What do you think?
Rate this book
Dinosaurs
Take a journey through the prehistoric world and trace the evolution of the most astonishing creatures ever to have walked the earth. Over 170 giant-sized and superbly detailed computer generated illustrations provide a stunning visual catalogue of dinosaurs, bringing the prehistoric world to life like never before. The expert text identifies each species - what they looked like, what they ate, how they lived and died. Packed with the latest research and discoveries, this giant-sized title is as unique and impressive as the dinosaurs themselves.
224 pages, Hardcover
First published May 24, 2000
7 people are currently reading
217 people want to read
About the author
Stephen Brusatte
9 books847 followersAuthor writes under the penname Steve Brusatte as well.
Steve Brusatte is a paleontologist at the University of Edinburgh and a specialist on the evolution of dinosaurs. He has traveled the world digging up dinosaurs, named over 15 new species (including the tyrannosaur 'Pinocchio rex'), and published ground-breaking studies on the origin and extinction of dinosaurs. He has a Bachelor's from the University of Chicago, a Master's from the University of Bristol, and a PhD from Columbia University. He appears frequently on television and his work is covered often by the popular press. He has written several books for children and the leading textbook Dinosaur Paleobiology. The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs is his first full-length book for adults. A native of Ottawa, Illinois, he now lives in Edinburgh, Scotland.
Steve Brusatte is a paleontologist at the University of Edinburgh and a specialist on the evolution of dinosaurs. He has traveled the world digging up dinosaurs, named over 15 new species (including the tyrannosaur 'Pinocchio rex'), and published ground-breaking studies on the origin and extinction of dinosaurs. He has a Bachelor's from the University of Chicago, a Master's from the University of Bristol, and a PhD from Columbia University. He appears frequently on television and his work is covered often by the popular press. He has written several books for children and the leading textbook Dinosaur Paleobiology. The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs is his first full-length book for adults. A native of Ottawa, Illinois, he now lives in Edinburgh, Scotland.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
January 24, 2011
Flip through this book first--notice the large, detailed graphics of what dinosaurs may have looked like--the ruffs and crests of feathers, the heavy bodies, the wealth of predators and prey, each filling a different niche. Then, go through it slowly, savoring the brief summaries of the state of the world in the different eras of dinosaur time, also illustrated and noting the little details accompanying each glossy picture of a dinosaur: I particularly liked the small graphic comparison of dinosaur size to human size.
November 4, 2023
Since Stephen Brusatte is the author, you know these pictures are as accurate as possible. This HUGE book (14"x17" = 35cmx45cm) has action shots that can take up both pages with the book open. Some have angle-shots from down low looking upward, etc. Very diverse selection of actions. Each of the 170 dinosaurs is listed in the order of appearance in geologic time. The general paragraphs of writing bring up the highly interesting facts about each particular dinosaur.
There is consistently four small panels per dinosaur:
- Classification (kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species)
- Fossil locations around the Earth
- Statistics (habitat, period, length, height, weight, predators, food)
- Size comparison to a human (shadow outline)
I can't imagine how to make this book any better! You could maybe add more encyclopedic writing, but that wouldn't map well to this coffee-table style huge book. You certainly can't make the pictures any better!
I'm currently reading another book by the author: Stephen Brusatte. This book is: The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs: A New History of a Lost World. I am finding all the geologic detail in this fun-to-read book. My only wish with this book is I wanted more pictures. Well, I certainly found them. If you read this Rise/Fall book, I would greatly encourage you to have this oversize "Dinosaurs" book handy, so get the visual on these incredible animals.
There is consistently four small panels per dinosaur:
- Classification (kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species)
- Fossil locations around the Earth
- Statistics (habitat, period, length, height, weight, predators, food)
- Size comparison to a human (shadow outline)
I can't imagine how to make this book any better! You could maybe add more encyclopedic writing, but that wouldn't map well to this coffee-table style huge book. You certainly can't make the pictures any better!
I'm currently reading another book by the author: Stephen Brusatte. This book is: The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs: A New History of a Lost World. I am finding all the geologic detail in this fun-to-read book. My only wish with this book is I wanted more pictures. Well, I certainly found them. If you read this Rise/Fall book, I would greatly encourage you to have this oversize "Dinosaurs" book handy, so get the visual on these incredible animals.
September 6, 2024
A representation of uninformed laziness ( www.amazon.com/review/R3J1R5BYAZABGZ/... ): 1/5
Short Version: If you want the best digital paleoart, get Csotonyi/White's "The Paleoart of Julius Csotonyi". If you want the best natural history of dinos, get Gardom/Milner's "The Natural History Museum Book of Dinosaurs". If you want the best collection of dino profiles, get GSPaul's "The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs". Brusatte/Benton's "Dinosaurs" fails at being any of these or even just decent in its own right.
Long Version: Read on.
Benton & Brusatte are consistently good sources for the specialist (E.g. See Brusatte's "Dinosaur Paleobiology"). However, they're also consistently not-so-good sources for casual readers/the enthusiast. Dinosaurs in particular is so bad that Naish described it as a representation of "uninformed laziness" ( www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RG0yLeJE_U ). In this review, I list the 4 main reasons why I think Dinosaurs is that bad.
1) The writing is annoyingly hyperbolic (E.g. See the Brusatte/Benton quote)/repetitive (E.g. On average, the word "dominate" is used once or twice per page in Dinosaurs, a 224 page book; In fact, it's used 3 times, back-to-back, in the 1st paragraph alone)/inconsistent (E.g. It goes back & forth between "story" & "storey" throughout Dinosaurs).
2) The text is hit-&-miss in terms of getting the facts straight. This is especially apparent in the dino profiles because the misses stick out more with less text. That of the Protoceratops profile is some of the worst: On page 205, Protoceratops is described as being "a small, generalized grazer of low plants"; Also, on the same page, it's claimed that "the frill anchored strong jaw muscles[...]that helped Protoceratops mow through shrubs and bushes". When I 1st read that, all I could think was "BS": For 1 (in reference to "on page 205"), "the hooked beak of the snout together with the predentary[...]strongly suggests that these herbivores were capable of a great deal of selective feeding" (See Fastovsky/Weishampel's "The Evolution and Extinction of the Dinosaurs"); For another (in reference to "also"), "there are many problems with this idea, starting with the fact that no living animal has such strange lengthy jaw muscles. Such muscles would have been terribly vulnerable to injury if males really did fight with each other as we think likely" (See Lanzendorf's "Dinosaur Imagery: The Science of Lost Worlds and Jurassic Art: The Lanzendorf Collection").
3) "Planet Dinosaur" (which is a decent dino doc in its own right) was billed as the new "Walking With Dinosaurs" (which is the 1st natural history doc about dinos). However, to quote Albertonykus ( http://albertonykus.blogspot.com/2011... ), "one of the less desirable characteristics of Planet Dinosaur is that it's very theropod centric[...]Planet Dinosaur probably should have been called "Planet Theropod"." Likewise, Dinosaurs should've been called "Theropods": It's claimed that Dinosaurs is a natural history of dinos in the Introduction ("The rich, unfolding drama of the Age of Dinosaurs is the theme of this book"); However, while 5 sub-chapters focus on theropods (1 for tetanurans, 1 for coelurosaurs, 1 for bird origins & evolution, 1 for Chinese feathered dinos, & 1 for T. rex), only 3 focus on non-theropods (2 for sauropodomorphs & 1 for ornithischians).*
4) Pixel-shack's digital paleoart is the worst I've seen in a post-2000 popular dino book. In Dinosaurs, some of the reconstructions are shameless rip-offs of more famous reconstructions (E.g. The Spinosaurus is a shameless rip-off of the "Jurassic Park" Spinosaurus). Others are poorly-photoshopped animals (E.g. The non-dino Euparkeria is a poorly-photoshopped green iguana). Still others are just plain outdated/abominable. The deinonychosaurs are especially outdated: To quote Naish ( https://web.archive.org/web/201609170... ), "when a dinosaur book published in 2011 features scaly-skinned, completely un-feathered dromaeosaurs with down-facing palms, and yet was supposedly checked by one of the world's most famous and respected vertebrate palaeontologists, we know we have a problem"; & if that's not bad enough, most of them are depicted with Velociraptor's head; This is especially apparent in the Dromaeosaurus ( www.amazon.fr/Dinosaures-Steve-Brusat... ) because it's also a shameless rip-off of Kokoro's Velociraptor. Likewise, the ceratopsians are especially abominable: Most of them are depicted as being piles of poop (I'm not trying to be creative or vulgar with my language; They really look like piles of poop); This is especially apparent in the Torosaurus ( http://rpg2006.cgsociety.org/art/dino... ) because it's even lumpier & darker brown than the others; & if that's not bad enough, the Torosaurus is also a shameless rip-off of the "Walking With Dinosaurs" Torosaurus.
*A decent natural history of dinos would combine the 1 for bird origins & evolution with the 1 for Chinese feathered dinos (as in Chapter 10 of Gardom/Milner's book). Also, it would use T. rex as a vehicle to address a broader range of topics (as with Baryonyx in Chapter 9 of Gardom/Milner's book).
Quoting Brusatte/Benton: "In 1922 Andrews' team discovered a heavily crushed but remarkably complete skull of a small theropod. This skull was very similar to Brown's Dromaeosaurus, but found alongside was something paleontologists had never seen before: a giant, curved and dangerously sharp toe claw. Two years later museum scientist Henry Fairfield Osborn named this new animal Velociraptor, the 'speedy thief'. It was a nightmarish creature, a human-sized carnivore that could rip prey apart with its lethal claws and array of knife-like teeth."
Short Version: If you want the best digital paleoart, get Csotonyi/White's "The Paleoart of Julius Csotonyi". If you want the best natural history of dinos, get Gardom/Milner's "The Natural History Museum Book of Dinosaurs". If you want the best collection of dino profiles, get GSPaul's "The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs". Brusatte/Benton's "Dinosaurs" fails at being any of these or even just decent in its own right.
Long Version: Read on.
Benton & Brusatte are consistently good sources for the specialist (E.g. See Brusatte's "Dinosaur Paleobiology"). However, they're also consistently not-so-good sources for casual readers/the enthusiast. Dinosaurs in particular is so bad that Naish described it as a representation of "uninformed laziness" ( www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RG0yLeJE_U ). In this review, I list the 4 main reasons why I think Dinosaurs is that bad.
1) The writing is annoyingly hyperbolic (E.g. See the Brusatte/Benton quote)/repetitive (E.g. On average, the word "dominate" is used once or twice per page in Dinosaurs, a 224 page book; In fact, it's used 3 times, back-to-back, in the 1st paragraph alone)/inconsistent (E.g. It goes back & forth between "story" & "storey" throughout Dinosaurs).
2) The text is hit-&-miss in terms of getting the facts straight. This is especially apparent in the dino profiles because the misses stick out more with less text. That of the Protoceratops profile is some of the worst: On page 205, Protoceratops is described as being "a small, generalized grazer of low plants"; Also, on the same page, it's claimed that "the frill anchored strong jaw muscles[...]that helped Protoceratops mow through shrubs and bushes". When I 1st read that, all I could think was "BS": For 1 (in reference to "on page 205"), "the hooked beak of the snout together with the predentary[...]strongly suggests that these herbivores were capable of a great deal of selective feeding" (See Fastovsky/Weishampel's "The Evolution and Extinction of the Dinosaurs"); For another (in reference to "also"), "there are many problems with this idea, starting with the fact that no living animal has such strange lengthy jaw muscles. Such muscles would have been terribly vulnerable to injury if males really did fight with each other as we think likely" (See Lanzendorf's "Dinosaur Imagery: The Science of Lost Worlds and Jurassic Art: The Lanzendorf Collection").
3) "Planet Dinosaur" (which is a decent dino doc in its own right) was billed as the new "Walking With Dinosaurs" (which is the 1st natural history doc about dinos). However, to quote Albertonykus ( http://albertonykus.blogspot.com/2011... ), "one of the less desirable characteristics of Planet Dinosaur is that it's very theropod centric[...]Planet Dinosaur probably should have been called "Planet Theropod"." Likewise, Dinosaurs should've been called "Theropods": It's claimed that Dinosaurs is a natural history of dinos in the Introduction ("The rich, unfolding drama of the Age of Dinosaurs is the theme of this book"); However, while 5 sub-chapters focus on theropods (1 for tetanurans, 1 for coelurosaurs, 1 for bird origins & evolution, 1 for Chinese feathered dinos, & 1 for T. rex), only 3 focus on non-theropods (2 for sauropodomorphs & 1 for ornithischians).*
4) Pixel-shack's digital paleoart is the worst I've seen in a post-2000 popular dino book. In Dinosaurs, some of the reconstructions are shameless rip-offs of more famous reconstructions (E.g. The Spinosaurus is a shameless rip-off of the "Jurassic Park" Spinosaurus). Others are poorly-photoshopped animals (E.g. The non-dino Euparkeria is a poorly-photoshopped green iguana). Still others are just plain outdated/abominable. The deinonychosaurs are especially outdated: To quote Naish ( https://web.archive.org/web/201609170... ), "when a dinosaur book published in 2011 features scaly-skinned, completely un-feathered dromaeosaurs with down-facing palms, and yet was supposedly checked by one of the world's most famous and respected vertebrate palaeontologists, we know we have a problem"; & if that's not bad enough, most of them are depicted with Velociraptor's head; This is especially apparent in the Dromaeosaurus ( www.amazon.fr/Dinosaures-Steve-Brusat... ) because it's also a shameless rip-off of Kokoro's Velociraptor. Likewise, the ceratopsians are especially abominable: Most of them are depicted as being piles of poop (I'm not trying to be creative or vulgar with my language; They really look like piles of poop); This is especially apparent in the Torosaurus ( http://rpg2006.cgsociety.org/art/dino... ) because it's even lumpier & darker brown than the others; & if that's not bad enough, the Torosaurus is also a shameless rip-off of the "Walking With Dinosaurs" Torosaurus.
*A decent natural history of dinos would combine the 1 for bird origins & evolution with the 1 for Chinese feathered dinos (as in Chapter 10 of Gardom/Milner's book). Also, it would use T. rex as a vehicle to address a broader range of topics (as with Baryonyx in Chapter 9 of Gardom/Milner's book).
Quoting Brusatte/Benton: "In 1922 Andrews' team discovered a heavily crushed but remarkably complete skull of a small theropod. This skull was very similar to Brown's Dromaeosaurus, but found alongside was something paleontologists had never seen before: a giant, curved and dangerously sharp toe claw. Two years later museum scientist Henry Fairfield Osborn named this new animal Velociraptor, the 'speedy thief'. It was a nightmarish creature, a human-sized carnivore that could rip prey apart with its lethal claws and array of knife-like teeth."
September 1, 2020
Having a young son who loves dinosaur books, I found myself wanting to learn more about them than the details given in toddler books, and this was a great find. First, I was surprised by the size. I put this on hold at the library and didn’t expect this giant. Then, I was enthralled with the illustrations and descriptions of dinosaurs. What an awesome book!
March 21, 2017
This is the book I dreamed about as a kid.
December 27, 2020
This book is great fun and huge! It is the tallest book I own - and I have some giants. The pictures and detail is fantastic and its an intersting read. Â
October 23, 2011
It describes the different types of dinosaurs - it goes into their evolution across time and shows a bunch of cladograms that demonstrate how the different groups of dinosaurs are related - excellent graphics - it deals minimally with the people who made the discoveries - pretty fascinating - and YES, birds evolved from dinosaurs and YES, some dinosaurs had feathers!
September 19, 2012
My family and friends love this HUGE book. I gave this book to my boys last christmas, and they are still so inthralled with this book, definite accomplishment for a 4 & 6 year old. Not to mention, me and another couple literally spent hours reading and looking at the pics in this book, it is amazing!
March 6, 2015
I really like this book because it shows how dinosaurs lived and the time of extinction. I learned a lot about the sizes and diets of these prehistoric creatures. I really like to read about dinosaurs and how they survived on the earth
July 20, 2010
Shared this huge book with its magnificent pictures of all the dinosaurs with my 7-year-old grandson. We both loved it!
February 24, 2014
Lovely book great illustrations and good text funny author
May 15, 2014
Fantastic book that really captured my son's imagination and interest! This author is funny and knows how to make dinosaurs more interesting! My son now says Steve Brusatte is his hero!
January 23, 2015
Very very very very good
November 29, 2016
You will learn a lot about dinosaurs if you read this book!
Read
December 11, 2008This book is 14" x 19". Big enough for a life-size picture of an Archaeopteryx.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews