• frezik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Any which way they go with it would be a guess based on limited information. They’re most likely going to be wrong, and if they were exactly right, we wouldn’t know it.

    • Draconic NEO@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Of course it’ll be wrong, my point is to try making it look more like a living thing than a living skeleton. When comparing skin wrapped designs to living creatures (even mythical ones) they just look wrong. Most creatures don’t look shrink wrapped. Really imagining what prehistoric animals is more art than science, you use science to try and know roughly what they looked like but that’ll only get you so far, you need to use imagination or creativity.

      I mean we can create depictions of mythical animals that have never lived and will never live, why not use some of that skill to try and depict prehistoric creatures in a way that’s more life-like, because the shrink wrap technique isn’t more accurate, it’s lazy, not believable, and also aesthetically unappealing.

    • FundMECFSOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Honestly they should probably do like 2-3 potential pictures side by side so readers are aware of the uncertainty.