post rare Knights
>>2327318
dumping my folder of knights
>>2327462
>>2327464
>>2327465
>>2327466
>>2327467
>>2327468
>>2327469
>>2327470
>>2327471
>>2327472
>>2327474
>>2327475
>>2327476
>>2327477
>>2327478
>>2327480
>>2327481
>>2327478
My fav.
>>2327482
>>2327484
>>2327486
shit forgot pic lek
>>2327487
>>2327488
>>2327489
last one
some of these are bretty good
excellent dump anon
>>2327318
Thank you for these OP. I'll post some rare Franczaks.
>>2329171
>>2329173
>>2329192
>>2329193
>>2329195
>>2329199
>>2329203
Wish this artist was still around. I wonder what he's up to these days.
>>2329171
>>2329173
>>2329192
>>2329193
>>2329195
>>2329199
>>2329203
>>2329207
these paintings had a huge effect on me when i was young. they were in some computer game/software that I played. I used to have a lot of educational software and there was one about dinosaurs I remember. Love this artist's work.
>>2329533
addendum: first time I've seen them in high resolution. Grainy gif format images by Franczak were all I am used to seeing!
>>2327462
he painted a fuckin wyrm and called it a dino
>>2327484
>smilodon
>being able to tackle a megatherium
That would be like a leopard trying to take down a rhino.
>>2330767
that's just how most bipeds work. human walking is a perpetual falling down.
>>2330834
this
>>2329533
>>2329534
Could that game be Dinosaur 3-D Adventure? That's what I had when I was a kid. That game is full with Brian Franczak's art, it's probably part of the reason why it captivates me to this day. Nostalgia aside, I do think that Franczak brought forth that rare quality in his paintings of depicting the animals as but a small part of a greater context. His art for me is not as much pictures of dinosaurs than it is snapshots of different Mesozoic landscapes and what they contained. His dinosaurs were beautiful too. Just look at this Dryosaurus!
It's a shame that most of his art on the internet doesn't exist in any good quality. I was lucky enough to find his website shortly before it got taken down, it's where those pictures are from. I have not uploaded most of these paintings before now so be sure to save them.
>>2330767
Keep in mind that real animals aren't static homogeneous objects and that different factors than proportions plays part in their balance such as tendons, bone density, organ placement, hollow cavities such as lungs and air-sacks, and however the animal is locomoting or not. Some of those tails do look a bit meagre by modern standards, but I think they're fine purely mechanically-wise.
Based Burian coming through.
>>2333148
>>2333150
>>2333146
Yup that was probably it.
That dryosaur painting looks like Greg Paul, though.
dem eyes
Here's some rare Burian.
>>2333419
Yeah, it's actually Paul's.
Brian Engh's art deserves more recognition imo.
>>2333419
>>2335783
My god you're right. I've associated that piece with Franczak my whole life for some reason. My world is shook.
>>2331692
is that a sarkastodon in the back?
>>2327490
WAIT A MINUTE I RECOGNIZE THAT PICTURE!
When Burian ripped off Bakker.
>>2327478
*pomf* =3
>>2327474
what the fuck am I looking at
John Conway
>>2336237
I find Franczak more appealing than Paul. More subtle and naturalistic artwork. Paul tends to show his dinosaurs in very dramatic circumstances, which is kind of obvious because him and his mentor Bakker have dedicated their lives to convincing the public that dinosaurs were hot-blooded animals.
>>2338001
How can whitebois even compete?
>>2338037
Everywhere I post that, that same joke gets made.
>>2333152
this one is awesome
>>2338009
Yeah this guy is pretty great.
>>2327478
>I have foreseen this confrontation coming and have mastered Brazilian Jiu Jitsu
>Crawl atop me and meet your doom!
>>2327478
Who was in the wrong here?
>>2340996
eww
>>2341349
Scoliosaurus
>>2340996
Has science gone too far?
I know it's bullshit, but snake-necked plesiosaurs will forever have a place in my heart.
>>2327470
Why'd they keep drawing the same 4 animals
>>2336390
Yes it is.
I have found the full version.
Emiliano Troco
>>2343838
>>2343838
moar from this artist plz
>>2343843
I'll post all that I got.
>>2343844
>>2343845
>>2343849
>>2343850
>>2343851
>>2343854
>>2343857
>>2343859
What are those nodes for?
>>2343854
Islamasauras
>>2340996
Teleports in front of you.
Pssh nothing personal kid.
>>2340996
>i was a foken' legend
>>2344019
Sure, it's cute. But dinosaurs aren't about being cute.
>>2345022
itt shrink wrapping and feathers
>>2345022
Actually, the artist posted his reasoning for it. Female lions and leopards, usually after losing cubs, have been shown to take offspring of usual prey species and "adopt" them. Unfortunately, the calves are going to die either from starvation or "mom"'s gonna get hungry.
For dinosaurs, it's all speculatory, of course.
>>2345045
dinosaurs were probably not capable of that kind of behavior. unless there was something instinctual about it, it seems unlikely that a tyrannosaur would let a juvenile ceratopsian hang around like that. dinosaur behavior would have been very stereotyped and sophisticated "thought" rare
>>2345877
>probably not
>m-m-muh skull size studies
>m-muh brain to body mass when comparing non-mammals
Quit regurgitating journals you won't even comprehend properly anon. Life is not a game of parroting Google Scholar.
>>2345895
>muh smart-o-saurs
behavioral sophistication on the levels of ratites and waterfowl is probably the most dinosaurs could muster. lots of stereotyped behaviors - like goose egg-rolling. Not that it's inferior - genes can 'program' pretty complex behaviors.
FWIW, dromaeosaurids probably didn't exhibit wolf-level forms of social behavior or pack hunting. they may have been gregarious, but Jurassic Park is (duh) pushing it - they would have been mostly solitary or cooperative only temporarily. nearly all modern birds and reptiles are not pack hunters (see modern raptors)
>>2346604
adding on to my post: it's compelling to compare dromaeosaurids to felines and envision them as cat-like ambush predators, especially the smaller ones. They don't seem to have been as fast as once thought.
>>2346604
>probably the most
>probably didn't
>it's compelling
Nice speculative biology faggot.
>>2346615
it's no more speculative than the notion that they lived in tight-knit wolf packs, which is a *possibility* - we have evidence of probable gregariousness for these theropods, but many birds are gregarious yet do not cooperatively hunt
>>2346615
see http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3374/0079-032X%282007%2948%5B103%3AAROCPH%5D2.0.CO%3B2
>>2346604
You can't generalize all 30+ known genera of Dromaeosaur. That's like saying all canids are solitary just because coyotes tend to hunt alone. It also wouldn't surprise me if the smartest dinosaurs were on the same level as the smartest birds.
>Inb4 muh brain case analysis
Those brain studies don't even really work on modern birds, much less animals removed 65 million years.
>>2346634
>Hey! Lets guestimate and extrapolate what animals that died 120 mya would be like based on animals that share almost nothing in common with except for relation!
These weren't ducks or crocodiles. Niche has far more to do with traits an animal exhibits than relation does. I guess lions must not actually be pack animals because all other felids are solitary hunters.
>>2336241
ow man
>>2343849
"Which one of you nerds wants to wrestle"
>>2346672
okay, but there's not a lot of *positive* evidence for leonine or canine style pack-hunting. extant phylogenetic bracketing is one of the few ways of tackling the question, and unfortunately it seems like current evidence squares up to that. Obviously, there was likely a spectrum of social behavior in a family of dinosaurs that lived for almost 100 million years, but it doesn't seem likely to me that the hyper-predatory varieties ever reached the kind of cooperation that extant mammalian apex predators did. Birds can be extremely gregarious and social animals, but usually the act of gathering food is a solitary performance. Leopards and tigers handle beefy prey on their own; perhaps _Utahraptor_, a large and robust dromaeosaurid, was more like this. The lion analogy is probably less applicable.
>>2346724
But thats the thing, we shouldn't be tackling questions like this when there is no possible way of knowing. Extrapolating from living relatives is a straight up glorified guess. Until we have definitive evidence (looking at modern animals isn't "evidence") The question should remain unanswered, especially since we're painting in such broad strokes with an entire clade of animals.
>>2346935
It's evidence, albeit very shitty evidence. For the purposes of, say, artwork, or if one had to make an *educated* guess, however, it's clearly wiser to portray theropod behavior as within the range of it exhibited by living diapsids, excepting contrary evidence.
>this thread
wew
>>2346956
Its seriously like trying to definitively say that T. rex was brown because some birds are brown, its fucking useless. Calling that evidence is like saying that you found the killer just because both the suspect and the perpetrator are both males.
>>2337815
A dire-otter?
>>2340996
>TAKBIR
>>2327478
Every time I see this painting I wonder if they are supposed to be genuinely fighting or play fighting
>>2340996
Why was it when people realized that Iguanadon's "horn" was actually a claw everybody just assumed that it was its's only claw and that it would fight by jamming its thumbs into it's enemies like a homicidal fonz?
>>2345877
Modern birds have been known to do similar things
It wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility