|
|
Post by theropod on Nov 30, 2019 21:30:06 GMT 5
This time the Apatosaurus is 41 m (860 px) to the elephant’s 4.2 m (88 px).
|
|
|
|
Post by Life on Nov 30, 2019 22:38:06 GMT 5
Erroneous scale bars can be omitted from comparisons.  |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 1, 2019 2:56:09 GMT 5
Rescaled once again:  |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Dec 1, 2019 3:23:32 GMT 5
This time the Apatosaurus is 42 m long/878 px based on two independent measurements (the elephant is still ~88 px ±3).
Seriously, how can this be so difficult? Even if for whatever reason you are unable to make the proper measurements and choose not to do anything about that (in which case I would argue you should not be making comparisons, or rely on a measurement that you can actually make accurately), I basically spelled out the "exact" (as much as possible with so much blur) sizes out for you three times, which tell you pretty precisely by how many percent you are off the mark and hence how much you need to change the sizes to be accurate.
The elephant being about 88 px tall (would be better to have it more precisely of course, which is only possible if you produce an image with proper resolution), corresponding to 4.2 m means that a 37 m Apatosaurus would have to be about 775 px long, 88.3 % the size of the one in your comparison.
And indeed, inapplicable scalebars can and should be omitted, but seems we are still tackling the much more serious issue of animals themselves being scaled incorrectly.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 1, 2019 4:11:57 GMT 5
Well, I just had a lot on my plate today. Maybe that's why.
Yeah, I'll make more charts with directly applicable scalebars
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 1, 2019 21:16:25 GMT 5
Atlantic walrus (Prehistoric Fauna, scaled to 2.9 meters TL) vs Dakosaurus (Wikimedia Commons, scaled to 4.5 meters in a straight line). Scalebar is 1 meter  |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 1, 2019 21:18:07 GMT 5
Triceratops (UCMP 128561, 9.2 meters along centra, 14-14.7 tonnes) vs Apatosaurus louisae (OMNH 1329, 27 meters TL, 39 tonnes, not fully grown. Skeletals by Hartman, scalebar on lower left is 1 meter.  |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 3, 2019 17:40:53 GMT 5
Two of the giants of the OMNH: Holotype of Sauroposeidon (OMNH 53062, 32 meters, 60+ tonnes) vs OMNH 1670 Apatosaurus (28.3 meters, 52 tonnes, less than half grown). Scalebar (square, bottom left) is 1 meter, skeletals are by Paleo King and Hartman respectively.  |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 4, 2019 19:10:21 GMT 5
Here's a size comparison for one of the best matchups of all: AM68108 vs OMNH 1331 Amphicyon is scaled to 2.4 meters TL and should be about 400 kg, while the Apatosaurus is scaled to 163% the size of CM 3018 (36.3 meters) and is about 95 tonnes. Amphicyon is silhouette of Monsters Resurrected, Apatosaurus skeletal is by Hartman. Scalebar on bottom left is 1 meter.  |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 4, 2019 20:29:18 GMT 5
Short faced bear (FMNH PM24880, 150 cm shoulder height) vs Megalosaurus (BMNH R1101, 9 meters TL). Skeletals by Blaze and Hartman respectively, scalebar is 1 meter.  |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 5, 2019 1:00:13 GMT 5
Dunkleosteus vs Spinosaurus - max vs max, skeletals by blaze and Franoys respectively. Dunkleosteus is scaled to CMNH 5936 (7.8 meters, 4.6 tonnes) and Spinosaurus is MSNM V 4047 (15 meters TL, 7.5 tonnes). Scale bar is 1 meter  |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 6, 2019 18:19:55 GMT 5
Zygolophodon vs Apatosaurus - max vs max Zygolophodon is the big femur from Greece (4.1 meters SH, ~16 tonnes) while Apatosaurus is the extrapolated adult size for OMNH 1670 (~37 meters and ~100 tonnes), scaled up from CM 3018. Bottom left scalebar is 1 meter, skeletals are by Larramendi and Hartman respectively.  |
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 7, 2019 17:37:21 GMT 5
Columbian mammoth (DMNH 1359, 372 cm SH, 9 tonnes) vs Apatosaurus (OMNH 1670, 28.3 meters, 52 tonnes, less than half grown). Skeletals by Larramendi and Hartman, scalebar on bottom left is 1 meter.  |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Dec 7, 2019 19:22:38 GMT 5
Dakosaurus vs Odobenus
543 px vs 374 px, if the walrus is 2.9 m the Dakosaurus is 4.2 m, not 4.5 m.
Apatosaurus vs Triceratops:
763 px vs 278 px. If the Trike is 9.2 m, the Apatosaurus is 25 m, not 27.
Apatosaurus vs Sauroposeidon:
599 px vs 620 or 625 depending on measurement, if latter 32 m then former is more like 31 m, not 28.3
Apatosaurus vs Amphicyon:
Unclear how you measured the Amphicyon, is it straight-line, or curved, including or excluding the tail?
In straight line , the Amphicyon is 70px long with and 55 px without tail.
In curved length it is 84 px with and 58 px without tail.
The Apatosaurus is 929 px. I cannot seem to get it to the length you list (36.3 m), or even reasonably close using ANY of the possible measurements for the
Megalosaurus vs Arctodus: Megalosaurus seems to be closer to 9.3 m (1057/171 px*1.5 m), not 9.0 m.
Spinosaurus vs Dunkleosteus
651 px vs 345 px, spino is 14.7 m if Dunkleosteus is 7.8 m.
Apatosaurus vs Z. borsoni:
790/84 px, if the mammutid is 4.1 m tall the dinosaur is 38.5 m long, not 37 m.
Apatosaurus vs M. columbi
835/103 px. If the mammoth is 3.72 m tall, the dinosaur is 30.2 m long, not 28.3 m.
This doesn’t seem to be working. I don’t have the time to check every single one of your comparisons indefinitely, and they don’t seem to be improving much, if at all (in all these, which were the last 8 comparisons you posted, only one got to within under 3% of being accurate). I suggest that in the future you give the exact pixel count you scale each animal to. Maybe then they will get more accurate.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Dec 7, 2019 19:27:39 GMT 5
Sure, I'll see if I can count pixel length.
|
|
