PaleoArt - New Visions of Ancient Creatures
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 мар 2018
- / scifri - Please Help Support Our Video Productions!
Paleoartist and scientific illustrator Gabriel Ugueto has a golden rule for his work: Accuracy. In order to resurrect the dinosaurs, Ugueto begins with a single bone and works his way from inside out. He researches whether there are any related animals alive today, or existing fossils that may shed light on how the bone fragment fits into a larger piece, and reconstructs the entire skeletal system. He then sketches in muscle groups, and adds skin and color considering where the animal lived and during what period of time.
But his resulting illustrations often don’t match the Jurassic Park-inspired dinosaurs that we’re used to.
Produced by Luke Groskin
Music by Audio Network
Illustrations by Gabriel Ugueto
Additional Images by Shutterstock and E. Frey 
Наука
Aaahhhh I love this!!
The book _All Yesterdays_ really opened my eyes to this kind of thinking. Really interesting book. It also includes some pictures of animals living today but reconstructed from their skeletons in the way we normally do with dinosaurs. They are utterly unrecognizable.
But one thing Dinosaurs cant all be dull colored
They will be colorfull
Idk if the cucked iguana is also in there. Is it?
Can you send us a link to the book?
i agree even though reptiles and archosaurs in flesh look very similar to their skeletons they still look different take a chicken for example...it's main bodyshape is just like it's skeleton (with muscles of course) but it has feathers it has scales on it's feet they have combs and wattlesroosters have long tails for display
@@jaisanatanrashtra7035that is a misconception, not all of them
Someone hire this guy for designing animals or monsters in an mmo.
Gabriel is awesome! Absolutely love his Baryonyx!
Calico Jackosaur Thank you very much! I’m glad you like my reconstructions.
Serpenillus You have a youtube channel!!?? Going to sub!
I randomly just decided to search and watch paleoart on yt but i didn't expect gabriel to be the main result, I've always love his art style the day i discovered his works a little over a year ago
Me too
Same!
First of all, I cannot get over how incredible your illustrations are. They are truly some of the best I have ever seen.
I am reaching a point in my life where I need to decide what I’m going to do going forward, and pieces of art like yours inspire me into the courage that I could someday do something as incredible. Wherever I go from here, natural history will always be my passion. And I want to thank you for creating this. It brings me confidence, and inspires awe.
Totally agree with this guy. Love the video!!!
He is one of my favorite paleoartists. I think his animals are the ones that look more realistic. Other paleoartists are great too, maybe even more "artistic" but most of the the time they go over the top with colors, patterns, etc. His reconstructions just feel real.
Gabriel is really talented! He is really inspiring to me, I love his art and his passion for this scope.
REALISTIC DINOSAURS! HECK YES!!
i love this guy's art he is making all the animals very accurate especially the marine reptiles
Gabreil Ugueto’s work is absolutely incredible, he depicts such a wide variety of animals in such detail and accuracy it’s hard not to like.
Really cool video!!!
My favorite paleo artist I can’t wait to have his book
The way you bring your art to life is fantastic
Absolutely incredible work! Thank you Gabriel Ugueto
Realistic is just as cool, maybe even cooler than Jurassic park. And more bad ass
I loved the hell out of this video. Keep it up
4:07
Silky ant eaters actually look alot like them in a way.
It’s not clear in the vid, but it’s got a ‘claw’ on the end of its tail too! Completely unique.
Thank You Gabriel Ugueto for showing me reality of prehistoric animals ❤️👍
I LOVE YOUR JOB!
Very, very interesting!
I see why people may not want to rethink how we originally depicted dinosaurs but to me I think its like rediscovering and reigniting my fascination again!
I just love it, when science and art meet...
This was great! Beautiful work and great ideas/thoughts. The world of palaeontology is ever expanding, we cant be stuck in the past (sound ironic, I know...). Dinosaurs and kin were real breathing things, not sci-fi monsters. It makes me glad that more and more people are depicting them as they should be. As animals, form a time long forgotten!
I would like to know what application does he use for illustrating??
ProCreate
SciFri Great! Thanks!
FASCINATING!! Gabriel: Me encanta tu trabajo; lo he estado siguiendo desde hace un tiempo en internet, y ahora mi hermano, que trabaja en el área de vida salvaje, me ha pasado este video para que se lo muestre a mis niños, y me ha volado la cabeza. Por cierto, trabajo en el área de diseño gráfico pero creo que lo que me apasiona es la ilustración, aunque nunca se me dio bien.
This video should have wayyyy more views
Paleoart is the
best
I suddenly want a remake of Disney's 'Dinosaur' where the dinos have more feathers done by this guy, he'd make it 100x better.
We really need a new documentary on the scale of BBC's Walking With Dinosaurs to depict the contemporary scientific understanding of dinosaurs, pterosaurs, plesiosaurs, ichthyosaurs, other reptiles and animals, including their habitats. Paleoecology has advanced so much since the 90's, and even then the Cretaceous feathered dinosaurs have not yet been discovered.
i mean, they tried to reboot WWD with the movie, but 20th century fox turned into... e w.
@@AltairBlue yeah because all major media sees dinosaurs as is either
1. Killing machines with a huge bloodlust
Or
2. A cartooney character meant to make kids giggle
20th century fox went with the latter, unfortunately
Your wish has been granted
Amazing
This would be great for an Disney Nature film!
If aliens try to reconstruct what a camel would look like when they were alive, and they never see one alive, they wouldnt know camels have a hump in the first place
This goes similar to recuntructing dinosaurs and other extinct creatures, trying to depict what they looked like when theyre alive
And i kinda blame Hollywood for that, they made us think that sharks are evil monsters that only wants bloodshed, they made us think that dinosaurs are giant angry beast that roars all the time and stomp around
Good thoughts. Great video! :D
Dream job
Check out Mark Witton, Emily Willoughby and Julio Lacerda as well!
Brian Engh is also great!
@@kelseyjaffer Brian Engh Speculates a bit too much
Also His dinosaurs are bit too weird , ( no offense I like Brian enghs style but I don't think any real Dinosaurs would look like what he thinks they looked like.)
The reason being, He gives Feathers to Sauropods. We have more than enough Scale fossils to say that Sauropods didn't had feathers. Owing to their massive size. Brian also gives really weird colors to Creatures sometimes even blues and Reds to large creatures. He States that animals alive today are color blind so that's why they don't have that complex color patterns like birds. But doesn't takes into account that The if predator and prey both have shiny blue , white feathers and Red Heads then spotting each other would be so easy. Predators should have Camouflaging colors just like how Gabriel or Mark Witton draws them .
@@Ujjwalkumar-je3me we don't have enough to say no for sure, but it is correct that afaik rn it's not very likely sauropod had feathering
this guys got the coolest job in the world xD i dont doubt it took a ton of work to get it tho
The dinosaur nerd part of me is going crazy right now 😆
I admire and appreciate dinosaur experts who sees these animals as 'realistic animals' and not Jurassic Park monsters. I just *sigh* when I see a depiction or paleoart of a T.rex fighting with another T.rex, even if there's evidence that can support that. The point is people just want to see creatures fight and rampage. These extinct species like modern animals also rested in the sun, played with their prey, had weird dance rituals and so on. There's nothing more real than that.
Yoo this is amazin
Awesome😃
Theres a lot of birds that you can wonder, in shapes or colors, some of asia or india's birds, the south american birds. Here in Brazil we have a bird caled Cigana that have claws on their proto wing as infants, thats so interesting because make me think in raptors or other tipes from the same kind
That art program? Pls i would really wan that
where can we see his art?
He's on IG @serpenillus
What's that flying squirrel?
At what part of the video?
I think you’re referring to the reptile with the “leg wings” that was shown? That’s Sharovipteryx! Super interesting animal
@@TheDDG995 almost certain they're referring to the furry pterosaur-like creature, which looks infinitely more like a flying squirrel than an avian dinosaur with feathered legs does.
What's a good book on dinosaur anatomy?
0:29 awwwww
Hey Gabriel Ugueto, would you be my consultant?
How do you know the colors and if they are striped?
I did my art project on you if that was ok :^)
4:46, well that has been pretty debunked.
Not so black and white as you put it.
One study saying something else doesn't mean the consensus has been debunked.
No it's not Trex had 10 % feathers
No, it's complicated.
Please, can you tell me what education you have? I want to be a science illustrator. I wonder if an illustration degree, plus self directed study is enough. Thank you very much.
What for equipmrnt do he use?
2:15 what is that
The reptile with horns? I think it's called Shringasaurus
What art program do you use?
1000%
Why would someone dont like the reality about dinosaurs? As we know more for them they are getting even more awesome I mean see a t rex from jurrasic park and then see at the real t rex with feathers....what you like the most? The 2 legged scaly ''lizard'' with small arms and scary appearance or the 2 legged ''lizard'' that has small arms and appearance like it fused with a bird and looks like a hybrid of nature??
Look I dont care what you like the most but you have to accept the reality
Hahhaa, but now ther's new evidence of conplitley scale trex...
@@emanueleapostoli244 ok t rex didnt had feathers in its whole body its belly tail feet and face was complitely scaly because when they grew they didnt grew more feathers from their baby stage so the older ones had not as much feathers as younger ones if you are right propably it was the biggest size of an really old t rex.....
Where you find that about the new evidence? I want to check it
So we can not find what happend to us 12 thousand years back but we can tell how the dinos looked 300 millions years back?
M'a man Gabriel Ugueto
I am 10 years old and draw a chicken dilophosaurus with only the crest velociraptor hybird
I wanna stench pad
Birds are reptiles.
Shoulders of Giants. Birds are distant relatives of reptiles
Hell the human race were reptiles at some point
We organize animals based on their evolutionary relationships/ancestors, so because of that all animals descended from a group are also members of that group. Since the last common ancestor of all reptiles also gave rise to birds either birds are reptiles or the term reptile has no actual scientific meaning.
@@somedude140 All comes down to mono/paraphyletic grouping, doesn't it?
Whales are fish
MRIzkyR digugel Whales are not Fish they are mammals as they give birth to live young have any ear bones and have no scales.
Stupid people will think all of these are dinosaurs
?
@@miguelisaurusbruh1158 ?
I LOVED everything in this video except for your carnotaurus… there are ZERO evidences that carnotaurus had that famous (maybe infamous….) spikes/ croc-like osteodermic edges on its back, and the same for tubercular scales or other reptilian-like epidermic and dermic structures.
We have ZERO paleontological proofs about this kind of structures also in all the other abelisaurids and theropoda itself.
So, according with the "feathered theory", it's sensibly more likely that carnotaurus was covered by primitive fuzz-like filamentous feathers.
The only reason why a lot of people think that carnotaurus was scaly and had spikes on the back is that, when it was discovered, someone, in the very first reconstructions, put scales on its skin and spikes on its back… without any proof of it and only because it was congruous with the "scaly imagine" of dinosaurs of that times… that reconstructions spread like a virus all around the world and... the rest is history.
I very like your works, so PLEASE, don't be like that people :)
We have proof for osteoderms in Carnotaurus if i remember correctly. Osteoderms are very common in Archosaurs, Pseudosuchia has them, we know some Sauropods had them, Thyreophorans famously have all these crazy osteoderm structures, and we know that Carnotaurus was most likely scaly from the very first specimen that was discovered, which was very well preserved and had skin impressions which showed scales, which sadly were destroyed as the fossil was collected. I believe we later did find evidence for osteoderms in an Abelisaurid (i can't remember if it was Carnotaurus itself, but it might have been). So the most likely integument for Carnotaurus is small scales with some osteoderms.
We heve zero fossilized osteoderms about theropods, bring me a single scientific article about them and we can start seriously talking about.
we have only proof of osteoderms in ornithischians and sauropods, but only in some families which evolved them indipendently for protecting themself from predator, like some mammals did too.
Osteoderms in dinosaurs or, more inclusive, in ornithodira are an apomorphy, or rather a character NOT inherited from the common ancestors, otherwise a lot of dinosaurs could have osteoderms, like it happens with a lot of other archosaurs but… our proofs say differently and more specific say us that osteoderm are more a quite rare exeption than a rule in dinosaurs.
Going back to carnotaurus, the only source of information about its skin are the famous photos of Bonaparte et Al. which show us impressions of SOME FRAGMENTS OF SKIN OF THE MID-VENTRAL PART OF THE BODY (I use uppercase not because i'm angry or something XD but only to put enphasis points) so… only fragments of the lower part of the animal, NOT ITS BACK, no proof of osteodrems on the back… nothing about them… and more important… what these impressions show us??? they show only (and i use the same word of the paleontologists that made the photos) "conical protuberances, rather low, with a diameter of about 4-5 cm, each with a modest hull, and separated from each other by about 8-10 cm . The surface between the protuberances is coarse, with small granules with a diameter of about 5 mm, rather rounded and low, separated one from the other by narrow furrows ."
So, The skin is described as irregularly coarse, with low protuberances surrounded by a pattern of small granules. The authors never call these structures "scales". If the authors do not call them "scales", we are not authorized by us, nor others who have not even seen the fossil.
On more you can find this kind of tubercular pattern also in the naked skin of an ostrich's upper part of its legs, that is part of the lower surface of the animal, specifically a theropod just like carnotaurus.
I leave you a very interesting article, about carnotaurus and its inaccurate reconstruction, of a very brilliant paleontologist :theropoda.blogspot.com/2016/03/miti-e-leggende-post-moderne-sui.html
It's in Italian but you can translate it in the page ;-)
nhm.org/site/sites/default/files/pdf/contrib_science/CS416.pdf
I would like to add that while osteoderms are indeed result of convergent evolution, rather than coming from a common ancestor, they usually first appear mainly as display structures, rather than protection like in derived Thyreophorans. Meaning there would be nothing stopping a derived theropod from having osteoderms covered in keratin (similar to how the horns probably would have been) just to look sexy to other Carnotaurus.
"conical protuberances, rather low, with a diameter of about 4-5 cm, each with a modest hull, and separated from each other by about 8-10 cm . The surface between the protuberances is coarse, with small granules with a diameter of about 5 mm, rather rounded and low, separated one from the other by narrow furrows ." Just what I said before, I took indeed that part from the same article you posted above.
Bonaparte didn't talk about osteoderms, spikes or even scales and, if he, who examined that skin's impressions and made the article doesn't talk about these kind of structures, I don't understand why we must do it.
DarkLight Mister Ugueto is an artist we can trust on accuracy. The osteoderms he put on the drawing are similar to what was described.