Tiny Baby 5.1mm Dinosaur Track Discovery !?

[Kurufossils]

3 minutes ago, Auspex said:

To have an "identical right toe" on successive but unaligned bipedal tracks, he'd have been hopping.

You are trying hard to prove what you want it to be; let the evidence speak to you, and listen with a critical ear.

If you only look for and collect data that supports your desired conclusion, you will miss all that disproves it.

@Auspex Ok I know what you mean, but I am just sharing more pictures and my opinion atm lol of what I see, just attempting to point out to what I see with the pointers more since I can't get those dreamy hd photos right now, trust me I'm not trying to hard at all since I can't provide 'the standard of evidence' or disprove anything at this time, not like I'm sharing a billion papers, pictures of comparable evidence from others, and quoting articles so...? We'll see what happens with time.

[Kurufossils]

3 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

You might contact Dr. Patrick Getty.

 

Can you borrow a camera from anyone? 

Something that has a good Macro feature?

 

 

Thank you very much for the recommendation! I will see if I can.

 

Unfortunately I know no one in my area with a camera like that, I wish I did as I really want to present the clarity it needs. 

[Pagurus]

13 minutes ago, Ryann10006 said:

Unfortunately I know no one in my area with a camera like that

Sometimes a flat bed photo scanner will produce a sharp image, if you have access to one of those, maybe in an office?  It doesn't always work but it might be worth a try.

[Kurufossils]

2 minutes ago, Pagurus said:

Sometimes a flat bed photo scanner will produce a sharp image, if you have access to one of those, maybe in an office?  It doesn't always work but it might be worth a try.

Thanks for the suggestion, I actually do but it won't lay flat on it because of the ripples so I'm not sure if that would work out, also may damage the scanner glass if I am not careful. It could be to risky to be worth trying.

[Kurufossils]

@Fossildude19 Thank you, I have just sent him an email and I will certainly update this post when he gets back to me, I appreciate the recommendation.

[Fossildude19]

12 minutes ago, Ryann10006 said:

@Fossildude19 Thank you, I have just sent him an email and I will certainly update this post when he gets back to me, I appreciate the recommendation.

Happy to help.   Fingers crossed, ... .

 

I think what the others are getting at is that you are stating with confidence that they are footprints, when in fact they are in question. 

Better to hedge your bets with something like...  "I believe them to be ..." or "I think they are ..." "In my opinion..." etc. At least until your theory is proved or disproved.   

 

Stating it as a fact without confirmation could be misleading for the people who do not know about tracks. 

Just trying to keep mis-information from what is a scientific based Forum.   

 

EDIT: Also, these guys are pretty knowledgeable as well. 

 

[Bobby Rico]

I hope you don’t mind I turned it into a black and white photo and adjusted the contrast to see what stands out. To me there looks to be other  markings to the right but it is too blurry to see. I think that plant debris has made them marks but it is just a guess.

[Kurufossils]

@Bobby Rico Thanks for doing that it certainly helps visually, yeah I noticed those as well off to the side that one clear one to me I believe is likely an insect track, it shares the look of one while the rest are very muddled up to tell if its a full trackway,  there very well could be some plant debris in there as well as I do have other pieces with plant material mixed into the matrix.

[ynot]

The smallest dinosaur (that I know of) was the size of a turkey. A hatchling turkey has a foot well over an inch in size. Even if You went down to a baby chicken the foot is still over an inch long.

I do not see this being from any dinosaur currently known, unless there were some hummingbird sized dinos.

 

I see many deformities within the surface of the rock that look similar to the "tracks" that do not resemble any track I can think of.

Therefor I question these as being tracks of any kind. I think it is more likely that they are random markings that happen to resemble tracks.

[Kurufossils]

33 minutes ago, ynot said:

The smallest dinosaur (that I know of) was the size of a turkey. A hatchling turkey has a foot well over an inch in size. Even if You went down to a baby chicken the foot is still over an inch long.

I do not see this being from any dinosaur currently known, unless there were some hummingbird sized dinos.

 

I see many deformities within the surface of the rock that look similar to the "tracks" that do not resemble any track I can think of.

Therefor I question these as being tracks of any kind. I think it is more likely that they are random markings that happen to resemble tracks.

Currently the smallest recorded dinosaur footprint measures under an inch at around 0.7, I agree its likely not from anything known due to the size as even the species of the 0.7 inch footprint I mention is unknown as well.

 

I'm less inclined to believe they are random markings and very worth looking into as they certainly stand out alot from the random markings or so in the matrix, they can even be comparable to already existing tracks I've seen and personally hunted for myself at this site. There is that chance they are random markings but in my opinion it is highly unlikely, only time will tell especially if I can get more people to look at in hand in person, sometime time soon I hope to bring this to a buddy I will be hunting with in the future who is an avid collector of tracks and has even contributed to museums, From what I showed him he definitely sees the resemblance as a track so far.

[ynot]

[Mediospirifer]

I assume your cellphone camera doesn't have its own light. Try illuminating the specimen from the side, so that the hollows are shadowed. That might help show the details better.

 

Take lots of photos until you get the best image possible.

 

Interesting specimen!

 

[Bobby Rico]

57 minutes ago, Ryann10006 said:

0.7,

0.7’’ is about 17mm your is 5mm a lot smaller then. Very interesting post.

[Kurufossils]

5 hours ago, Bobby Rico said:

0.7’’ is about 17mm your is 5mm a lot smaller then. Very interesting post.

Yeah that's especially why I'm interested in getting to the bottom of this when I can, it's way to interesting to initially pass off since this resembles a track closely.

 

@Mediospirifer Yes but I can't use both functions at the same time unfortunately, I tried at all sides under lighting but the quality keeps coming out the same. Bobby Rico's post did a good job of bringing out the shadows for the most part.

[Innocentx]

4 hours ago, Ryann10006 said:

Yes but I can't use both functions at the same time unfortunately, I tried at all sides under lighting but the quality keeps coming out the same.

Outdoors in full sun at a tilt to show shadows.

 

[Mediospirifer]

4 hours ago, Ryann10006 said:

Yeah that's especially why I'm interested in getting to the bottom of this when I can, it's way to interesting to initially pass off since this resembles a track closely.

 

@Mediospirifer Yes but I can't use both functions at the same time unfortunately, I tried at all sides under lighting but the quality keeps coming out the same. Bobby Rico's post did a good job of bringing out the shadows for the most part.

 

Try setting a desk lamp next to the piece when photographing. One that you can control the angle of the light to best bring out the contours. Maybe try shooting through a hand lens to get better detail? Good luck!

 

[Kurufossils]

@Mediospirifer Do you mean something like a magnifying glass? I do not have a hands lens otherwise.

[Bobby Rico]

2 hours ago, Ryann10006 said:

post did a good job

If you do take more photos I am happy to run them thought some filters like I did before. If it helps.

[JohnJ]

6 hours ago, Ryann10006 said:

I hope to bring this to a buddy I will be hunting with in the future who is an avid collector of tracks and has even contributed to museums, From what I showed him he definitely sees the resemblance as a track so far.

 

@Carl works at the AMNH and has offered to help you.

 

No disrespect to your buddy, but his confirmation of your idea is not evidence your suspicions are accurate.  Try to get it in the hands of a trained researcher for examination.

 

What do the other marks on the surface look like?  Any other inclusions?  Any close up photos?  

[Kurufossils]

@JohnJ All I am mentioning is that he sees the resemblance initially and I want to show it to him in person, he didn't necessarily confirm anything yet besides his opinion and I am just pointing out  basically that he is a strong source that I personally know, trust me when I say he knows his stuff as much as any expert, he has specialized with tracks for many years and has seen hundreds of different specimens from the area and more. So theres a good chance in person when I eventually show it to him he can provide a very strong conclusion.

 

On the surface there is a mix of what appears to be natural abstract weathering and indeterminate marking mostly on the left side while on the right side close to the spot in question  there is what I believe is a clear insect track that could be part of a more weathered away or natural covered trackway. In the very left bottom corner there appears to be the slightest partial of possibly a larger track but it certainly is to broken off if so there is absolute uncertainty with that aspect. Unfortunately I do not have the equipment to get good very up close photos, if I could I definitely would provided the clearest possible images of these spots to showcase exactly what is seen. 

 

I would certainly love to bring it into the city for Carl to examine, but if he is likely busy with alot of other work he has to do I'd rather find a way to make this clearer in the meantime so I can prove it to be as worth of his time as I believe it could be. I will contact him soon anyways to see if there is a way to bring him the specimen to examine that works with his schedule.

[Kurufossils]

Please don't accuse me for using this as evidence confirmation of anything lol just wanted to share something as it relates to the subject of very small dinosaur tracks in general, I came across Minisauripus which seems to be the smallest non avian dinosaur, very interesting to see tracks as small as these.

[JohnJ]

45 minutes ago, Ryann10006 said:

Please don't accuse me for using this as evidence confirmation of anything lol just wanted to share something as it relates to the subject of very small dinosaur tracks in general, I came across Minisauripus which seems to be the smallest non avian dinosaur, very interesting to see tracks as small as these.

 

 

 

Ryan, please properly cite the source of any images or figures you 'borrow' to post on TFF.   

[Carl]

18 hours ago, ynot said:

The smallest dinosaur (that I know of) was the size of a turkey. A hatchling turkey has a foot well over an inch in size. Even if You went down to a baby chicken the foot is still over an inch long.

I do not see this being from any dinosaur currently known, unless there were some hummingbird sized dinos.

 

I see many deformities within the surface of the rock that look similar to the "tracks" that do not resemble any track I can think of.

Therefor I question these as being tracks of any kind. I think it is more likely that they are random markings that happen to resemble tracks.

Just to be pedantic, a hummingbird is a hummingbird-sized dinosaur.

[Carl]

One more piece of advice. Even experts are likely to offer an inconclusive diagnosis on this piece. Be careful not to take that to mean that you have something never before seen or important. Many things are merely not currently identifiable and are most likely quite ordinary.

[ynot]

35 minutes ago, Carl said:

Just to be pedantic, a hummingbird is a hummingbird-sized dinosaur.

Uh, yeah.