The Transformers madness continues on Scary-Crayon with A Crayon Haiku #67 and the first part of our Quick Change Dinobots review. Okay, so the QC dinos aren’t technically Transformers, but still. As noted in the article, I really didn’t anticipate having quite so much to say about them, so Tricera-Bot and Tyranno-Bot (also known as Dregs and Gravelatch!) will be discussed at a later date. Hopefully not too much later, though.
Regarding Universe Triceradon in the haiku — I partially blame him for my current compulsion to buy Transformers on eBay and anywhere else I can find them, because it was his temporary unavailability that pretty much started me checking online toy stores and eBay listings as a matter of routine. Now that I’ve got him, he’s popping up everywhere. Go figure. Action figure, that is!
Feel free to note the cuteness of the newspaper clipping, btw! I don’t know why I felt compelled to black out all of the instances of my name — it’s not like it’d be that difficult to figure out if you really wanted to. 😛
Also, in a comment over at Wesoteric — where I first posted images of Triceradon, since he’s a pretty good representative of my current obsession — De asked whether Slag or Triceradon would win in a fight. Sounds like something worth discussing over here, no? So here are my thoughts:
A quick comparison of the tech specs of both Slag and Triceradon suggests that they’d be about evenly matched — if Triceradon didn’t have the upper hand. Slag’s superior endurance and firepower mean that he wouldn’t go down easily, but I suspect that the smarter, faster, braver, and more skillful Triceradon would be able to triumph in the end despite the former’s much nastier disposition. That said, it also bears mentioning that these two fighters are from different eras: I’m not sure exactly how far in the future Beast Machines takes place, but I think that Slag’s time predates Triceradon’s by millions of years. Therefore, if one assumes that Transformers continued to get stronger and stronger over the years — and that the numbers denoted by the tech specs are more/less relative to the average power levels of the times — one would have to multiply each of Triceradon’s stats by some figure over 9,000 (!!!) to get an accurate comparison. Triceradon would crush Slag.
However, given that Triceradon later fights alongside the future Grimlock in a reformed Dinobots team — and that Slag is the only absent member of the original team — I’m going to suggest that perhaps Triceradon is Slag, albeit much older and wiser. Perhaps his temper cooled a bit over the millions of years, such that he toned down his firepower a bit in favor of increasing his speed and strengthening his mind. Perhaps, as he matured, he grew more courageous and skilled — and perhaps, recognizing that, his comrades gifted him with even higher ranking and respect. Perhaps he lost a bit of his stamina due to old age. And perhaps he changed his name because “Slag” was too nasty for his more mellow temperament. At any rate, if we assume that Triceradon and Slag are one and the same, it stands to reason that, with millions more years of training and experience under his belt, Triceradon would best his younger self in combat.
Or perhaps Slag is absent among the reformed Dinobots because he was killed at some point, which — because Triceradon is his successor and presumably survived where Slag fell — would still suggest that Triceradon is the superior warrior. De went with Slag, citing his impressive showing against Unicron, but my analysis seems to confirm Triceradon as the victor.
The floor is open for you to add your thoughts to this pointless — but fun! — debate. 🙂
Perhaps he briefly possessed the Matrix of leadership. It turned Hot-Rod into Rodimus after all.
Pretty good article. For $1.50 they don’t sound all that bad.
But for the record, you don’t know the life of a Pok?mon trainer until you’ve traveled all around with a feisty redhead that brings you down a peg whenever your ego gets too big and a wise but lecherous “big-brother” figure!
Anyway, one of my recent interests has been this site which features a variety of National Parks presented through (rather well executed) 3D photography. (Red/Cyan 3D glasses required).
The Cool thing (besides the gorgeous scenery brought to my computer in full 3D glory) is that they share their method for creating these images here.
Which is awesome because while I did have a method of creating Black+White 3D images, this method works with color! (And, yes it’s working as well with drawings as with photos).
The reason I’m telling you all this (Besides that it’s cool) is that it relates to a dinosaur toy project of my own.
In addition to doing 3D drawings (which will mostly be Buddhist deities, mythical creatures and cute manga girls) I’m also planning to do 3D photos.
But, the only thing I’m all that interested in photographing is cheap dollar-store dinosaur toys! I’ve got a whole little bag of them, and I’m hoping to make little dioramas of them and photograph them from 2 angles each to make the 3D pics.
The only problem is I have no idea what else to include in the diorama. Do I try to replicate historically (or PREhistorically) accurate settings? And, if so, with what?(I don’t want to use actual dirt, too messy). Or, do I just go wild with the off-beat settings? I’ll probably do both.
Anyway, fun article, but just one little nitpick: Isn’t the “Brontosaurus” now called the “Apatosaurus”?