CollectA: New for 2023

[Lynx]

Looking at the pictures again, I stand by what I said. They both have stripes on the dorsal part, spots on the sides and grey as the base colour, only differences are the Megalosaurus has a warmer light grey whereas the Ceratosuchops has a cooler, darker grey and the latter only has spots on the neck.

a large amount of spinosaurids are quite similar, so you can say that for a lot of species.

The only spinosaurids we have adequate remains of are Suchomimus and Baryonyx. There's a lot of uncertainty surrounding Spinosaurus itself. And the rest are quite fragmentary. So we can't say they're similar to each other because we don't know.

from the current depictions we have are similar, as I stated several times before, there can quite easily be stuff we don't know that makes it vastly different, but as of RIGHT NOW, that figure is as accurate as you will get, and is based off what we know.

[Concavenator]

@suspsy indeed, I have the Megalosaurus (though if I didn't have it I don't think it would make much of a difference, pretty much all cameras nowadays do their job good enough). I also saw your review and other pics and reviews of it, and they all look quite similar as expected. This is mine:



To me that's more grey than brown. Not all people perceive colours the same way though. Maybe I was exaggerating when I said "copy pasted", but that was my inmediate reaction when I saw the figure. I guess I could have said "heavily inspired" instead of that to sound less triggering I guess? Also, never did I mention the Ceratosuchops paintjob or colour scheme is bad at all (that's subjective anyways, and I personally like the one CollectA chose), that has nothing to do with it being similar to another figure. I don't remember saying: "every single dinosaur figure with stripes and spots is guilty of "copy pasting" " either.

@Lynx if you mean that current depictions of spinosaurids look similar, you're right, they're similar because they're too fragmentary to have their own identity. That's what happens with fragmentary species. Naturally, yes, you could say this figure, as of right now, is "accurate" overall, though there are potentially some issues with it, as @Mattyonyx pointed out:

I understand why some people seem to have concerns about the rostrum on Ceratosuchops: judging by the first images, there's no fish trap, the teeth look too uniform

If they bother you or not that's a different thing.

[suspsy]

No, that is most assuredly a shade of brown on the Megalosaurus, not grey. If it were on a paint sample at Home Depot, it would be displayed with all the other shades of brown. At most, one could perhaps get away with describing it as greyish-brown, but brown nonetheless. Besides, whatever you insist on calling it, it's clearly not the same as the colour used on the Ceratosuchops, so "copy pasted" is indeed an errant choice of words. So is "heavily inspired."

Also, please don't suggest that I am somehow "triggered" simply for pointing out that two toys are not coloured the same.

[Ludodactylus]

They're very nice figures, but none of them are exactly grabbing me by the lapels and shouting "Add me to your cart!"

If Ceratosuchops were more like 15-17cm instead of 24cm, it might be more of a consideration, but as is it's just bigger than I want to be adding to my collection right now. It's an attractive figure (and to my eye, has the most pleasing paint job of the three), but it would need to replace something else in my display right now.

Honestly, of the three, I could see myself buying Hadrosaurus if I was buying something else and just needed to add $6-8 to my cart to qualify for free shipping. I really like the sculpt, but the color scheme reminds me too much of the CollectA Kamuysaurus.

I'm looking forward to seeing what else gets announced, but so far I'm not feeling any urgency to buy.

[profnik]

I saw the new collectA prehistoric world collection is hadrosaurus for 2 days ago.I just remember at the academy of natural sciences in Philadelphia pa of hadrosaurus skeleton. That's I grew up in oreland Pennsylvania right next to Flourtown Chestnut Hill to Philadelphia in PA.



Here the picture of hadrosaurus of skeleton an that why don't hardosaurus skeleton but they organize the exhibit at academy of natural sciences during Covid-19 for 2 years ago I think. but we do have hadrosaurus bone pieces at dinosaurs hall at the academy of natural sciences.




This the picture of hadrosaurus exhibit I remember when I was 13.






An this is the green wall covers thingy right next to the drawing of hadrosaurus skeleton.




Have you ever heard at the Academy of natural sciences in Philadelphia Pennsylvania with the dinosaurs hall is at?

[dinofelid]

Here the picture of hadrosaurus of skeleton an that why don't hardosaurus skeleton but they organize the exhibit at academy of natural sciences during Covid-19 for 2 years ago I think. but we do have hadrosaurus bone pieces at dinosaurs hall at the academy of natural sciences.




This the picture of hadrosaurus exhibit I remember when I was 13.

Just a note on the reconstruction in the second image (which might be the basis for the CollectA version), it seems from the article here that the first image shows all that's actually been found of the skull (some teeth and isolated sections of the dental battery), so the other features of the skull including the crest between the eyes and the nose are speculations based on hadrosaurs that were thought to be closely related like Gryposaurus (which the wiki article notes was speculated in the 70s and 80s to be a possible synonym for Hadrosaurus, but that idea has fallen out of favor).

The wikipedia article on Hadrosaurus notes in the section on classification that its position on the tree has been reevaluated in some recent studies, which consider it to be basal to both the Lambeosaurinae (the group of hadrosaurs known for their head crests) and the Saurolophinae (a group that was mostly crestless but where a number of other genera had a 'Roman nose' style crest like Gryposaurus, such as Maiasaura and Kritosaurus). Some other hadrosaurs that the cladogram shows as basal to both groups and which have preserved skulls, like Tethyshadros, don't have the same Roman nose crest (see the diagram of the skull here)...are there any that do? If not, maybe that means CollectA has based the head shape on outdated ideas about Hadrosaurus' place in the tree, unless anyone knows of other recent studies that still place it within Saurolophinae.

[Sim]

D @dinofelid, CollectA might have based their Hadrosaurus on an outdated idea of its relationships, like I think they did with their Metriacanthosaurus which has the head of Yangchuanosaurus even though analysis show it's more closely related to Sinraptor.  I'm guessing this was because CollectA read that Gregory Paul once considered Yangchuanosaurus a synonym of Metriacanthosaurus.

Regarding the "hump" on CollectA's newer Baryonyx figures, Anthony Beeson explained it's based on a real fossil vertebra found in the Isle of Wight which has been thought to belong to Baryonyx, although it has also been thought to belong to a new genus.  The discovery of Ceratosuchops and Riparovenator has rendered it possible that Baryonyx didn't occur on the Isle of Wight, so the hump on CollectA's Baryonyx could be a bit outdated.  It really depends on whether you think it's possible that vertebra with the tall neural spine belongs to Baryonyx.  Or, it could belong to a close relative of Baryonyx which could be used to infer the possible presence of such a hump in Baryonyx too.  I think in the end it's possible Baryonyx had that hump but there is no way to know if it did right now.

I agree the dentition was certainly executed better and more defined on the Baryonyx. But the promo pics are rather blurry and I can't inspect the premaxilla on the figure in great detail. Will wait for better close-ups before judging.

I feel that the sculptor was trying to replicate this smoothened look in regards to the notch. It's been an increasingly common trend to have soft tissue "cover" most of the notch, so I commend the effort in CollectA's Ceratosuchops. Would've preferred if the soft tissue covered more of the teeth though, and I don't imagine the sloppy bleeding teeth paint doing it any favours.
[...]

[...]

That image shows what I was saying.  If lips cover the hook part of the mouth in Ceratosuchops there would be a gap in the tooth row due to reduced teeth in the hook.  I also really doubt the "fish trap" parts of the jaws were smoothed out by lip as it would interfere with its function.

It's interesting how Suchomimus keeps getting passed up in favour of more fragmentary spinosaurids... "Sinopliosaurus" and now Ceratosuchops.  It looks like David Silva will be making a Suchomimus though, so it's time should be coming.   As for me being interested in a figure of Ceratosuchops, the most distinctive parts of its head are known and that's enough for me to be interested in it.  The rest of its head I think can be safely guessed and I'm fine with a speculative postcrania.  I understand if people feel it's not known from enough to be of interest to them though, it's reasonable.

@Lynx the parts of the tail are from Riparovenator.  Ceratosuchops is only known from fragments of the skull.

[Concavenator]

@Sim good catch, I also remember reading about Anthony Beeson explaining his decision to give the Baryonyx elongated neural spines. That said, I don't think they did belong to Baryonyx after all.



Based on the rigorous skeletal above, it doesn't look like it had a sail comparable to the CollectA versions.

When it comes to the lips obscuring the notch, I agree, it doesn't make much sense. That would kill its function.

And I'm sure a BotM Suchomimus would be outstanding, but I'd prefer if someone else gets to it just in order to save space and quite a bit of $!

[dyno77]

  The Hadrosaur looks ok ,but the other 2 look very generic. Nothing stands out yet,but its early ,and they need to try something different ,maybe compsognathus or gallimimus ,or some non dinosaurs..

[Halichoeres]

I haven't seen this mentioned here yet, but they're also releasing a goblin shark in their sea life line:



The genus Mitsukurina has been around since the Neogene, so they could work with a Livyatan or megalodon display, and they're reasonably similar to Scapanorhynchus sharks that were around as far back as the Cretaceous.

[suspsy]

Considering how many different sharks Safari Ltd. has released over the years, I'm frankly amazed that CollectA beat them to the punch here. That goblin shark is a must-have!

[Flaffy]

Considering how many different sharks Safari Ltd. has released over the years, I'm frankly amazed that CollectA beat them to the punch here. That goblin shark is a must-have!

Same here. Very glad that CollectA's continuing their trend with deep sea fish. Last year's Anglerfish was a gem.

However, I have noted on the STS forum that the tail appears to be too small and short. Hopefully it's just the angle of the promo pic.

[Faelrin]

That goblin shark is wonderful, and I love that they went full in with the weird retractable mouth. I don't usually collect extant animals often, but that one has my interest. Granted most of the extant animals in my collection are either deep sea marine, or things that would fit well alongside your standard Pleistocene megafauna, and got lucky enough to stick around.

[Stuckasaurus (Dino Dad Reviews)]

Considering how many different sharks Safari Ltd. has released over the years, I'm frankly amazed that CollectA beat them to the punch here. That goblin shark is a must-have!

I mean, the Safari Toob Scapanorhynchus is basically a pink Goblin Shark, but point taken.

[ItsTwentyBelow]

The Ceratosuchops and Hadrosaurus both look really good. Naturalistic sculpting and proportions is present on both models. Definitely interested in those two!

[Gwangi]

I'm very excited about the goblin shark as I also collect extant animals with a focus on sharks. CollectA is really stepping up their shark game, their basking shark is one of the best sharks in my collection. I might be in the minority here but I would have preferred seeing the goblin shark without its jaw extended. I know, that's what makes it look cool. When I was a kid I assumed the goblin shark always looked like that, with the extended jaw.

[SenSx]

[
It's interesting how Suchomimus keeps getting passed up in favour of more fragmentary spinosaurids... "Sinopliosaurus" and now Ceratosuchops.  It looks like David Silva will be making a Suchomimus though, so it's time should be coming.   As for me being interested in a figure of Ceratosuchops, the most distinctive parts of its head are known and that's enough for me to be interested in it.  The rest of its head I think can be safely guessed and I'm fine with a speculative postcrania.  I understand if people feel it's not known from enough to be of interest to them though, it's reasonable.

@Lynx the parts of the tail are from Riparovenator.  Ceratosuchops is only known from fragments of the skull.

I desesperately want a 1/35 Suchomimus, and the PNSO failure really disappointed me.

I might have to buy an expansive kit for more rare dinosaurs mass production companies don't want to make as figures
( Suchomimus, Herrerasaurus, Gigantoraptor, to name a few...)

[Bread]

That Goblin Shark is probably going to be my favorite and most desired out of their 2023 lineup. Been looking for a decent size figure for this extant shark.

Although, I do have hope for an Ouranosaurus from CollectA... Now that could be my ultimate 2023 CollectA figure.

[Halichoeres]

I'm very excited about the goblin shark as I also collect extant animals with a focus on sharks. CollectA is really stepping up their shark game, their basking shark is one of the best sharks in my collection. I might be in the minority here but I would have preferred seeing the goblin shark without its jaw extended. I know, that's what makes it look cool. When I was a kid I assumed the goblin shark always looked like that, with the extended jaw.

Just thank goodness they didn't try to articulate it!

[Gwangi]

I'm very excited about the goblin shark as I also collect extant animals with a focus on sharks. CollectA is really stepping up their shark game, their basking shark is one of the best sharks in my collection. I might be in the minority here but I would have preferred seeing the goblin shark without its jaw extended. I know, that's what makes it look cool. When I was a kid I assumed the goblin shark always looked like that, with the extended jaw.

Just thank goodness they didn't try to articulate it!

I don't even know how you would do it, maybe PNSO will figure it out like they did with the Dunkleosteus.