[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Notes on scientifically comparative paleoposes
In a message dated 3/18/11 6:57:18 AM, david.marjanovic@gmx.at writes:
<< The tree trunks around the *Omeisaurus* (p. 65, again after the first
page of a chapter) are _all
completely flat_, one of the poor animals has a head but all the rest of
it is just brown color on the background (lit much too brightly),
another had head and neck visible but the neck isn't shaded even though
its front side is lit by the sun, the legs in caudal view are all
completely flat, and the distance between the little ones and the bush
in front of them is just impossible to judge. >>
The above comments are incorrect because the commentator did not send me a
message asking for an explanation. The painting was based closely on a photo
I took of the sun shining through conifers from behind. The trunks are of
course flat in the photo because there is no differential shading from one
side (likewise, a photograph taken when the sun is on the horizon, with the
the sun directly behind the camera so that their are no shadows in the
resulting image, everything from behind being fully lit by the sun, look
strangely
flat). The dinosaurs etc are the same. One reason I did the scene this why
was for that peculiar flat look. I also did much the same in reverse with the
resting pair of Yangchuanosaurus oil lit by the setting sun almost directly
behind the viewer.
And the sun is not "too" bright because that is exactly the way it was at
the scene and is in the photo.
G Paul
</HTML>