Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Giraffatitan brancai UNCENSORED! by Paleo-King Giraffatitan brancai UNCENSORED! by Paleo-King
Giraffatitan brancai

Family: Brachiosauridae (intermediate position)
Time: Late Jurassic, Kimmeridgian-Tithonian epochs, ~150 mya
Location: Tendaguru Formation, Tanzania (the "upper Saurian Marl")
Estimated mass: ~33 tons (subadult HMN SII/S116/Aa) up to ~50 tons (HMN XV2/HMN Fund no.)

*Now COMPLETELY REVISED and updated with fully restored original measurements and oft-overlooked rare specimens!*

They got Giraffatitan wrong! Dr. Werner Janensch’s giant brachiosaur, Giraffatitan brancai, has been controversial for many reasons, in debates ranging through everything from metabolism and posture to maximum size and heat management, but one of the greatest controversies has been over the many restorations of its skeleton over the years. It has come to light that these older versions, even some considered accurate today, contain incorrectly scaled and articulated bones, inaccurately drawn bones, and even some outright fabrications.
Nearly ever part of Giraffatitan's skeleton was published from multiple specimens by Janensch in 1922, 1935-36, and 1950, and the most complete one, the subadult paralectotype HMN SII, was used as the basis for the Berlin mount and most skeletal restorations. Yet these skeletals fabricated certain bones, omitted bones, assumed incorrect placements, used specimens other than the ones most morphologically relevant to SII, misinterpreted Janensch’s notes, and made some parts oversized while distorting the true form for other parts of the animal. Many of these older skeletals were composited far more than necessary, making needlessly heavy use of scaled-up juvenile material for bones already known from SII (thus confusing the proportions), or in some cases even threw in bones that may not be Giraffatitan at all.

If you have seen one of these older restorations of Giraffatitan, then you have not seen the
real Giraffatitan which is found only in this new Paleo King reconstruction.

For the first time, a modern, easy to understand, truly complete and uncensored reconstruction of Giraffatitan has been completed which reveals more than any past skeletal reconstruction. This beautifully detailed rendition is also the first Giraffatitan skeletal available as a signature print for purchase. The basic lateral view is also available as a print: paleo-king.deviantart.com/art/…

Included here for the first time in history, scaled up to SII, are a complete atlas (HMN t) and axis (HMN be 1) from true Giraffatitan specimens, never before depicted outside of Janensch, which compare very well with the elongated HMN SII but present a very different profile from the shorter, steeper vertebrae in the problematic lectotype HMN SI used in older reconstructions as a gap-filler. In addition, the long-forgotten proatlas of HMN SII is here restored for the first time. Also shown here is the never-before-included last dorsal vertebra HMN Fund no 8, designated as the twelfth dorsal, with the posterior dorsals moved forward one space and one of two speculative plaster mid-dorsals eliminated to allow the shift while still keeping the count at 12. This arrangement actually restores Janensch’s original 1950 sequencing of the dorsal vertebrae, which has been IGNORED in all other skeletal reconstructions (which mislabeled the fused posterior dorsals D10 and D11 as being D11 and D12.)

Also restored here for the first time are the original skull of SII (HMN S116) which replaces the smaller HMN t skull used in most older skeletals, and the hyoid bones scaled up from HMN S66.  100% new full frontal and dorsal views, including an updated sacrum, which has never been accurately restored from above before by any artist (most notably, GSP’s version actually censored the angles of the sacral rib articulations and completely omitted the holes between them). Cross-scaling the ilium, sacrum and pubes of HMN SII/Aa with the ilium, ischium and pubes of the younger HMN J, also reveals that the hips of Giraffatitan were considerably more bottom-heavy than resored by either Paul (1988) or Taylor (2009).
The tail is re-scaled to the correct measurements of HMN Aa, which also included the mounted sacrum and is probably from the same individual as SII. It is significantly smaller than the tail used in the Berlin composite mount, HMN Fund no., a tail from a giant specimen around 13% larger than SII, which may belong to the colossal HMN XV2 and also includes the aforementioned 12th dorsal. Even more so than expected from previous restorations, Giraffatitan had a really small tail for a sauropod of its size.
 
Basic documentation of the first step of the restoration process back to the actual specimens Janensch found: paleoking.blogspot.com/2014/03…   The rest follows on my blog in installments.

Giraffatitan brancai: UNCENSORED takes a look at this famous yet misunderstood dinosaur like no one has before and explains many elements that have confused both scientists and amateur dinosaur fans alike. We also see revealed several never-before-revealed skeletal components and limb-joint cutaways taken directly from the engravings in Janensch’s publications, that were quietly omitted from past full-body reconstructions, and even neglected in the recent RCI recast and remount of the Berlin composite skeleton.


World-famous as the tallest animal ever mounted in a museum, the east African Giraffatitan brancai was for many years considered a species of Brachiosaurus fav.me/d4slf2d , not least by the German paleontologists who discovered and prepared it. Yet it is confirmed since Taylor (2009) that Giraffatitan is a distinct and more extreme animal, with a shorter torso, longer neck, and even longer arms than the long-armed Brachiosaurus itself. It was also probably a bit lighter. The mounted skeleton in Berlin is primarily based on HMN SII, a teenage specimen around 75 ft. long and 33 tons as opposed to the 37 ton B. altithorax type specimen (which coincidentally was also a teenager). Both animals likely grew 15% bigger as adults, as evidenced by a large Giraffatitan fibula, HMN XV2.

The Humboldt Museum in Berlin houses all of the known Giraffatitan material, which comprises multiple individuals and growth stages, including skull material from four specimens. Though none of the specimens are complete, this animal is far better represented in the fossil record than Brachiosaurus, and the many overlapping remains allow for a very accurate skeletal rendition. This reconstruction was done using the nearly complete neck of HMN SII, without including any of the proportionally shorter HMN SI material which is typically frankensteined onto it by Greg Paul and others. The end result is a naturally longer neck than has often been depicted. The original skull of HMN SII (HMN S116) is fully restored here, indicating a much larger nose than the more immature HMN t1 scaled up and cast in the Berlin remount, as well as possible sexual dimorphism in this species.

Giraffatitan shared the tropical coastal conifer forests of Tendaguru with other endemic plant-eaters like the stegosaur Kentrosaurus, the small diplodocoid Dicraeosaurus, the bipedal ornithopod Dryosaurus, the barosaurine Tornieria, the diplodocid Australodocus, the putative camarasaur Tendaguria, fellow brachiosaur "The Archbishop" (which had an even longer neck!) and the mysterious "first titanosaur", Janenschia, which was more likely a robust acrofornican similar to Tangvayosaurus. Predators in the area included large allosaurs ("Allosaurus" tendaguriensis) and ceratosaurs ("Ceratosaurus" ingens) which are badly in need of redescription, and the odd small theropod Elaphrosaurus.

I reviewed and checked every line in Janensch’s papers, and for the first time, Giraffatitan is available in a detailed yet easy to understand version that leaves nothing out. This long road of research and sweat from the development of a new restoration from all available data on all known specimens has revealed hundreds of errors in past scientific restorations of the skeleton. Now you can discover previously unknown aspects to this remarkable and legendary animal and understand it as no one has before. There are many secrets in the bones of Giraffatitan brancai. They have remained hidden by poor and inaccurate skeletals since the days of Janensch’s original description, despite the plethora of excellent engravings of the individual bones that he published. Here, finally, the majestic animal's true nature is revealed.

As usual, this groundbreaking skeletal contains no GSP. Also no Hartman, no Larramendi, and no Czerkas for those keeping track. :XD:



References:

Janensch, W. (1914). "Übersicht über der Wirbeltierfauna der Tendaguru-Schichten nebst einer kurzen Charakterisierung der neu aufgeführten Arten von Sauropoden." Archiv für Biontologie, 3 (1): 81–110.

Janensch, W. (1922). "Das Handskelett von Gigantosaurus robustus und Brachiosaurus brancai aus den Tendaguru-Schichten Deutsch-Ostafrikas". Centralblatt für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie 1922(15):464-480.

Janensch, W. 1935-36. Die Schädel der Sauropoden Brachiosaurus, Barosaurus und Dicraeosaurus aus den Tendaguru-Schichten Deutsch-Ostafrikas. Palaeontographica, Supplement 7 1(2):147-298.

Janensch, W. (1950a). "Die Skelettrekonstruktion von Brachiosaurus brancai". Palaeontographica, Supplement 7 (I, 3):97-103.

Janensch, W. (1950c). "Die Wirbelsäule von Brachiosaurus brancai". Palaeontolographica, Supplement, 7:27-93.

Paul, G.S. (1988). "The brachiosaur giants of the Morrison and Tendaguru with a description of a new subgenus, Giraffatitan, and a comparison of the world's largest dinosaurs". Hunteria, 2(3): 1–14. (Yes I have read the paper, and no, I did not copy Paul's skeletal - which is anatomically flawed in several ways.)

Taylor, M.P. (2009). "A Re-evaluation of Brachiosaurus altithorax Riggs 1903 (Dinosauria, Sauropod) and its generic separation from Giraffatitan brancai (Janensch 1914)." Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 29(3): 787-806. www.miketaylor.org.uk/dino/pub…
Add a Comment:
 
:iconthedubstepaddict:
TheDubstepAddict Featured By Owner Dec 17, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
ME HES ONE IN MOOSEOM
Reply
:iconthedilophoraptor:
TheDilophoraptor Featured By Owner Nov 24, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
I wish there were more Skeletals this thorough, they make astronomically amazing references.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Nov 24, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
Me too.... sadly most artists don't have the time for it... conversely I don't make as many skeletals as some artists. But I make mine as high-quality as time will allow.
Reply
:iconsketchy-raptor:
Sketchy-raptor Featured By Owner Nov 13, 2016  Student General Artist
The detail in this diagram is mind blowing! Probably the most useful reference one could ever have when reconstructing Giraffatitian. The animal is so much more gracile than I would have expected :O .
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
Thanks very much! Indeed my intent was to have a Giraffatitan skeletal so comprehensive and detailed that it will not be surpassed.

As it turns out, most dinosaurs are actually more gracile than I expected. Not a GSP level of slim, but still, on the gracile side of things. Most artists restore them too bulky relative to what the muscle crests on the bones actually justify.
Reply
:iconsketchy-raptor:
Sketchy-raptor Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2016  Student General Artist
You're welcome! 

I think what interests me most is how gracile it is relative to Brachiosaurus altithorax. Is there any chance of a multi-view look at the ol' big B in the near future? 
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
Possibly. The only issue there is that there's not a lot of photo documentation of rib material for B. altithorax. So reconstructing a front view of the rib cage is an educated guess. Also last I checked there aren't good ventral pice of the referred neck bones on the web. The O'Hare airport reconstruction (and its twin in NAMAL at Lehi, Utah) uses casts of the holotype combined with a LOT of speculative sculpted bones, that may or may not be accurate (the neck is too short in those, based on the proportions of the referred neck material I used, and the ribs and upper torso are speculative).

Only one rib was fully described and published by Riggs (actually only the head of that rib), though it's alleged that the prepared specimen contained others. There were other ribs from the same specimen but apparently they could not be excavated in the first dig season and they were apparently stolen/poached or destroyed by unknown persons. This was back in 1900-1903 when there weren't laws regulating fossils and there were no video cameras or modern procedures to protect the secrecy of a dig site from looters.

Even if we had all the ribs from the original specimen, the one surviving photo of them shows they were badly crushed. So the precise shape of the rib cage in cross-section is a guess at best. I expect it would be a bit wider than in Giraffatitan, but still not anything too unusual for a brachiosaur... we're not talking titanosaur-wide bellies here, and the hips of the B. altithorax holotype don't get much wider than those of Giraffatitan HMN SII/Aa, if at all, in any case.

The rib found with the Potter Creek specimen, which may be a new species of Brachiosaurus, was reconstructed and cast by Jensen, but it too is crushed and warped. It's HUGE, but flattened by crushing. So these 8-foot or 9-foot ribs were once more curved and thus "shorter" in terms of spatial dimensions.
Reply
:iconsketchy-raptor:
Sketchy-raptor Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2016  Student General Artist
Here's hoping that any future Brachiosaurus specimens will be more well documented. 
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
True. Thing is, I've heard at SVP presentations that there are over 30 partial Brachiosaurus specimens known, but the vast majority of them have never been published. Even the recent ones that were used for bone samples for mineral-radiograhpic body temperature analysis (yes there is a method for that now and it proves they were warm-blooded), are hardly documented at all. My own Brachiosaurus skeletal is based on the few specimens that I was able to find data or pictures for.
Reply
:iconpaleo-reptiles:
Paleo-reptiles Featured By Owner Aug 26, 2016
Thank you!
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Sep 19, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
You're welcome. :D
Reply
:iconsameerprehistorica:
SameerPrehistorica Featured By Owner Aug 25, 2016  Hobbyist
Good job man..
Reply
:iconjokerz-1824:
Jokerz-1824 Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2016
Honestly, I'm amazed that this animal could even hold itself up with a neck like that.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 22, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
It does look rather scary, I'll grant you that. :D But despite being so big the neck was full of air sacs and made up probably only a tenth of the animal's mass. Most of its bulk was in the rear torso. The hips and limbs are solid bone, the neck vertebrae are full of caverns and holes.

Of course the ultra-light design of the neck bones didn't stop at Giraffatitan. Some sauropods like Erketu, Daxiatitan, Rapetosaurus and most of the species currently lumped into "Mamenchisaurus" had even more extreme necks.
Reply
:iconkaprosuchusdragon:
KaprosuchusDragon Featured By Owner Jul 31, 2016
so can i use this to draw giraffatitan?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Aug 4, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
Sure, as long as you name me and give me credit as the original artist, and include a link back to this original image. In fact, if others have questions about Giraffatitan, you can repeatedly invoke my name.

Also if you sell your drawing we need to work out a deal first. But if it's non-commercial then giving me proper credit will be fine.
Reply
:iconkaprosuchusdragon:
KaprosuchusDragon Featured By Owner Aug 5, 2016
ok
Reply
:iconthedinorocker:
thedinorocker Featured By Owner Jul 31, 2016
This is what I am waiting for!
Really Great work with this! Now o go to compare this skeletal with the others to better appreciate difference
Reply
:iconthepasthappened:
ThePastHappened Featured By Owner Jul 20, 2016  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Awesome restoration for a creature with an awesome name!
Reply
:iconpaleojoe:
PaleoJoe Featured By Owner Jul 18, 2016  Student Traditional Artist
This restoration simply put is amazing, and I laud you for the vast amount of work you have expended to accurately reconstruct this animal. Great job and I hope you have a great day.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Edited Jul 18, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
Thanks! This was a real beast to tackle, and using as much material from HMN SII as possible (instead of big chunks of the other critters usually frankensteined onto it by other artists) was probably the biggest challenge. Turns out Janenesch actually illustrated and documented a good bit of material from SII (or other specimens that are parts of the same individual like HMN S116, Sa9, Aa and so forth) that either had never been used or hadn't been scaled correctly in earlier restorations. It appears that previous skeletals had just ignored much of it. So there was no need for the extreme "kitbashes" from different-aged individuals seen in older skeletals. Only a few elements like the atlas, axis, hyoid, ischium, D12, and the hindlimbs needed to be scaled from other individuals. The rest was already in the SII/S116/Sa9/Aa individual, usually complete enough to be reconstructed/reversed as needed.
Reply
:iconpaleojoe:
PaleoJoe Featured By Owner Jul 19, 2016  Student Traditional Artist
You're welcome.:) (Smile)  What animal do you plan to tackle next?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jul 24, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
Euhelopus.
Reply
:iconpaleojoe:
PaleoJoe Featured By Owner Jul 24, 2016  Student Traditional Artist
That sounds very interesting, I hope it all goes well.:) (Smile) 
Reply
:iconzoobuilder21:
zoobuilder21 Featured By Owner Jul 18, 2016  Student Traditional Artist
does this mean The Archbishop could be a giraffatitan
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Edited Jul 18, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
Doubtful. This restoration doesn't use any material from the Archbishop, and in fact the Archbishop has all the hallmarks of a totally different genus. The Archbishop differs in many ways from this animal, including the shapes and even the laminae and muscle attachment points on the vertebrae (in which it's at least as far taxonomically from Giraffatitan as Brachiosaurus is), and from what I've seen, the Archbishop has even crazier upper body proportions. So we clearly have two or more brachiosaur genera in Tendaguru, and there may be more that have yet to be found. Dr. Mike Taylor of SV-POW does a pretty thorough job of debunking the assumption that the Archbishop is any sort of Giraffatitan: www.miketaylor.org.uk/dino/pub…

However it's possible that the problematic specimen HMN SI could be a juvenile Archbishop, or far more likely, a related species given its oddly truncated neck. They both appear to have the slight forward hooked tip on their cervical neural spines.
Reply
:iconspinoinwonderland:
Is it plausible that the kink in the dorsals is actually pathologic? I have a slight feeling it is.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jul 18, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
That's always possible but pathologies are usually asymmetric and irregular, whereas the kink is perfectly symmetric over what remains of the vertebrae. Left side and right side are pretty much the same. D9 has an extremely long centrum, but the neural arch and postzygapophyses are short by comparison - so that its articulates with D10 only in an up-tilted position. The odd angle of the cotyle of D9 also support this.

Although there is some erosion, enough of the centrum remained that Janensch was able to restore it and there did not appear to be a pathology. The neural arch was actually crushed down and strongly forward during fossilization (I have "uncrushed" it quite a lot in fact) and in its published "as-is" state it would have needed either an even steeper angle of articulation, or there would have been no connection at all between the its postzygs and the prezygs of D10. Of course D10 is odd too, its condyle has that "droopy lip" but again this is symmetric on the fossil (so far as can be gleaned from it as it's heavily restored) so there doesn't appear to be an indication of an infection in D10 either. D10 and D11 are fused together but again the fusion is symmetric and does not have any swellings or lesions on the bone.

If this is a pathology, it would be a freakishly clean one, something like a one in a million chance. In most sauropod bone pathologies (*here's looking at you, Mamenchisaurus*) there is some sort of asymmetric distortion, or some lumpy domes of bone overgrowth on the infection/fracture/tumor site. But there's no hint of a tumor, infection, fracture, or healed bone overgrowth here in Giraffatitan. I think it's more likely the kink was a product of a natural ontogenic growth process, though there is always the possibility of a one-off genetic mutation. It does not however appear to be a typical pathology in the sense of the bone itself being diseased or infected.
Reply
:iconleopold002:
Leopold002 Featured By Owner Jul 17, 2016  Hobbyist Writer
To think there were once animals this big. Excellent!
Reply
:iconbricksmashtv:
bricksmashtv Featured By Owner Jul 17, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
This is FREAKING AWESOME! So beautiful! Put's all previous restorations of this magnificent beast to shame!
Reply
:iconlucas-attwell:
Lucas-Attwell Featured By Owner Edited Jul 17, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
Congratulations The best skeletal drawing.I think it could mark a before and after in skeletal restorations.
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Edited Jul 21, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
"His calculations plainly indicated the coming of a brachiosaurid skeletal so vast it would darken all with its shadow - so imposing, detailed and lifelike that it would mark the end of both skeletal and silhouette as the universe had known them heretofore. The rise of this shadow would be the end of paleontography itself.

Janensch had not the slightest doubt that the entire galaxy would measure time according to its arrival. Events would be marked by how far they had preceded the shadow, or by how long after it they followed.
"

- Saurian Wars, The Titanosauriform Way :XD:
Reply
:iconbricksmashtv:
bricksmashtv Featured By Owner Jul 31, 2016  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap 
Reply
:iconlucas-attwell:
Lucas-Attwell Featured By Owner Jul 22, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
LOL

Could you give me some tips at making a skeletal restoration of Epachthosaurus? And skeletal restorations in general?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jul 23, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
Epachthosaurus... hard to tell but Getawaytrike's skeletal for Elaltitan may be a good "base" to get ideas from.  In terms of proportions.

Skeletals in general... you need to know 3 things. (1). SCALING. make sure you scale everything right. this is harder when cross-scaling multiple incomplete specimens. (2). FIDELITY TO IMAGE. often digitaly enhancing or drawing over the bones to make outlines can obscure important details. Make sure you keep this tendency of obscuration to a minimum. Stay true to the bones' shape. (3) ANGLES. Getting the right rotation and angles of articulation is critical. Many times your skeletal can look very different with just a small change in scapula or dorsal column incline. Know the important angles in a dinosaur's anatomy and how changing one can affect the others.

Other than that.... programs like Pixia offer a free and easy way to shade bones that are not known or existent in currently described specimens. Layering in pixia is also a good way to rearrange individual bones without loss of resolution or creating too many files.
Reply
:iconlucas-attwell:
Lucas-Attwell Featured By Owner Jul 25, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
 Thank you!

On Epachthosaurus proportions, I already tried at doing a skeletal.And the dinosaur was much longer than Elaltitan.I considered the existence of 11 dorsal vertebrae (in the paper the authors considered 10) but I don´t know if this is right.
And do you recommend digital medium over traditional?Or a mix?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jul 25, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
If you do skeletals, always go digital, mistakes are much easier to correct.

I am curious to see your Epachthosaurus skeletal. Much longer than Elaltitan? That's news to me, I'd like to see how it scales up.
Reply
:iconlucas-attwell:
Lucas-Attwell Featured By Owner Edited Jul 27, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
I tried to make a (Verryyy) ROUGH correction (the scapula is crap) and surprise...It isn't that longer,however,is longer than Elaltitan scontent-eze1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v…

(The two dorsal vertebrae are from the paper,and are actually caudals xD)
Reply
:iconlucas-attwell:
Lucas-Attwell Featured By Owner Jul 27, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
It was very sketchy and I messed up the orientation of the firsts dorsal vertebrae.Another problem that I faced was the rotation and angle of the humerus,radius,ulna,femur,tibia and fibula ( :| (Blank Stare) ) so I used the measurements of the bones but not the shape in this cases.I don't know if there is a way of rotate the femur and the other bones (I suspect that there isn't). The vertebral column was low in my skeletal and the size of the scapula was small.Maybe elevating the dorsal vertebra and giving a proper scapula size erase the "long look". I tried making a new skeletal but I failed at the rotation of bones and decided to not continue. I didn't scanned the drawing so the perspective of the camera deformed some bones.Tell me if you see another mistakes 
orig12.deviantart.net/2ffc/f/2…
The next one is going to be digital but what software you recommend for correctly scaling the elements?
Reply
:iconpaleo-king:
Paleo-King Featured By Owner Jul 29, 2016  Professional Traditional Artist
MS Paint (any version from 2006 or later) is fine for scaling and converting images to line drawings.

Pixia is good for rotating bones and repositioning them. That will fix your issue.

I just use Paint and Pixia, nothing fancier than that.
Reply
(1 Reply)
Add a Comment:
 
×
  • Art Print
  • Canvas
  • Photo
Download JPG 6472 × 6976




Details

Submitted on
July 17, 2016
Image Size
6.2 MB
Resolution
6472×6976
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
2,561 (6 today)
Favourites
99 (who?)
Comments
44
Downloads
53
×