executed well by a predator could quickly kill if not debilitate an herbivore. Utilizing a color for the spots on the frill which parallels the exact coloration of the animal's eyes could confuse and disorient a predator. The attacking animal would think the most vulnerable region also to be situated right within a massive crown of spikes, and consequently be confounded as to the best route of attack. An excellent, excellent choice of color pattern. To say that a lot of thought has gone into this particular color scheme would seem a vast understatement.

Lastly I'll just say concerning the exclusive skull that I would highly recommend pairing the skull with this piece for a number of reasons. I know there has been a lot of debate circling recently concerning whether or not to display the exclusive skulls separately from the statues or with the accompanying pieces. Firstly, the statues are not in scale with one another, and the exclusive skulls are to scale with the individual statues. The result is a Styracosaurus skull which quite literally dwarfs the other exclusive skulls. Displaying the skulls together and separate from the statues would skew perspective as to the comparative element between pieces. Some will point out that the T.rex skull exclusive to the maquette comes up short of the maquette's skull in size. Remember, however, that the T.rex depicted in the maquette is a senior alpha male who has succeeded over his long years in staving off assaults from not only individual competitors, but from packs of competing Tyrannosaurs. At his age and status within his ecology, it's apparent that he's an extraordinary organism, and that the skull is likely based on an average adult organism from the species, and evidently not the animal in the statue. In his younger years as an adult it's quite likely the T.rex had a skull very much the size of the exclusive skull. Comparing size between statues aside, it's nice, particularly in the Styracosaurus piece, to see the keratinous outgrowths overlaying the bone, and to have the ability to hold the statue against the skull and see the similarities and disparities concurrently.

So there you have it. These are my thoughts on the Styracosaurus maquette - overall an outstanding artistic achievement in bringing our first solo herbivore into the line. Some features could have been improved upon, and others stand out as exquisite examples of the prescience and biological insight poured into the piece.

 

[The Craw]

nice review. he is definately my favorite of the line so far. he hasn't left my desk yet to join the others on the shelf. i love looking at him. i have the T-rex/Triceratops on Flexpay. i can't wait to add it to my collection in a couple months and compare the triceratops' detail to the styracosaurus.

 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Interesting.... I certainly agree on the horns look too smooth..I think it kind of extends to the rest of the head as well though..it looks like there are lines and creases there but they smoothed over as if trying to hide them.. maybe an error in molding occured. it's not major really..just a nitpick..those details really drive my interest though. Giving this fellow some small wounds or scars would also have been fine..he was fresh from the mating battles right ?

 

[dansdinosaurs]

Great analysis as always, my friend.

One thing I noticed is that Krentz, like many paleoartists, tends give ceratopsians rather thin tails. Granted, they shouldn't be as beefy as the tails of hadrosaurs, but I'm not quite sure if there's enough evidence to say that ceratopsians should have such awkwardly puny-looking tails. One might argue that their center of mass is somewhat unique, though.

I assume you've seen many avian hunting tactics that emphasize determination of the prey's head. I would be interested to know if a more primitive mind, such as that of a reptile, would also show that selective tendency.

 

[MooMooEgg]

Nice review, Scar. Always good to read an enlightening review like that.

It's a shame that the pieces aren't to scale, but it's completely understandable why they're not. But even though I haven't seen any of the pieces in person (yet ), all these pics and praise make me hope this line has a very long life.

 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

The tail looks acceptable to me..the skeletons of ceretosians have very thin tails it looks like.

Reptiles focus a lot on movement during hunting..not sure about color even if some of them are very colorful in appearence. The lighter color might standout more when the animal is moving a reptile..so it might focus on the lighter color..not really sure how that would work when applied to dinosaurs though.

 

[Scar]

Interesting.... I certainly agree on the horns look too smooth..I think it kind of extends to the rest of the head as well though..it looks like there are lines and creases there but they smoothed over as if trying to hide them.. maybe an error in molding occured. it's not major really..just a nitpick..those details really drive my interest though. Giving this fellow some small wounds or scars would also have been fine..he was fresh from the mating battles right ?

It's not the entire head where I have an issue, though, in that with some of that spectacular scaling and pebbling we don't need to see the rough-hewn bits that should be prevalent on the horns and keratinous outgrowths. Agama lizards, for instance, often have very large pebbling contributing to a relatively smooth surface. That's just fine in terms of relation to the animal kingdom. The horns and cranial protrusions are my points of contention.

Also, he's not "fresh" from mating battles. We don't have really good models to approximate how long egg-laying may have taken place following fertilization, though it may have been a good stretch of time so it makes sense that the Styracosaur isn't nursing fresh wounds. That being said, we also don't know what Styracosaur mating competitions may have involved. We don't have any evidence that they gouged each other's heads with their horns, rather what we once thought were pitting and wounds from conspecific horn injuries were actually bone diseases which were surprisingly prevalent in ceratopsians. The likelihood of them charging one another like rams isn't plausible, as pressure tests show this would have fractured the skulls. Styracosaurs with their large fenestra had fairly fragile crests which may have been more advantageous as displays or thermoregulation as opposed to armor in their cousin Triceratops. Side-long bashing of the skulls or "locking" of the heads at close range and pushing at one another in tests of strength is much more likely. Not a lot of blood-letting, but easy to determine dominance.

Great analysis as always, my friend.

One thing I noticed is that Krentz, like many paleoartists, tends give ceratopsians rather thin tails. Granted, they shouldn't be as beefy as the tails of hadrosaurs, but I'm not quite sure if there's enough evidence to say that ceratopsians should have such awkwardly puny-looking tails. One might argue that their center of mass is somewhat unique, though.

I assume you've seen many avian hunting tactics that emphasize determination of the prey's head. I would be interested to know if a more primitive mind, such as that of a reptile, would also show that selective tendency.

Agreed. Krentz does have a tendency to slenderize ceratopsian tails a bit more than is traditional, though it's an interpretation equally as valid as a stockier tail. It also seems a bit of a greater likelihood in the lighter-built ceratopsians like Styracosaurus.

What's really cool about the targeting of the head by predators is that it isn't exclusive to very intelligent, derived vertebrate predators. Quite a number of fish species do the same due to the tendency of predatory fish to attack the head for a quick kill.

As a piranha owner, I can tell you that those bad boys regularly target the eyes of other fish, including rival piranha; you'll rarely happen across a piranha tank that doesn't have at least a third of the fish sans one or both eyes. Tuna, marlin, grouper, halibut, bass, trout, and sharks all go for the head. Avian raptors, crocodilians, varanids, all known mammalian carnivores (the list goes on and on) all go for an exposed head when the opportunity presents itself. You'll often see that after Ora lizards deal their initial devastating attack, they amble back to the dying animal and often latch directly onto the head (if the prey is small enough for them to grab an adequate hold), and the belly for larger prey. The target is always a region with vital organs. The "eye spot" design is a cool defensive adaptation to confuse and disorient predators, drawing their attention away from regions housing vital organs and simultaneously making it difficult for predators to assess whether or not they have attained the element of surprise in an attack.

 

[Agent0028]

So if we don't know what the mating competitions involved, how do we know there were mating competitions? Is it based on what we know of modern animals?

 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

A lot of speculation I guess.

I expect some injury to present in every piece really...dinosaurs aren't pristine. The fact he lost his mating fight just means he was in a fight..some scratching or bruising should be present..true we don't know a time frame really...but some wounds would show as just old scars...especially on the frill and horns. He has also been in fights as a guardian..some few hints of that wouldn't be out of order.

The story says " his horns and head are thick with keratin..a sign of virility " does that explain the smoothness ? I would just expect the detail shown along the spine and body to be present in the head as well..the main focal point.

 

[Agent0028]

Last Sunday I watched a show about dinosaurs on Discovery, and they showed a Rex crunching through a Trike's horn during a battle. That would be a cool maquette, a tricertaops with a broken horn. I don't know if one would survive that battle for it to be a realistic depiction though.

 

[dansdinosaurs]

From a purely statistical standpoint, mating and courtship is frequently characterized by some type of ritual behavior. Sometimes this is a simple procedure, but sometimes even seemingly simple animals display incredibly sophisticated courtship behavior. Within the field of paleontolgy, our ideas are in a constant state of flux, and of course there is much we don't really know. Fossils can tell you a lot, but they won't tell you everything.

The classic depiction of Pachycephalosaurs engaging in headbutting behavior represents a prime example of this; the domed skull is no longer thought to have been utilized in direct, frontal charging maneuvers. Yet in the dusty cloud of that shattered vision lies a familiar reminder: There are things we will never know. It was not our world, and these creatures are alien to us.

 

[MooMooEgg]

There are things we will never know. It was not our world, and these creatures are alien to us.

Yeah, and I find that all the new information/speculation about these creatures is utterly intriguing. I honestly haven't been following dinosaur studies too closely until the past 2 years or so, and it's amazing how much has changed and how wrong we were about certain aspects of their behavior and physiology.

 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Well how wrong we think we are is more correct..without observing the animals in their own enviroment we will never know for certain. In JP: The Lost World, Levine hoped to do just that..but if you've read the book you know it's pretty much impossible...if only that plateau existed somewhere.

I remember just last year or the year before hearing how some thought a healthy Rex would never attempt to attack a healthy Trike. Now they are showing two healthy individuals battling it out again.

 

[Agent0028]

So what are these changes based on? I find this stuff fascinating because its a field where we know alot, but we also know very little.