Tapejaroidea, a clade of pterosaurs that might also be called Lophocratia, depending on whom you ask, represent a diverse clade of mostly toothless pterosaurs. They represent mostly one half of the Pterodactyloidea, the other being Ornithocheiroidea (or Euornithocheira). [It’s something of a boondoggle, the taxonomy of Pterosauria, due to the fact that two different and competing sets of names are used by mutually exclusive groups of pterosaur systematists; you’d think someone should just come in and settle the bloody thing once and for all.]
Shown from left to right are a “germanodactylid” (or basal dsungaripteroid, though considered in some analyses to be closer to ctenochasmatoids), a thalassodromid/tapejarid, an azhdarchid, a chaoyangopterid, and a more sensible dsungaripterid (or, one peering around the corner of the page). All animals are depicted in the quadupedal stance of general terrestrial locomotion, dispensing with the idea that they were bipedal in any fashion, while also covered head-to-toe and wintip-to-wingtip in “pterofuzz” (pycnofibres). Wings are tucked in “terrestrial” mode, and this can do funny things to the shape and relationship of the wing membrane (cheiropatagium, broadly).
The style here is pretty useful for characterizing a simple drawing showing proportions, stance, and attitude. I characterize the species merely walking, mostly largely doing the same thing, which helps the viewer to compare them easily side by side, get a sense of proportion or scale. In these, though, scale is less important than shape differences in body outline, something much more difficult to do with varying perspectives or even “in flight” depictions. Indeed, pterosaurs are so often shown flying, taking off in various ways, or landing that there is an essential dearth in “grounded” views, walking, or idling. I’ve shown pterosaurs before in “non-standard” perspectives, but that was only preparatory. There is a high degree of utility in “side-view” depictions, as it is otherwise impossible to describe scale when trying to be “realistic” in scaling and perspective but also show comparison between two animals. Artistically, one can show this by coloring, but that doesn’t tell you much about physical details, and indeed can obscure actual details; the artist is spending more time showing colors than showing shapes that actually distinguish the two. Of course, in some animals, the “standard” differs, so that in ceratopsians, the best way to show off the head is in fact a dorsal view of the head/skull, rather than a side view, due to the shape of the frill, horns, spikes, etc. [though I’ve differed occasionally, as in this piece, which also just so happens to show nonmuscular “cheeks”.] But that doesn’t really work on crest pterosaurs, as the crests are often very, very thin and form large semi-circular/ovate “plates” standing on-end.