Third one gives me a 404. As it is, I like the first best, followed by the fourth.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.This is the page proper. Let's see if that works.
And this is a cropped form◊.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.Both of those links work.
That's a good image; I definitely prefer it to 1.4, which is low-quality. For me, it ties with your first suggestion — this one has good scale (since those are definitely sperm whales), but I like the perspective of that one. Both show agression and size, though!
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.Which do you think works better, the cropped version or the full one?
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.The first one on the first link is in the OP.
As for the fossils, they do just part of the job of illustrating the trope. It would be like a picture of a Nice Hat that just showed the brim.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.well the way I see it, showing an actual photo of the fossils drives the nail home that the creature actually existed. An artist's rendering of what the shark may have looked like may just lead people to thinking that it's an oversized Great White shown in some fictional fantasy setting. Lets face it, without actually seeing the creature directly, there's not much we know about how it was physically different from other sharks aside from the obvious size.
...However, I'm not against the idea of combining a picture to show the artist rendering and the actual fossiles.
Honestly, I don't care for the pics in 3...it looks like the shark is titanic in comparison to the whales when they would really be about the same size. I like the pic of the shark about to bite the whale's fin best.
edited 26th May '12 8:50:46 PM by Willbyr
Just because I thought it needed to be mentioned: The article linked to earlier has a few inaccuracies. Megalodon was not the largest known predator to live in the oceans. That title is contested, but we know that the modern day Sperm Whale is probably larger.
I like the shark about to attack the diver and the shark about to bite the whale's fin for different reasons. The first demonstrates the way that Megalodon is often used in works (As a bigger Bruce), while the second demonstrates its real life scale more effectively.
edited 26th May '12 9:14:51 PM by Scardoll
Fight. Struggle. Endure. Suffer. LIVE."showing an actual photo of the fossils drives the nail home that the creature actually existed"
But that can be done with links in the description noting that this is Truth in Television.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.I like this◊ because the other creatures give some temporal context. Dislike the "shark way bigger than sperm whales", it is a cool picture but that is not accurate, and the trope is indirectly about the real thing. (Fun fact: Blue whales are the largest animal on Earth, ever. Including dinosaurs.)
edited 26th May '12 11:20:21 PM by rodneyAnonymous
Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.They give extremely inaccurate temporal context. There were no mosasaurs or pterosaurs when Megalodon prowled the seas; they died out over 40 million years before. It'd be equivalent to showing a tyrannosaurus chomping on a woolly mammoth. If you want an accurate image, you can't go with that one.
edited 27th May '12 3:12:57 AM by Scardoll
Fight. Struggle. Endure. Suffer. LIVE.@Rodney: My issue with that image is that there isn't much sense of scale; it just looks like a regular shark.
Reaction Image Repository^^ Broad strokes "prehistoric creature" is fine. Most people won't know or care those are the wrong kind of dinosaurs. I meant "inaccurate at a glance", not "inaccurate on close inspection".
^ /nod, that is a problem.
edited 27th May '12 3:02:39 PM by rodneyAnonymous
Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.I'm fine with an inaccurate image that portrays how the megalodon creature is used in fiction (Which is why I like the diver picture). However, if we're going to look for accuracy, an image of a megalodon biting down on a mosasaur is not going to cut it.
Fight. Struggle. Endure. Suffer. LIVE.So the most likely accurate, and depiction of size, is with the prehistoric whales.
But still, any other suggestions?
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.I think the one with the humpback looks pretty good, and even if a humpback whale doesn't look much like a "prehistoric whale", the sizes seem to match up pretty well.
Alternatively, someone could find a better quality shot of that one with the speedboat, but I don't even know what it's from.
Megalodons are supposed to be a giant shark, therefore i think the pic in question should have a size reference for something of consistent size or a general range size, for example a yard stick, or an approximately average sized human. Thus I like the ones with the humans or the one with the whale, which ever is most scientifically accurate in respects to size.
edited 28th May '12 6:01:39 PM by captainsandwich
You mean something like this◊? (From this article.)
The Internet misuses, abuses, and overuses everything.Perfect. This image has my vote.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.I like the one with the diver.
please don't capitalize my handle. I just don't like it.Good enough for me.
I support that one.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
Loads, actually. Google image search has plenty. These are a few stand-outs for me.
Attacking a group of prehistoric whales◊
About to swallow a diver◊
Swimming among a pod of sperm whales◊
Swallowing a speedboat◊ (from Shark Attack 3: Megalodon)
About to attack a humpback whale◊
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.