Studying the paleoecology of the extinct chambered cephalopods is somewhat analogous to studying a distant landscape through the wrong end of a powerful telescope: we can see very small views of what must have been great panoramic vistas. Two factors have lead to this situation. First, the extant cephalopods still utilizing the phragmocone system of density reduction are at very low standing diversity, while most of the more interesting taxa, such as ammonites and belemnites, are completely extinct. Our functional interpretations of various shell morphologies thus depend heavily on generalizations based on a small number of sometimes distantly related taxa, such as Nautilus and Sepia. Secondly, studies of fossil associations and their relationships to various facies are clouded by the possibility of extensive post-mortal drift of the cephalopod shells. Because of this, we cannot ever be sure that we are studying cephalopod biocoenoses. In spite of these constraints, however, the past two decades have witnessed a great research effort into the study of cephalopod paleoecology. Debate over various issues has been sometimes clamorous, a sign of a healthy and vigorous utilization of the scientific method by many interested students of the fossil record.