HOME | DD

NTamura — Dipterus by-nc-nd

Published: 2010-02-27 08:59:23 +0000 UTC; Views: 2864; Favourites: 35; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description The devonian lungfish, Dipterus valenciennesi.
Related content

NTamura - Cardiocephalus

NTamura - Orthoceras

NTamura - Nannopterygius

NTamura - Dunkleosteus II

NTamura - Tully Monster ...

NTamura - Corosaurus

NTamura - Holoptychius

NTamura - Protocetus

NTamura - Bothriolepis

sphenaphinae - Dunkleosteus terrelli

Frank-Lode - Ophthalmosaurus.

AlternatePrehistory - Saurian: Jurassic Coast: Dakosaurus

Oracle1990 - Styxosaurus

Amoeba-like-thingy - 360 mya Acanthostega

Hyrotrioskjan - Lightsketch for Hyphalosaurus

paleopeter - JURASSIC SHARK

Plioart - Tiktaalik

Manuelsaurus - Mosasaur
Comments: 21

sethness [2010-03-19 05:53:59 +0000 UTC]

I'm thinking that in water, the fish should have a bluish cast. It's weird that the water should look so accurate, yet the fish looks so obviously lit-above-water-and-copy-pasted onto the water picture.

It's easy to alter the fish's colors in Photoshop.

Was it a conscious choice to avoid ralistic water-hues on the fish?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NTamura In reply to sethness [2010-04-13 01:15:14 +0000 UTC]

I actually originally have the picture with a bluish tone but then decided to change it and give it more contrast... Less realistic perhaps but details appear a bit better. You can check the other (older) marine images in my gallery and see the difference...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RickRaptor105 [2010-03-03 17:46:20 +0000 UTC]

Another ancestor of man (and other mammals, and birds, and non-avian dinosaurs, and lizards, and turtles, and crocodilians, and amphibians et cetera...)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Ryivhnn [2010-02-28 02:02:28 +0000 UTC]

Awww it looks like it's smiling

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NTamura In reply to Ryivhnn [2010-03-02 04:36:51 +0000 UTC]

May be it is

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Ryivhnn In reply to NTamura [2010-03-03 00:34:35 +0000 UTC]

Hee XD

But then that would imply that dinosaurs may well have been intelligent critters capable of building civilisations and everyone knows they're brainless monsters who eat everything in sight

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NTamura In reply to Ryivhnn [2010-03-03 00:49:18 +0000 UTC]

But this one is a fish...Anyway looks like somebody has watched too many Jurassic Park movies.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Ryivhnn In reply to NTamura [2010-03-03 01:44:52 +0000 UTC]

I reckon fish have this secret society down in the depths where we'll be hard pressed to find it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Dgylia [2010-02-27 20:56:21 +0000 UTC]

I love details!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NTamura In reply to Dgylia [2010-02-27 21:25:25 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Dgylia In reply to NTamura [2010-02-27 21:32:24 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

FablePaint [2010-02-27 19:15:40 +0000 UTC]

Ooh, where did you get info on this one?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NTamura In reply to FablePaint [2010-02-27 21:25:17 +0000 UTC]

Somebody asked for it. Then I just googled the name. There are loads of fossil images on the web...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

avancna [2010-02-27 19:02:31 +0000 UTC]

From the Taemas-Weejasper reef?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NTamura In reply to avancna [2010-02-27 21:23:12 +0000 UTC]

No, this one is the Scottish species...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

avancna In reply to NTamura [2010-02-28 04:34:16 +0000 UTC]

You plan to do the Australian species, too?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NTamura In reply to avancna [2010-03-02 04:36:31 +0000 UTC]

Not in the near future I think...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

avancna In reply to NTamura [2010-03-02 04:56:20 +0000 UTC]

Should we put in both species for the Encyclopedia, or you think we could survive with just the Scotch species?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NTamura In reply to avancna [2010-03-03 00:52:47 +0000 UTC]

Mmh, we can't have every single species on that book, can we? I was thinking to have no more than one species represented for a given genus...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

avancna In reply to NTamura [2010-03-03 04:39:59 +0000 UTC]

My practical side agrees with you. Having said that though, there are some genera that I feel we need to illustrate more than one species. But, we'll try to keep it to one species per genus.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Kuroi-moonwolf [2010-02-27 14:03:58 +0000 UTC]

It's interesting to see the primitive heterocercal caudal fin, oposed to the derived dificercal fin we see in extant lungfishes.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0