PNSO: New for 2022

[Faelrin]

I agree with both @Sim and @stargatedalek that it is really heavily focused on the groups mentioned, and while I am fond of those groups (especially glad for the hadrosaurids which have been lacking in representation for years aside from Parasaurolophus), I am quite surprised they haven't attempted a spinosaurid other then Spinosaurus, a single dromaeosaurid (Zhenyuanlong is practically begging to be made by them), and many others like pterosaurs or sauropods. At least they did some marine reptiles, fish, and long desired Livyatan last year though. But as far as dinosaurs go yeah there could be more done.

I honestly wish they would do some new minis. I loved many of the ones they got, especially when we got things like Anchiornis, Sinosauropteryx, Tianyulong, and the reptiles, etc. I think the minis work best for smaller animals like those so if they were to do things like Zhenyuanlong, Velociraptor, Caihong, Kulindadromeus, Dryosaurus, etc I'd prefer if they were those figures.

[GojiraGuy1954]

I know it's a bipedal theropod, but I'd love a Dilophosaurus to come out from any major company.  I think the last major Dilo release that I know of was the Papo and, while not a bad looking figure in many respects(I love the colors in particular), the pose that they stuck it in is beyond terrible.

EDIT: Also, would love to have a Utahraptor that actually looks good so I can box up and hide the REBOR Wind Hunter...out of all the REBOR figures I have, it's probably the ugliest.

Safari & CollectA

[Lynx]

Putting this out here since the Alberto from Safari is being brought up a ton:

After seeing both promo images and in-hand images, I can say the colors look amazing. Just because something is vibrant doesn't mean it's childish or unrealistic. Lots of birds and reptiles have it. Normalize vibrant color schemes.

Edit: In extremely harsh lighting, the colors (mainly on the head) look a bit sloppy. But in casual daylight, from what I have seen, it looks perfectly fine.

[Concavenator]

I apologize for cherry picking @Concavenator.

Don't worry, @Shadowknight1 . I admit the word "mess" was also unfortunate and rude from my part, I apologize. I'll be more careful about how I express myself.

@Sim

1. The PNSO Acrocanthosaurus might still have the first finger claw as the largest on each hand, the angle might be decieving.

Based on what we have seen so far, no, it doesn't have the enlarged claw. The claws are fairly long, but they appear to be the same length. Maybe it's another case in which some copies have the enlarged claw and others don't, like the Allosaurus, but based on what has been shown so far, that statement can't be confirmed. Of course, we haven't seen in hand pics, I imagine that will answer all of our questions and maybe prove us wrong, but we should be objective with what has been shown so far.

2. The Eofauna Giganotosaurus is not great when it comes to accuracy.  I'm tired of saying why, long story short the head is messed up.

That and the lack of the enlarged claw are its only inaccuracies. The PNSO Carcharodontosaurus also has the wrong skull and lacks the enlarged claw (same problems) yet you don't mention those. This PNSO Acrocanthosaurus'  head (again, based on what's been shown so far) is also messed up. Actually, even more, because not only the head appears to be too elongated (wrong shape), it's also too big (plus the tail may be too short).

But the Eofauna Giganotosaurus is inferior to many PNSO figures in terms of detail (why does it have lines over the antorbital fenestra?), colouration and accuracy.

Saying it's inferior in colouration is purely subjective. I have the Eofauna Giganotosaurus and I can see why it's said its paint app is on the weaker side, but I still consider it superior in this aspect to my PNSO Borealopelta, the PNSO Lambeosaurus and of course is far better than this PNSO Spinosaurus:



When it comes to detail, I imagine you're comparing the Eofauna Giganotosaurus to the PNSO figures post-scale size fix, because if you're comparing it to the PNSO 2020 figures, the Giganotosaurus is better detailed simply due to the fact that those PNSO figures, while impressively sculpted, have the wrong type of detail. I sound like a broken record when I say this. As you may know, the scales on those figures are oversized, which is basically the same problem with Papo's figures. I owned Papo figures in the past too and I perfectly know what you mean with PNSO figures being more impressive. I wasn't super impressed with the Papo figures I had. But being impressively sculpted and being scientifically accurate aren't necessarily the same thing. If you're comparing the Eofauna Giganotosaurus' detail to figures like the PNSO Carcharodontosaurus or Allosaurus, I can see why you say the detail is better in those PNSO, but as long as the detailing doesn't interfere in accuracy, I don't see why one has to be directly superior to another. I hate doing comparisons like these, because I really like both companies and appreciate them for different aspects, but I'm only doing it because you (among other people) brought that up and wanted to express my thoughts as well. I like PNSO's style, and Eofauna's, and Safari's, and Carnegie's, and CollectA's, and Battat's, and Dino Hazard's, and Mesozoic Life's, and Wild Past's, and Vitae's. I wouldn't say any one of them are superior to the other, because the different sculptors have different styles, and in those cases (excluding some cases in which Safari or CollectA figures have oversized scales) those styles are perfectly fine by themselves because they are not interfering with the figures' accuracy. When it comes to accuracy, the Eofauna Giganotosaurus is definitely more accurate than many PNSO figures. If you say the Eofauna Giganotosaurus is inferior in accuracy to many PNSO figures, you should be able to back that statement up. What about these?

1. The PNSO Microraptor having a feather crest, when we know it didn't have one.

2. The PNSO Carcharodontosaurus having an outdated skull and lacking the enlarged claw.

3. The PNSO Acrocanthosaurus (as of now) having wrong proportions, lacking the enlarged claw and having a too elongated skull.

4. Literally all their theropods (except for the Microraptor and baby Tyrannosaurus) and ornithischians (except the baby Sinoceratops) released in 2020 (12 figures) as well as the first 2 releases of 2021 (Carnotaurus and Pinacosaurus) having oversized scales, and therefore, inaccurate skin texture.

5. All their hadrosaurids prior to the new Tsintaosaurus lacking the thicker neck reconstruction proposed by Filippo Bertozzo, as well as having too spindly forelimbs.

6. These proportion issues mentioned by @Halichoeres , plus also the Yutyrannus, in this case the head being too small.

But they do often have parts that are outsized, like the too-small Tsintaosaurus head, the too-long Eurhinosaurus tail, and the overhyped but, yes, mildly oversized Corythosaurus head.

7. The Tylosaurus lacking the toothless prow on its rostrum, when it's one of, if not the most defining feature of this particular mosasaurid.

8. The Ankylosaurus having an arched tail when it should be stiff. The Ankylosaurus name means "stiff lizard".

9. For learning about the PNSO Helicorpion inaccuracies, read @Halichoeres ' fantastic review of it. He's infinitely more versed on fish than I am.

10. The Carnotaurus having possibly outdated proportions, legs too long (plus the already mentioned scale size issue).

11. The Pachycephalosaurus should have a bulkier tail and wider hips (watch DinosDragons' review, minute 8:55 and forward).

12. The Kronosaurus having a wrong tail design.

13. The Torvosaurus having head crests.

14. The Tuojiangosaurus having outdated proportions.

15. The Spinosaurus being quadrupedal, when it most likely wasn't.

And I'm not even including older PNSO figures, but also worth mentioning are the Amargasaurus missing the single first neck spine, and the Spinosaurus having a misplaced thumb finger.

I know I probably come off as an obnoxious pedant for pointing these out, but they're there. Some of these are minor and wouldn't be deal breakers to me, but I still pointed them out to proof that this statement

But the Eofauna Giganotosaurus is inferior to many PNSO figures in [...]  accuracy.

is false.

In regards to groups I would like to see represented from them, definitely more small and/ or feathered dinosaurs. I would love some dromaeosaurids (they're my favorite family of dinosaurs), like Halszkaraptor, Zhenyuanlong or Buitreraptor. But PNSO isn't the only company that focuses on the same groups as ever. For instance, CollectA haven't released another dromaeosaurid aside from the Microraptor in recent years, and apparently they only released that one because it was a comission from a museum, which means they wouldn't have otherwise made it.

[Shadowknight1]

I know it's a bipedal theropod, but I'd love a Dilophosaurus to come out from any major company.  I think the last major Dilo release that I know of was the Papo and, while not a bad looking figure in many respects(I love the colors in particular), the pose that they stuck it in is beyond terrible.

EDIT: Also, would love to have a Utahraptor that actually looks good so I can box up and hide the REBOR Wind Hunter...out of all the REBOR figures I have, it's probably the ugliest.

Safari & CollectA

I'm assuming that you're referring to Dilophosaurus.  I looked at both of those companies most recet versions and, sorry to say wasn't exactly blown away by either?  Though I will say that at least they didn't have their figures awkwardly resting on a hand to maintain balance like the Papo one.

[RobinGoodfellow]

After seeing both promo images and in-hand images, I can say the colors look amazing. Just because something is vibrant doesn't mean it's childish or unrealistic. Lots of birds and reptiles have it. Normalize vibrant color schemes.

..sorry but are you saying that it's plausible for a very giant predator to have flamboyant random colors easily to be seen by everyone (= prey) before an ambush , even on a long distance.. ?

[Stegotyranno420]

@RobinGoodfellow while he was talking about Albertosaurus, he did not specifically said large predators. His point was vibrant color doesnt not mean unrealistic or childish,  and should be portrayed in media more.
Even if he was specific about large theropods, I mean
A) you can be bold-flashy and still camouflage, theres many animals that do that, such as tigers, though the patterns will be different for dinosaurs as grass was more rare in those times.
B) some theropods are so large and might had lived in open  environments with little cover,  and their prey was not blind. So it will be very hard or even pointless to camouflage.

I would love a dilophosaurus,  but I hope they model it after the newer, larger reconstructions than the more gracile, smaller ones. I know its unlikely for them to mess up, but I have some wierd feeling something like that will happen.

In general,  I'd like pnso to make sauropodmorphs, and paleozoic creatures. Imagine a prionosuchus or rhizodus from them

[John]

All of the complaints about the new Acrocanthosaurus are overblown at best.It is a fine model,as is the Eofauna Giganotosaurus and all of the Safari Ltd models getting trashed,not to mention the older PNSO models getting nitpicked to death.

[stargatedalek]

After seeing both promo images and in-hand images, I can say the colors look amazing. Just because something is vibrant doesn't mean it's childish or unrealistic. Lots of birds and reptiles have it. Normalize vibrant color schemes.

..sorry but are you saying that it's plausible for a very giant predator to have flamboyant random colors easily to be seen by everyone (= prey) before an ambush , even on a long distance.. ?

Yes, for a number of reasons.

Dinosaurs had much better vision than mammals, over a certain size you weren't going to be hiding unless you were actively camouflaged (ala wobbegong sharks or many insects). And large animals don't do that as it means they are restricted to hunting in very specific conditions, the largest are the aforementioned sharks.

Ambush hunting is only efficient for animals that can expend small amounts of energy. Lions and tigers are already pushing the size limits of ambush hunting, as they often live on relatively slim margins for food. Yes prey animals were a bit larger proportionally, but most large theropods were lacking adaptations for targeting prey larger than themselves.

Tyrannosaurus was the only serious exception to this and was relatively specialized for hunting adult Triceratops, with adaptations specific to running them down over a long period, hunting and tracking even by night, and snapping the neck by grabbing the frill. And even Tyrannosaurus was in no position to so much as sneeze at a full sized Edmontosaurus let alone if it ever encountered Alamosaurus.

Most of the largest herbivores were essentially invulnerable, and most of the mid sized ones were slow. Nothing was hunting adult sauropods, and most hadrosaurs were much larger than the predators they lived alongside. Due to their massive clutches however, ecosystems would have been flooded with baby dinosaurs, sauropods in particular. This is why we see evidence for what seem to be sauropod hunting features in theropods a 30th the size of the sauropods they coexisted with, there were enough young, slow, sauropods for them to eat. Add to this thyreophorans which had most of the mid sized herbivore niches locked tight, and there really wasn't that much in terms of prey that was actually all that fast.

We don't see cases of any large theropods built for quick bursts of speed, instead we see brawlers and an awful lot of pursuit predators, far more than we see in modern ecosystems.

[GojiraGuy1954]

@RobinGoodfellow while he was talking about Albertosaurus, he did not specifically said large predators. His point was vibrant color doesnt not mean unrealistic or childish,  and should be portrayed in media more.
Even if he was specific about large theropods, I mean
A) you can be bold-flashy and still camouflage, theres many animals that do that, such as tigers, though the patterns will be different for dinosaurs as grass was more rare in those times.
B) some theropods are so large and might had lived in open  environments with little cover,  and their prey was not blind. So it will be very hard or even pointless to camouflage.

I would love a dilophosaurus,  but I hope they model it after the newer, larger reconstructions than the more gracile, smaller ones. I know its unlikely for them to mess up, but I have some wierd feeling something like that will happen.

In general,  I'd like pnso to make sauropodmorphs, and paleozoic creatures. Imagine a prionosuchus or rhizodus from them

Tiger camouflage works because their prey can't see orange. They see it as Green instead. Birds see many more colours than mammals, even humans, so camouflage like that would simply not work.

[Skorpio V.]

Looks like I missed... a lot.

Personally, I see and agree with both sides of the main argument here. PNSO does get incessant nitpicks but at the excess $15-20 margin they have over smaller brands' prices, it's warranted. I do think that this Acro is... off, however, I experienced the same thoughts over their Torosaurus and their Allosaurus. Once people got it in-hand, it was clear the issues presented with the promo images had vanished. @RobinGoodfellow's experienced take with camera knowledge further proves it and I'm almost sure that most of the proportioning issues will be resolved. Either way, I still wouldn't yet go as far as to say we have a definitive Acrocanthosaurus with this out.

Then I also agree with Safari sculpts being "over-glorified", and I think this minor bias is likely the cause of not only the cheaper prices for those in America, but probably (and I hate to admit it) the personal connection we forum members have with some of their advocates here. That Nanotyrannus figure looks like a textbook Schleich figure to be berated by this forum, but it got more criticism in its name than its sculpt.

The behaviour of those taking sides so one-sidedly and obnoxiously isn't right, because it should be common sense that it's necessary to have a filter especially when it comes to the point where people are taking it personally.

Back to the Acro, could we get a "more reasonable" skull source in terms of length? I still think people overrate PNSO's Carcharodontosaurus without knowledge that its skull should be more akin to GR Toys', but this Acrocanthosaurus is a lot more justifiable with the amount of sources it has on its skull length, which I've always seen as among the longest in Carcharodontosauridae. In my opinion; Battat's, CollectA's, and Papo's might be a smidge long but nothing out of the realm of realism as opposed to Safari's, Rebor's, and Creative Beast's which seem too blunt and squat. This one, I feel, has the closest to the rather universal length of the known specimens or at least the vast majority of images that pop up, if a little on the longer side.

[Renecito]

Then I also agree with Safari sculpts being "over-glorified", and I think this minor bias is likely the cause of not only the cheaper prices for those in America, but probably (and I hate to admit it) the personal connection we forum members have with some of their advocates here.

I fully agree with that.

[CARN0TAURUS]

My dream Acrocanthosaurus based on PNSO version, unfortunately stays in a dream.

OMG, I posted this repaint 2-3 months ago and now PNSO releases a copy of my work?!


I'm kidding, just kidding...

IDK guys, I like this new figure.  I got a weird vibe when I first saw it too.  That feeling reminded much the same like the way I felt about chunkysaurus when he came out and then later on I fell in love with chunky, now chunky is one of my favorites, LOL! 

To each their own, I'm pleasantly surprised about the lower price, I love the color and camo scheme, this one will definitely be coming home as soon as it's available on prime!

[Shadowknight1]

I think my favorite thing about this Acro is that it looks well fed and beefy when compared to almost every other Acro that I own.  Especially the spine.  A definite improvement over the "sail" of the Papo version.

[Stegotyranno420]

@CARN0TAURUS
This happened to me aswell with the Olorotitan haha.

[SidB]

All of the complaints about the new Acrocanthosaurus are overblown at best.It is a fine model,as is the Eofauna Giganotosaurus and all of the Safari Ltd models getting trashed,not to mention the older PNSO models getting nitpicked to death.

While it must be acknowledged that the criticisms usually are the result of some sound observations and also a desire to strive for the elusive "perfection", which are commendable qualities, sometimes the shadow of something else peaks through the back and forth of online discussions such as this thread. Unfair criticisms, such as deriding an otherwise excellent product such as the Eofauna Giganotosaurus that you mentioned frequently surface. It is now often dismissed because of it's adoption of older, original notion of a longer skull, yet at the time of it's release by Eofauna, that was state-of -the-art, so in context any criticism must be tempered by this knowledge. Also, its lesser scalation detailing comes under criticism over against the PNSO therapods, yet that too is off the mark, since at this scale the scalation would be difficult to discern. Yet the PNSO's often are critiqued for overemphasizing the scalation, even though the sculptors are trying to find a balance between aesthetics and accuracy. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.

These principles and their out workings have been discussed ad nauseum on the forum, of course - I'm not saying anything new or insightful. Rather it's the spirit of unfairness or seemingly WILLFUL ignorance for the sake of making one's opinion count that disturbs me when it sometimes emerges during the discussions. We do know better or at least should, given the sheer weight of educational content and informative discourse is the legacy of the forum.

What is noticeable over time (I've been active on the forum since 2016), is: 1) the long term durability and persistence through the years  of those members who maintain an openness and respect for the creators, fabricators and balanced judgements of others; 2) the sad disillusionment of those who take imperfections, however minute, to heart and lose interest in once classic figures, in dazzling new releases that quickly lose their charm because they are criticized (whether fairly or not). Two consequences - a) interest fades and the sometimes justified complaint of toxicity takes over; b) chronic criticizers reduce themselves to the hyper fastidious, seemingly liking very, very little, becoming virtually impossible to please.

Be aware of these corrosive tendencies and refuse to participate in their degradation of your love for the hobby. Stay around for the long haul, if possible,  and enjoy and delight in it's traditions and novelties. This forum is NOT a toxic environment and is a wonderful resource and pastime in itself. But all good things have their shadow side, and constructive criticism is never a negative thing if counterbalanced with an awareness of the big picture as much as possible. I really appreciate, especially, the ongoing efforts of the fine people here who routinely make the requisite effort to maintain balance and goodwill, in as far as that is possible.

[Over9K]

So Dan's has a page up for Acro pre-orders, with a "placeholder" price of $59.99... I think I'll wait until the actual price is revealed.

[GiganotosaurusFan]

There seems to be some slight deformation between two pictures of the same model, for some reason... go on Instagram and you will see.

[Shadowknight1]

There seems to be some slight deformation between two pictures of the same model, for some reason... go on Instagram and you will see.

I mean, #1) Instagram is pretty big, so telling us to go to Instagram isn't helpful.  And #2) not everyone has Instagram.

[Faelrin]

@GiganotosaurusFan Care to share a link? I use instagram frequently.