Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (FMNH PR 2081) by Franoys Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (FMNH PR 2081) by Franoys
The biggest, most complete, Tyrannosaurus Rex ever described. Bones drawn and scaled after one of the most detailed osteological analyses ever made.

Missing elements where restored after CM 9380 and AMNH 5027, as per the original Osborn descriptions for both.

This skeletal restoration is based of completely original research, using photographs of the bones and the measurements and descriptions of the fossil material provided at Brochu (2003). 

12/22/2016; Updated the posture. Every skeletal is going to be updated to feature it. Couldn't adapt the rigurous version as of right now because my gimp kept crashing every time I made it ( i did it like 10 times). I really need a new computer. 

I hope you like the new one! It allows for better visibility of the pelvic bones and solves some aesthetic concerns.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconanomally:
anomally Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2017
Really love this reconstruction, I do wish you give some mass estimate too tho. Have you done any GDI on this at all? Which one do you think is more accurate Hartman's 8400kg for Sue or John Hutchinson's 9500kg?
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2017
No I haven't, but I'm working on the multiview version of it that will be estimated. It is too soon to tell how the mass estimation will end up, Hutchinson's estimation is likely at least a bit overestimated, even if some parts in the model have minimal amounts of tissue such as the hindlimbs and the tail in his model, the paper itself acknowledges that some of the transverse processes in Sue's dorsals are crushed dorsally so some ribs became artificially expanded in the mount. On the other hand, Hartman says that his estimation is conservative and I don't know if it is done with exquisite rigor (bone by bone and measurement by measurement) or if it is just more of a generic silhouette for a Tyrannosaurine. It doesn't seem like it is done with the exquisite rigour mentioned because it is only a silhouette and the bones aren't drawn from dorsal view.

So I don't know, you will have to wait and see.
Reply
:iconanomally:
anomally Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2017
Nice, looking forward to it. Always love to see Sue from all views and that's the only way to appreciate how massive and bulky it is. I assume yours will be a more fleshy silhouette of it rather than a  exquisite rigour version?
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2017
No, it will be exquisite rigour version and will stick to what the bones suggest pretty tightly, it will stil have plausible amounts of soft tissue so don't worry about that.
Reply
:iconevodolka:
Evodolka Featured By Owner Feb 20, 2017  Hobbyist Artist
so we're only missing a foot?
that's pretty cool actually :la:
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Feb 24, 2017
Yes a foot, and the posterior bit of the tail, a few chevrons, and some pieces of several vertebrae due to eroding. Sue is an amazingl preserved specimen.
Reply
:iconevodolka:
Evodolka Featured By Owner Feb 24, 2017  Hobbyist Artist
when i look at sue's skeleton i always think it died with a broken neck by the look of those neck bones but for all i know it could haev been due to old age, unlikely but it's still possible and it would add to the badassness that is Sue the T.Rex :D
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Dec 23, 2016
12.53 Meters?
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Edited Dec 24, 2016
Yes, along the curves of the spine, which is the traditional way to measure vertebrates, even if I prefer along the centra because it allows better comparison with high spined creatures, and it still solves bent/ reared necks and curved tails related issues efficiently.

Hartman's Sue is 12,7 meters along the curves of the spine drive.google.com/open?id=0B-K0…. The ~12,3 m metric is measuring along the centra of the vertebrae.

My skeletal is just as big but the way I articulated the tail reduces the length measuring over the curves, although the length along the centra and the mass of the animal remains intact. This is one of the many reasons why this type of measurement is missleading, but it is still used a lot in the literature so I decided to give both measurements from now on.

The field museum measured their mount along the curvature of the spine and it came out at 12,8 meters. That's why you see Sue cited at either 12,3 m or 12,8.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Dec 24, 2016
I assume giganotosaurus and other therpods would be a bit longer when measured along the curves of the spine?

I always thought the ~12.8 meter length figure for Sue was totally made Up! Good to know that it wasn't!

Thanks tor the explanation,its very helpful!
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Edited Dec 24, 2016
Some of them yes, and some of them not, because there is a huge mess regarding the metrics used when measuring the animals, and the type of measuring that was used is almost never cited.

Hartman's Giganotosaurus is 12,7 m along the curves of the back and 12,4 m along the centra, but some of his other theropods, like CM 9380, are ~11.9 m along the curves of the back but about 11,74 m along the centra. 

So, some of them could be longer than what you would imagine from their popular estimations, and some of them shorter, because the metrics are mixed indistinctly. This isn't that important because the skeletals are usually to scale, but it is missleading when you compare the lengths of different specimens that have been measured using different metrics.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Dec 24, 2016
oh i forgot to add, i think you got your pixel measurements mixed up with the red and green lines drive.google.com/file/d/0B-K0f…
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Dec 25, 2016
Oops yes, they are. I'll fix it right away, thank you.
Reply
:iconyu-gi-nos:
Yu-Gi-Nos Featured By Owner Dec 23, 2016  Student General Artist
SUPERB accuracy! Well done :) :)
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Dec 23, 2016
Thank you!
Reply
:icontigris115:
tigris115 Featured By Owner Dec 10, 2016
If you don't mind me asking, why are the legs on your Sue longer than the ones in the Scott Hartman skeletal? I wanna know because I'm making a blender model and accuracy is my top priority.
Reply
:iconveterufreak:
Veterufreak Featured By Owner Dec 10, 2016  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Like he said, the legs are about the same size but positioned differently. Now, anybody can just repeat that, but don't worry my comment has some use.
I am also a dinosaur modeler, and I use Blender! I think for making dinosaurs this is a lot closer to what you'll need in your base model. The legs in your model (if you're doing it "right," but I guess everyone models their own way) are literally identical in position but mirrored over the x-axis. So while Hartman's T. rex has legs that are farther apart from each other and make the torso be lower to the ground and the legs be shorter looking, this is much better to use as the torso is as high up as it should be in the base starting position and the legs just about as long. When the model is to be animated, it can have its legs moved and torso brought down like Hartman's, but it may be a problem if you use say Hartman's skeletal and the torso is the same distance from the ground but the legs are straight, this will create legs that are too short.

It's actually entirely possible that you know all this and you're probably a lot better at modeling than me, but maybe this tip helped out a bit xP
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Edited Dec 10, 2016
They are of similar size, just possitioned differently. The femur is like 1 cm longer in mine when compared to Hartman's, and the way the tarsals articulate also add a bit of extra length. (2 or 3 cm max).

If you want maximum accuracy, you can use Brochu et al (2003) as a guide as well. I got the measurements directly from there, and they are coherent with Hutchinson et al (2011). The femur is 1,321 m, the tibiotarsus 1,245 m, the tarsals are 3-4 cm deep and the metatarsal lll is 0.671 m.
Reply
:iconspinosaurus14:
Spinosaurus14 Featured By Owner Oct 17, 2016
Ok this is the most accurate t.rex skeletal I have seen so far. With the right leg lenght, in contrast to Scott's shortlegged tyrannosaurus.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Oct 18, 2016
It haseems mire to do with the stance than the actual measurements scince both are virtually the same skeletal (almost)
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Oct 22, 2016
Yes most of it is the posture, the actual length of the leg differs very little, a few cm at most. I used to believe that the difference would be bigger, but I took the time to dismember Scott's sue hindlimbs and measure all of the bones in the maximum length possible and the whole legs are only about 5-7 cm shorter or so than the results I got. So it is not that big of a deal really.
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Oct 17, 2016
why did you make Sue?

it essentially replicated Scott Hartman`s version as far as i can see.
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Edited Oct 17, 2016
You are right on that, Scott and I got very similar results. But given how good Scott is at what he does, I consider that a good thing. Honestly, I wanted to have my own rendition of the animal so I can use it freely for my projects. I know that Scott usually doesn't mind people using his restorations, but still I wanted to have something mine, and that allowed any kind of usage, since Scott's Sue
is still copyrighted.

It has some differences, I uploaded it in the highest res that I could, and I tried to do very detailed versions of the bones. This will be the Sue that I'll use my charts from now on and when I update them. Perhaps it doesn't provide the paleo fans and/or students any information that they don't alredy know, given how many times Sue has been restored. At least not as the previous skeletals and/or GDI did, but it can still be useful for me or anyone in the future. It also served me to do personal research on Tyrannosaurus, etc.

Sue will also be usefult when I get to do other Tyrannosaurus specimens.

But don't worry, I also have a more obscure huge theropod on the works that as far as I can see, hasn't have been attempted a lot. The restoration of it is really complicated, but I'm trying.
Reply
:icontheterritorialtrike:
TheTerritorialTrike Featured By Owner Oct 17, 2016
Nice pose!
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Edited Oct 17, 2016
Thank you! It was a bit tricky to archieve.
Reply
:iconthedinorocker:
thedinorocker Featured By Owner Oct 17, 2016
Good one! :)
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Oct 17, 2016
Thank you!
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×
200 Purchase Purchased Download Purchase Soon
2.7 MB ZIP File. Includes PNG
Tyrannosaurus Rex skeletal diagram (FMNH PR 2081).png
3.1 MB
Add Your Rating! Thanks for Rating! Change Your Rating




Details

Submitted on
October 17, 2016
Image Size
3.3 MB
Resolution
6719×3724
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
2,340 (21 today)
Favourites
58 (who?)
Comments
27
×