Leaping Lizards - Reptilian 6? What's next?

13»

Comments

  • wsterdanwsterdan Posts: 3,056
    edited December 1969

    Kinich said:
    Okay the Reptilian was a must buy for me, a Christmas treat for myself so here are a couple of quick renders, the first the plain Reptilian figure without the legs, though you can't tell with this crop, the second is a result of me dialling various Creature Creator morphs, to my mind it is somewhat reminiscent of the Gremlins from the film of the same title.

    Edit, okay the forum software loaded the images in reverse order, so please read the above the same way.

    Forgot to comment yesterday, absolutely brilliant; I love the "gremlin" one especially.

    -- Walt Sterdan

  • XenomorphineXenomorphine Posts: 2,421
    edited December 2014

    wsterdan said:
    No problems here; to clarify, my only problem is when people point out that something imaginary is scientifically "wrong" when it ain't necessarily so. I can agree with your preferences above, but I could also point out that humans have teeth capable of ripping flesh from bone and still manage to suckle at their mother's breast. It's not a huge leap to think that Predators could develop their ripping and tearing parts later on. Have we seen baby Predators? Do they come from eggs, do they pop out ready to take down small deer on their own, or lie in their cribs tearing apart cow legs from day one? ;-)

    No, but humans can also conceal those. Predators are like crocodiles: Their jaws are designed to have razor-sharp fangs jutting out.

    Also, unlike humans, as I say, crocodiles and Predators won't really have lips which can curtain around a spherical object and provide necessary suction. ;)

    The problem's actually magnified when it comes to something velociraptor-like, as with the Reptilian. It would have to have lips which actually come forward and eliminate the entire point of having that pronounced snout.

    Of course, science and art don't necessarily mix well. :) I'd imagine even an anthropomorphic shark with human cleavage would probably sell its fair share!

    Post edited by Xenomorphine on
  • CybersoxCybersox Posts: 9,275
    edited December 1969

    wsterdan said:
    With a reptilian humanoid character, I'd imagine breasted versions would appeal to the 'furry' community (or would it be 'scaly', in her case?). Reptilian looks lend themselves a heck of a lot easier to anthropomorphic stuff than I'd imagine squirrels and stuff do (if only because humans typically don't have fur all over them, which makes the psychological connection easier to make).

    Personally, I'd be amused to put one in a science-fiction uniform to parody 'Star Trek. :)

    For any other uses, I'd dial out the breasts, though. I remember Dark Horse comics brought out a in-house guide for writers who would be involved in their 'Predator' adaptation stories. It's an alien, sure, but it has most traits in common with reptilian life. Dark Horse had the advice: If you're close enough to tell its gender, then you're already dead. :)

    Of course, lots of fan-boys got their fun by drawing 'female' Predators with huge breasts, not comprehending that breast-feeding would be, at best, an insanely risky proposition for the mothers when you're a species which has jaws which are a cross between crab legs and an industrial shredder... You wouldn't want soft tissue anywhere near a mouth like that, infant or not!

    Plus, y'know... Reptiles generally don't have lips which can be easily formed for suction, so...

    That's why I'd dial cleavage out for a would-be G2F Reptilian, but maybe retain them if I was doing a parody or maybe something aimed at kids (who tend to appreciate obvious clues when you're trying to imply that something has a particular status/gender).

    No problems here; to clarify, my only problem is when people point out that something imaginary is scientifically "wrong" when it ain't necessarily so. I can agree with your preferences above, but I could also point out that humans have teeth capable of ripping flesh from bone and still manage to suckle at their mother's breast. It's not a huge leap to think that Predators could develop their ripping and tearing parts later on. Have we seen baby Predators? Do they come from eggs, do they pop out ready to take down small deer on their own, or lie in their cribs tearing apart cow legs from day one? ;-)

    -- Walt Sterdan

    And, of course, it frequently turns out that nature has done things that were previously considered scientifically wrong. For example, there are two known egg-laying creatures that also produce milk (platypus and echidnas) and for years it was widely considered a truism that nature had never produced an axel... and then it was discovered that bacteria flagella in fact DO rotate like a wheel.

  • wsterdanwsterdan Posts: 3,056
    edited December 1969

    wsterdan said:
    No problems here; to clarify, my only problem is when people point out that something imaginary is scientifically "wrong" when it ain't necessarily so. I can agree with your preferences above, but I could also point out that humans have teeth capable of ripping flesh from bone and still manage to suckle at their mother's breast. It's not a huge leap to think that Predators could develop their ripping and tearing parts later on. Have we seen baby Predators? Do they come from eggs, do they pop out ready to take down small deer on their own, or lie in their cribs tearing apart cow legs from day one? ;-)

    No, but humans can also conceal those. Predators are like crocodiles: Their jaws are designed to have razor-sharp fangs jutting out.

    Also, unlike humans, as I say, crocodiles and Predators won't really have lips which can curtain around a spherical object and provide necessary suction. ;)

    And yet there's nothing saying that for the first six months of life the babies have soft "lips" that allow it to suckle while it's small and defenseless, lips that later either harden into a scaly material, or recede completely. Without seeing a baby Predator, we have no way of knowing.

    Of special interest here, though is the Aliens vs. Predator novel series (based on the Dark Horse Comics) by David Bischoff, Steve and Stephani Perry, where "The Predators are portrayed as sexually dimorphic mammals, with females being larger and stronger than males and sporting more prominent mammary glands (like human females).".

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predator_(alien)

    So "technically", everything we assumed by watching the movies was wrong. ;-)

    -- Walt Sterdan

  • XenomorphineXenomorphine Posts: 2,421
    edited December 2014

    That's why there's a schism in the fandom between the fan-boys who like their stuff sexualised and those who don't. ;)

    For what it's worth, Perry's spin-off novels aren't regarded as canon. There was actually another author who wrote some and called his Predators 'Hish'. In that one, he had them changing between genders throughout their lives. Completely different interpretation and one which can't be reconciled with Perry's version (and Dark horse's own versions never had breasts, period, as per their guide). Of course, Perry turned them into Klingon-alikes, obsessed with 'honour' at the expense of all else, rather than the blood-thirsty safari hunters shown in the movies, too... Fox don't care, one way or another, so long as it makes them money.

    Mechanics-wise, it wouldn't matter if those membranes around a Predator's mouth are soft or scaly. They only 'reach' around the sides. On the upper and lower jaws, there's virtually nothing. It would be incapable of drinking, say, a glass of water without a lot of wasted liquid dribbling down its front, let alone breast-feeding as an infant. Probably why they're so grumpy all the time! :)

    They might have a completely different mouth when they're young, sure. But until we see that on screen...

    Post edited by Xenomorphine on
  • LeatherGryphonLeatherGryphon Posts: 12,087
    edited December 2014

    Loading the legs on their own, yeah, I guessed. But they won't look right on certain figures without the ability to dial them in by percentages. I'd imagine particularly slender/skeletal/emaciated creatures might well suffer from that.

    Not that I'm complaining! Stuff like the Minotaur, I don't really have much use for. This, I have definite use for - and those diverse skins are certainly going to come in useful for the various Creature Creator stuff.

    And stuff like the Reptilians I don't have much use for, but the Minotaur and other bovine beasties populate my fantasy worlds.

    However, in some universe there must be a world with two isolated continents each populated by one of those groups that eventually results in an epic worldclass battle. And the Octopussians in the ocean between them are a surprise to both!

    But fiction is fiction. The original author of a fictional world is the ONLY person who should be concerned with character consistency. Anybody else is just a Johhny-come-lately who doesn't matter a whit. And as for criticizing scientific consistency, come on, it's fiction! Just postulate a different universe and believe.

    Post edited by LeatherGryphon on
  • wsterdanwsterdan Posts: 3,056
    edited December 1969

    That's why there's a schism in the fandom between the fan-boys who like their stuff sexualised and those who don't. ;)

    For what it's worth, Perry's spin-off novels aren't regarded as canon. There was actually another author who wrote some and called his Predators 'Hish'. In that one, he had them changing between genders throughout their lives. Completely different interpretation and one which can't be reconciled with Perry's version (and Dark horse's own versions never had breasts, period, as per their guide). Of course, Perry turned them into Klingon-alikes, obsessed with 'honour' at the expense of all else, rather than the blood-thirsty safari hunters shown in the movies, too... Fox don't care, one way or another, so long as it makes them money.

    Mechanics-wise, it wouldn't matter if those membranes around a Predator's mouth are soft or scaly. They only 'reach' around the sides. On the upper and lower jaws, there's virtually nothing. It would be incapable of drinking, say, a glass of water without a lot of wasted liquid dribbling down its front, let alone breast-feeding as an infant. Probably why they're so grumpy all the time! :)

    They might have a completely different mouth when they're young, sure. But until we see that on screen...

    Well, when we get into different fan-boy camps arguing canon, science stops mattering. ;-)

    As to what we see on screen, that can also change from movie to movie, as we've seen many times.

    Out of curiosity, how do you see the Predator young getting their liquid intake and food just after they're born? What mechanics do you envision?

    Not arguing, honestly curious. It's a very interesting area I haven't thought much about.

    --Walt Sterdan

  • XenomorphineXenomorphine Posts: 2,421
    edited December 1969

    I usually leave it at an 'I don't know', because I embrace how powerful ambiguity is in my own written stories. :) Although, if I seriously had to hazard a fictional guess, then if we continue the assumption of them having similarities with reptiles, then they're probably carnivorous hunters from hatching/birthing/whatever (which might explain a few things about their mentality).

    Amusingly, Dan O'Bannon once said that his version of the 'Alien Versus Predator' thing would have been to portray Aliens as what infant Predators are.

  • Atlantean6Atlantean6 Posts: 26
    edited December 1969

    These lizards threw me into the uncanny valley.

    The DAZ Genesis 2 Reptile reminded me too much of the above. I was stuck between being excited and being repelled.

    rep1.jpg
    343 x 266 - 27K
    rep1.jpg
    343 x 266 - 27K
  • Serene NightSerene Night Posts: 17,704
    edited December 1969

    wsterdan said:
    IIf we are talking aliens, the sky is the limit. It..might for example be a masculine trait to have mammary glands for nursing, or that gender is different or exists in multiples we do not have here.

    I'm reminded of the hermaphroditic, reptilian Dracs from Enemy Mine (my wife loved that movie). ;-)

    -- Walt Sterdan

    Good film. I like the unexpected. =-)

  • AethyrAethyr Posts: 117
    edited December 1969

    I hope the next one is a werewolf. I haven't really liked any that are out there so far. I am hoping for something that looks like it came the White Wolf rpg games.

    Took the words out of my mouth! I do like the ones that RawArt has done, but sadly the Night World Lycanthropos looks a bit dated now, and of course you haven't been able to buy SA Horde for ages now.

    A high-def G2M werewolf in the style of White Wolf's garou (look up some of Ron Spencer's art for great examples) would be amazing :D

  • alexhcowleyalexhcowley Posts: 2,403
    edited December 1969

    Loading the legs on their own, yeah, I guessed. But they won't look right on certain figures without the ability to dial them in by percentages. I'd imagine particularly slender/skeletal/emaciated creatures might well suffer from that.

    Not that I'm complaining! Stuff like the Minotaur, I don't really have much use for. This, I have definite use for - and those diverse skins are certainly going to come in useful for the various Creature Creator stuff.

    And stuff like the Reptilians I don't have much use for, but the Minotaur and other bovine beasties populate my fantasy worlds.

    However, in some universe there must be a world with two isolated continents each populated by one of those groups that eventually results in an epic worldclass battle. And the Octopussians in the ocean between them are a surprise to both!

    But fiction is fiction. The original author of a fictional world is the ONLY person who should be concerned with character consistency. Anybody else is just a Johhny-come-lately who doesn't matter a whit. And as for criticizing scientific consistency, come on, it's fiction! Just postulate a different universe and believe.

    To elaborate slightly on your note: a fantasy universe can be as fantastical as you like, with reference to our universe. It does not have to follow the same rules as the real world, the only requirement is that it should follow a consistent set of rules. So, forget about the laws of thermodynamics, Newtonian mechanics and all the other boring stuff you heard about in Physics, Chemistry and Biology and let your imagination run wild.

    Cheers,

    Alex.

  • cecilia.robinsoncecilia.robinson Posts: 2,208
    edited December 2014

    wiz said:
    So, first we got a Minotaur, now we get a Lizardman? If this follows through in the same way the Genesis monsters did, there's at least one more waiting in the wings. Anyone want to take bets on what it (or they) will be?

    Werepoodle.

    What else could it possibly be?

    Before a werepoodle, give me a normal poodle with no fancy cut please...

    Wsterdan, dragons would be most related to an archaeopteryx in my humble opinion.

    Post edited by cecilia.robinson on
  • alexhcowleyalexhcowley Posts: 2,403
    edited December 1969

    wiz said:
    So, first we got a Minotaur, now we get a Lizardman? If this follows through in the same way the Genesis monsters did, there's at least one more waiting in the wings. Anyone want to take bets on what it (or they) will be?

    Werepoodle.

    What else could it possibly be?

    Before a werepoodle, give me a normal poodle with no fancy cut please...

    Wsterdan, dragons would be most related to an archaeopteryx in my humble opinion.

    Since we've now gone four-legged, top of my creature wish list is a giant war wolf, complete with LAMH fur and a saddle for my Victoria Sixes. Something like the recent Battlecat for Daz Big Cat 2, but for dog-lovers, would go down a treat.

    Cheers,

    Alex.

  • cecilia.robinsoncecilia.robinson Posts: 2,208
    edited December 1969

    Agreed, more canines please.

  • LeatherGryphonLeatherGryphon Posts: 12,087
    edited December 2014

    Loading the legs on their own, yeah, I guessed. But they won't look right on certain figures without the ability to dial them in by percentages. I'd imagine particularly slender/skeletal/emaciated creatures might well suffer from that.

    Not that I'm complaining! Stuff like the Minotaur, I don't really have much use for. This, I have definite use for - and those diverse skins are certainly going to come in useful for the various Creature Creator stuff.

    And stuff like the Reptilians I don't have much use for, but the Minotaur and other bovine beasties populate my fantasy worlds.

    However, in some universe there must be a world with two isolated continents each populated by one of those groups that eventually results in an epic worldclass battle. And the Octopussians in the ocean between them are a surprise to both!

    But fiction is fiction. The original author of a fictional world is the ONLY person who should be concerned with character consistency. Anybody else is just a Johhny-come-lately who doesn't matter a whit. And as for criticizing scientific consistency, come on, it's fiction! Just postulate a different universe and believe.

    To elaborate slightly on your note: a fantasy universe can be as fantastical as you like, with reference to our universe. It does not have to follow the same rules as the real world, the only requirement is that it should follow a consistent set of rules. So, forget about the laws of thermodynamics, Newtonian mechanics and all the other boring stuff you heard about in Physics, Chemistry and Biology and let your imagination run wild.

    Cheers,

    Alex.

    I postulate a universe in which the rules are not consistent. 8-Q
    In my universe imagination not only runs wild, it goes absolutely insane!
    In my universe the physical laws are just as subjective as human laws but enforcement is a problem.

    Post edited by LeatherGryphon on
  • JOdelJOdel Posts: 6,314
    edited December 1969

    wsterdan said:
    No problems here; to clarify, my only problem is when people point out that something imaginary is scientifically "wrong" when it ain't necessarily so. I can agree with your preferences above, but I could also point out that humans have teeth capable of ripping flesh from bone and still manage to suckle at their mother's breast. It's not a huge leap to think that Predators could develop their ripping and tearing parts later on. Have we seen baby Predators? Do they come from eggs, do they pop out ready to take down small deer on their own, or lie in their cribs tearing apart cow legs from day one? ;-)

    No, but humans can also conceal those. Predators are like crocodiles: Their jaws are designed to have razor-sharp fangs jutting out.

    Also, unlike humans, as I say, crocodiles and Predators won't really have lips which can curtain around a spherical object and provide necessary suction. ;)

    The problem's actually magnified when it comes to something velociraptor-like, as with the Reptilian. It would have to have lips which actually come forward and eliminate the entire point of having that pronounced snout.

    Of course, science and art don't necessarily mix well. :) I'd imagine even an anthropomorphic shark with human cleavage would probably sell its fair share!

    You'd have to ask Kemp Sparky. He's got a couple of them on his site. (Philosopher's Egg)

  • cecilia.robinsoncecilia.robinson Posts: 2,208
    edited December 1969

    JOdel said:
    You'd have to ask Kemp Sparky. He's got a couple of them on his site. (Philosopher's Egg)

    ...like Lacerian. There is a bundle, I think.

  • JOdelJOdel Posts: 6,314
    edited December 1969

    Two of them. Regular sharks and Hammerheads.

  • fixmypcmikefixmypcmike Posts: 19,686
    edited December 1969

    JOdel said:
    Two of them. Regular sharks and Hammerheads.

    The term Hammerheads is offensive. The Shark Defense League prefers the term "Differently Cranialed".

  • LeatherGryphonLeatherGryphon Posts: 12,087
    edited December 2014

    JOdel said:
    Two of them. Regular sharks and Hammerheads.

    The term Hammerheads is offensive. The Shark Defense League prefers the term "Differently Cranialed".

    If a hammer is called a "whammer", could an insane Hammerhead be called pejoratively a "whacker" or "wacko" or possibly a "wacko whacker"? 8-o

    Post edited by LeatherGryphon on
  • Bunyip02Bunyip02 Posts: 9,238
    edited December 1969

    Hammerheads, and T-Rex/Crocodiles ?

    http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/44294/P165/#733132

    http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/44294/P180/#737752

    Actually I would like to see some Insect type hybrids, there's lots of all the other types of critter morphs out there.

    http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/47299/P15/#693355

  • Bunyip02Bunyip02 Posts: 9,238
    edited December 1969

    Crocky
    Reptilian 6 + Anubis 6 + a little Minotaur 6 + 50+various morphs for a mongrel mix.
    Still have not used A3 morphs, which add even more variation.
    Postwork with Topaz filter in PSPX7 to add some more punch to the colours.

    Crocky_G2M_ReptAnubisMinotaur_50+_morphs_Topaz_x1950.png
    1950 x 1424 - 6M
  • Don't tell anyone, but DAZ will be following up the Reptilian 6 HD with the Repteens, two adorable teen lizard-persons who spend their time hanging out at the mall, skateboarding and studying. The scaliest students at Reptile High, the Repteens can be purchased individually, or as part of a bundle that includes textures and make-up (Joanna Goanna, the female Repteen, likes to experiment with lipstick, even though she doesn't really have lips), clothing (snakeskin boots -- so very controversial, oh my!) and poses (leaping, lying on a rock sunbathing, shedding tail and escaping).

    Available SOON.

    Nothing has happened since then.  I don't think DAZ plans on doing the Repteens nor Reptilian 6 HD for female.  They probably don't care about our hopes or how we feel! :(

Sign In or Register to comment.