Concavenator’s Collection (new 08/05/2024)

[GojiraGuy1954]

lol that was a very bad pic from me. I hope this is better:

I was referring to the feel of the cover. I have the book myself and the material used for the T. rex scales and tongue are rougher than the rest of the cover. It's nice to the touch

[Concavenator]

@GojiraGuy1954 oh, I hadn't realized that! That's cool, it almost feels like you're actually touching the Tyrannosaurus. 

...



Binomial name: Stegosaurus stenops (Marsh, 1877)
Etymology: "Narrow-faced roof lizard" (Greek)
Classified as: Dinosauria -> Ornithoscelida -> Ornithischia -> Genasauria -> Thyreophora -> Stegosauria -> Stegosauridae -> Stegosaurinae
Period: Late Jurassic (Kimmeridgian - Tithonian)
Fossils found in: Morrison Formation, present day USA (North America)

Company: Safari Ltd.
Line: Wild Safari Prehistoric World
Sculptor: Doug Watson
Based on: NHMUK PV R36730 "Sophie"
Year of release: 2019

Review:

Spoiler

The most famous stegosaurian (Maidment, Brassey & Barrett 2015). It is also one of the most famous species out of the ones that were named during Cope's and Marsh's "Bone Wars" (Brusatte 2019). Despite its iconic appearance, well-preserved Stegosaurus fossils are rare (Maidment, Brassey & Barrett 2015). As a result, the discovery of a nearly complete and well-preserved subadult specimen named NHMUK PV R36730 made a re-examination of the species' anatomy possible (Maidment, Brassey & Barrett 2015).

I love this Stegosaurus, and for a change, it's not green with red plates. A real milestone, isn't it? I really like Doug Watson's thyreophorans, I think they are one of his strengths.

[close]

[Leyster]

Well well, it seems like I have to copyright my thread format  Joking, I myself copied it from @Halichoeres. A small suggestion: never use, if only possible, total lenght to determine scales, 'cause more often than not brands messes up lenghts (tail lenght expecially). Also, determining a dinosaur lenght is not that easy and many don't specifly if they use head to tail lenght, along the curvature or along vertebra centra. Using skull/femur lenght is generally more reliable.

[Concavenator]

L @Leyster you caught me! I'll be honest, I copied both you and @Halichoeres, I just really like your threads and format. I also copied Halichoeres' collecting strategy (1 model / genus), which is very handy when it comes to saving space as well as increasing phylogenetic diversity (even if it's just a little, because my collection's diversity is rather low), except that I'm more strict in the 1 / genus rule because I make no exceptions for it, and then of course, I'm not a taxa completist.

Regarding the scale calculation - thank you for the tips. What I used were the official measurements for the figures, but yikes, that's not the best way... for example, the Eofauna Atlasaurus measured in straight line is 30 cm long, which would result in ~ 1:52 scale, whereas measured in straight line, it's 39 cm long, which would result in 1:40 scale (as advertised).

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

Lovely figures there @Concavenator I'm glad you managed to get hold of those lovely Carnegies too.

[Leyster]

for example, the Eofauna Atlasaurus measured in straight line is 30 cm long, which would result in ~ 1:52 scale, whereas measured in straight line, it's 39 cm long, which would result in 1:40 scale (as advertised).

I think there is something wrong with phrasing here, or you got different lenghts with the same measurement (straight line)? Which would be quite weird

[Concavenator]

@Gothmog the Baryonyx Thank you! Glad I got them while they were available, though there's an exception to this...

L @Leyster oops, it definitely is. I wanted to say that, measured in straight line it is 30 cm long, and along the curves, 39 cm long. So the scale would be different if I used one measurement or the other.

...

Here's a really nice book!





Name: La enciclopedia ilustrada de los dinosaurios y otros animales prehistóricos
Author/s: Dougal Dixon
Publishing house: Ediciones Omega
Year of publication: 2010

Review:

Spoiler

It's from 2010, so it's the oldest prehistoric life book I have. After having it for around 10 years, I can say it hasn't lost it charm. That said, I wouldn't recommend it because of the information regarding the species (as it's fairly outdated in this aspect), though it has an introductory section that's pretty solid, even today. But one of its pros is the great diversity of species that features, as the cover indicates. So you may discover one or a few creatures you didn't know before thanks to this book, and thanks to that, search for updated literature and reconstructions of them if you like afterwards. Another one of its pros clearly is its beautiful paleoart. Some of it is absolutely fabulous even to today's standards.

[close]

[Leyster]

@Concavenator I wouldn't measure it in a straight line: poses and the linke can change too much the results. Along the curvature is more reliable.

Also, may I ask why did you remove the data on animals? They were nice to see.

[Concavenator]

L @Leyster yeah, that's why I got an accurate scale when I measured the Atlasaurus figure along the curves. However, I will no longer include scales as I'm not a scale-oriented collector and there are other threads that include scales, like yours as well as @Halichoeres ' and B @bmathison1972 's ( and also because I'm admittedly very lazy for it...)

Regarding the data, well, I'm still trying to find a format that I really like. I decided to include them again.

[Halichoeres]

Gratifying to know I've inspired you both  Apart from being a paleontology enthusiast, I'm a connoisseur of field guides and I think that influenced how I set up my collection thread.

I have that same book, except in English of course, and with a red border on the cover. It really does have some excellent art, including by the likes of Julius Csotonyi, and it introduced me to a few species I hadn't previously heard of, which I always appreciate. Come to think of it, it also has kind of a field guide format.

The Carnegie Concavenator is a really nice figure. I tend to think it didn't have any quills on its arm, but I could certainly be mistaken. The Favorite version has them!

[Leyster]

The quill thing is complicated. Some paleontologists, including Andrea Cau, proposed the bone was missplaced and they were muscle scars, but Cuesta's thesis (a monumental work) performed a study on muscle insertions and found the knobs do not represent any know muscle. Cuesta's probably the person who know Concavenator better in the world, so I'd agree with her. So it seems some kind of structure was present. If they were quill knobs, anyway, they would've supported HUGE structures, not the few spikes we see in most restorations (non all birds have quill knobs, only the ones with robust wings and Zhenyuanlong, which has big wings, still lacks them).

[ceratopsian]

Always a pleasure to browse this sort of thread. Thanks @Concavenator.

[SidB]

The quill thing is complicated. Some paleontologists, including Andrea Cau, proposed the bone was missplaced and they were muscle scars, but Cuesta's thesis (a monumental work) performed a study on muscle insertions and found the knobs do not represent any know muscle. Cuesta's probably the person who know Concavenator better in the world, so I'd agree with her. So it seems some kind of structure was present. If they were quill knobs, anyway, they would've supported HUGE structures, not the few spikes we see in most restorations (non all birds have quill knobs, only the ones with robust wings and Zhenyuanlong, which has big wings, still lacks them).

If one considers this hypothesis at face value, that would potentially open the door to the creation of a quite unique and spectacular rendition of Concavenator. I'd love to see one with these hypothetical spectacular feathered display structures.

[Concavenator]

Thank you everyone for taking a look 

The Favorite version has them!

That one is also nice, but I think it's hard to find. And as far as I know it's, along with Sean Cooper's, the only depiction of the genus in model form that considers the possibility of some sort of external structure being present.

Always a pleasure to browse this sort of thread. Thanks @Concavenator.

Pleased to hear you like it!

The quill thing is complicated. Some paleontologists, including Andrea Cau, proposed the bone was missplaced and they were muscle scars, but Cuesta's thesis (a monumental work) performed a study on muscle insertions and found the knobs do not represent any know muscle. Cuesta's probably the person who know Concavenator better in the world, so I'd agree with her. So it seems some kind of structure was present. If they were quill knobs, anyway, they would've supported HUGE structures, not the few spikes we see in most restorations (non all birds have quill knobs, only the ones with robust wings and Zhenyuanlong, which has big wings, still lacks them).

If one considers this hypothesis at face value, that would potentially open the door to the creation of a quite unique and spectacular rendition of Concavenator. I'd love to see one with these hypothetical spectacular feathered display structures.

Yep, it's likely most of Concavenator depictions are too conservative (as well as its relatives', by phylogenetic bracketing). For me, the most interesting aspect about Concavenator isn't so much its peculiar neural spine morphology (previous to its discovery, Acrocanthosaurus showed some Carcharodontosauridae could be unusual in this regard), but it's the presence of those quill knobs, which as of now, depending on how they're interpreted, could be relevant for reconstructions of other theropods (maybe even for more dinosaurs, since there is evidence of feathers in ornithischians as well, like Kulindadromeus, maybe feathers were a specific trait of ornithoscelidans?).

Funnily enough, PNSO showed a depiction of Concavenator that's way less conservative than most depictions:

...



Binomial name: Microraptor zhaoianus (Xu et al., 2000)
Etymology: "Zhao's small robber" (Greek and Latin)
Classified as: Dinosauria -> Ornithoscelida -> Theropoda -> Neotheropoda -> Averostra -> Tetanurae -> Coelurosauria -> Tyrannoraptora -> Maniraptoromorpha -> Neocoelurosauria -> Maniraptoriformes -> Maniraptora -> Pennaraptora -> Paraves -> Eumaniraptora -> Deinonychosauria -> Dromaeosauridae -> Microraptorinae
Period: Early Cretaceous (Aptian)
Fossils found in: Jiufotang Formation, present day China (Asia)

Company: Safari Ltd.
Line: Wild Safari Prehistoric World
Sculptor: ? Not Doug Watson
Color scheme inspired by: Microraptor zhaoianus Xu et al. 2000 BMNHC PH881
Year of release: 2017

Review:

Spoiler

Microraptor is a focal point in the study of the origin of birds and the evolution of early avian flight. It is known from many specimens, some of them being exquisitely well-preserved (Xing et al. 2013). Microraptor is believed to have been able of powered flying (Pittman et al. 2022). Melanosome contents suggest it had black, iridescent feathers (Li et al. 2012). Microraptor seems to have been a generalist feeder (Hone et al. 2022).

Replaces the Carnegie version. Not only is it an updated version, but I also felt like I needed to have a figure of a dinosaur species with a known colouration in my collection (and that reflects it), so I'm very happy for having this. Though ideally, this Microraptor would be iridescent, which Safari nailed on their Archaeopteryx. Feathered hand digits would also have been welcome (as well as lips), but props to the sculptor for giving it the alula, usually an overlooked detail.

Doug confirmed he didn't sculpt this one, but I also love the figures this sculptor did. Whoever sculpted it also made (as far as I know) the Anzu and the Malawisaurus, and those are some of my all-time favorite Safari figures. Would love to see more of that person's work.

[close]

[Concavenator]

Binomial name: Anzu wyliei (Lamanna et al., 2014)
Etymology: "Wylie's Anzu" (a feathered demon in Mesopotamian mythology)(Sumerian and Assyrian)
Classified as: Dinosauria -> Ornithoscelida -> Theropoda -> Neotheropoda -> Averostra -> Tetanurae -> Coelurosauria -> Tyrannoraptora -> Maniraptoromorpha -> Neocoelurosauria -> Maniraptoriformes -> Maniraptora -> Pennaraptora -> Oviraptorosauria -> Caenagnathoidea -> Caenagnathidae
Period: Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian)
Fossils found in: Hell Creek Formation, present day USA (North America)

Company: Safari Ltd.
Line: Wild Safari Prehistoric World
Sculptor: ? Not Doug Watson
Color scheme inspired by: Anzu wyliei Lamanna et al., 2014 by Elia Smaniotto
Year of release: 2017

Review:

Spoiler

A large caenagnathid oviraptorosaurian known from three well-preserved partial skeletons. When these remains are taken together, most of its skeleton is known. It is believed Anzu, as well as other caenagnathids, may have been ecological generalists that fed on vegetation, small animals and maybe eggs too (Lamanna et al. 2014).

As with the previous Microraptor, another very nice figure from Safari by that unknown sculptor. This is my 2nd copy of this figure, I bought the 1st as soon as it was released, but unfortunately it broke one of its foot. Last year I bought this copy. This also served me to compare the paint app between a first run and a later run. This one has a darker paint than the previous one, but it still looks good to me.

[close]

[Halichoeres]

Very nice selection of almost-birds! I also wish Vitae were back, I wonder if the recent crackdown on Hong Kong is part of the reason they've been quiet.

PS I haven't forgotten your Atopodentatus question, but I'm not at home to check measurements just now. 

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

What lovely Maniraptorforms you have, I do love accurate Maniraptorforms figures. I'm wondering whether to swap back to the Safari Microraptor myself.
Deinonychus is almost my second favourite dinosaur, I still have one of the Rebor trip to scale with my Sauropelta as well as the magnificent Safari Deinonychus.
I wonder if Safari will do a newer Beipiaosaurus.

[Concavenator]

@Halichoeres when it comes to Vitae, based on what @Flaffy shared, unfortunately, I wouldn't expect them to come back anytime soon...

I've talked to Cheung Chung Tat's friend/partner before, who runs a fossil shop in HK (https://www.facebook.com/fossilshk) and carries Vitae products regularly. He told me that the pandemic has made producing these figures, along with making a profit off their investment significantly more challenging (no surprise there). They did indeed have plans to produce more figures outside of the already known prototypes, a trilobite set, but again the pandemic has halted further progress of that project. Unsure if that was supposed to be in the Vitae line or not as well.

Cheung regularly receives commissions from museums in the mainland and runs a workshop to produce museum quality models, so he's got that going for him. Not to mention his collaboration with Hugo on the DinoHazard line.

Hopefully the situation will improve. And also, thank you very much in advance! 

@Gothmog the Baryonyx which Microraptor do you currently have? For what it's worth, I'd say the Safari Microraptor is the most accurate figure of the genus, aside from the BotM. It lacks the iridescence, but when it comes to the anatomy it's the best one at the moment. I was tempted by the CollectA and PNSO versions, but after thinking about it, I concluded the Safari was the best option. I certainly recommend it!

And I think it's likely Safari will release a new Beipiaosaurus soon, they've been steadily updating the species from the Carnegie Collection over the years.

[Halichoeres]

And I think it's likely Safari will release a new Beipiaosaurus soon, they've been steadily updating the species from the Carnegie Collection over the years.

I agree they will probably release a therizinosaur soon, it's one of the larger gaps in their offerings among dinosaurs sensu stricto. But I think it could just as easily be Falcarius or Alxasaurus or Nothronychus, or maybe even Therizinosaurus itself, although Doug in particular seems to avoid taxa that are as fragmentary as that.

[Concavenator]

Deleted. Wrong post.