Open the tool

Tyrannosaurus rex vs allosaurus: how their vision differs

Two animals people expect to see alike, or very differently. Here are their values side by side, from the same catalogue and with the same evidence labels. Both are fossil reconstructions: values come from living relatives and skull measurements, not from eyes.

Sample scene rendered by the See Like Animals engine for the tyrannosaurus rex.
Tyrannosaurus rex (reconstruction)
Sample scene rendered by the See Like Animals engine for the allosaurus.
Allosaurus (reconstruction)

The differences in numbers

Dial by dial

DialTyrannosaurus rexAllosaurus
Colour
Colour receptors: 4 receptor classes: 406.5 nm (VS/SWS (violet)), 452 nm (SWS (blue)), 505 nm (MWS (green)), 567 nm (LWS (long)) Reconstruction[1][2]
Colour receptors: 4 receptor classes: 406.5 nm (VS/SWS (violet)), 452 nm (SWS (blue)), 505 nm (MWS (green)), 567 nm (LWS (long)) Reconstruction[1][2]
Sharpness
Acuity: 87.21 cycles per degree Reconstruction[3][4]
Acuity: 65.31 cycles per degree Reconstruction[3][4]
Field of view
Binocular overlap: 55° Reconstruction[5]
Eye placement: lateral Reconstruction[5]
Binocular overlap: 20° Reconstruction[5]
Eye placement: lateral Reconstruction[5]
Sharp zones (foveas)No valueNo value
Night vision
Activity pattern: diurnal Reconstruction[6][7]
Rods vs cones: cone-dominated Reconstruction[6][7]
Activity pattern: diurnal Reconstruction[6][7]
Rods vs cones: cone-dominated Reconstruction[6][7]
Motion (flicker fusion)
Flicker fusion frequency: 85 Hz Reconstruction[8][9][10][11][12]
Flicker fusion frequency: 85 Hz Reconstruction[8][9][10][11][12]
Compare them on your own photo

Vision types: Tyrannosaurus rex: Reconstructed dinosaur or pterosaur. Allosaurus: Reconstructed dinosaur or pterosaur.

More comparisons: all comparisons.

Sources

  1. Lind O, Mitkus M, Olsson P, Kelber A. 2014. Ultraviolet vision in birds: the importance of transparent eye media. Proc R Soc B 281:20132209. Table 1. doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2209
  2. Longcore T. 2023. A compendium of photopigment peak sensitivities and visual spectral response curves of terrestrial wildlife to guide design of outdoor nighttime lighting. Basic Appl Ecol 73:40-50. doi:10.1016/j.baae.2023.09.002. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8432720
  3. Caves EM, Fernandez-Juricic E, Kelley LA (2024) Ecological and morphological correlates of visual acuity in birds. J Exp Biol 227(2): jeb246063. Supplementary Table S1.. doi.org/10.1242/jeb.246063
  4. Lautenschlager et al. 2023. Orbit size and estimated eye size in dinosaurs and other archosaurs and their implications for the evolution of visual capabilities. J Vert Paleontol (2023) e2295518.. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25046402.v2
  5. Stevens KA. 2006. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 26(2):321-330. doi.org/10.1671/0272-4634
  6. Wilman H, Belmaker J, Simpson J, de la Rosa C, Rivadeneira MM, Jetz W. 2014. EltonTraits 1.0: species-level foraging attributes of the world's birds and mammals. Ecology 95:2027. BirdFuncDat.txt. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3559887.v1
  7. Moura et al. 2024. A phylogeny-informed characterisation of global tetrapod traits addresses data gaps and biases. PLoS Biol 22:e3002658. TetrapodTraits v3.0.1.. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22536349
  8. Boström JE, Dimitrova M, Canton C, Håstad O, Qvarnström A, Ödeen A. 2016. Ultra-rapid vision in birds. PLoS ONE 11(3): e0151099. S1 Table. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151099
  9. Haarlem CS, Hynes C, Jackson AL, Mitchell KJ, O'Connell RG, Healy K. 2026. Pace of ecology drives the tempo of visual perception across the animal kingdom. Nature Ecology & Evolution (doi:10.1038/s41559-026-02994-7). Figshare dataset 10.6084/m9.figshare.30556475. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30556475
  10. Healy K, McNally L, Ruxton GD, Cooper N, Jackson AL. 2013. Metabolic rate and body size are linked with perception of temporal information. Animal Behaviour 86:685-696. Table 1. doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.06.018
  11. Inger R, Bennie J, Davies TW, Gaston KJ. 2014. Potential biological and ecological effects of flickering artificial light. PLoS ONE 9(5): e98631. Table 3. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098631
  12. Lafitte A, Sordello R, Legrand M, Nicolas V, Obein G, Reyjol Y. 2022. A flashing light may not be that flashy: A systematic review on critical fusion frequencies. PLoS ONE 17(12): e0279718. S10 File (CFF database). doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279718

Renders use the sample scene at a 60° field of view in daylight. Evidence levels: how the tiers work.