The best figure of every species, according to Halichoeres

[Halichoeres]

Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts, everyone!

"Spinosauridae indet." makes me feel much less on edge and queasy!!

As for PNSO stands - all my PNSO theropods stand well on their own. But I don't take any risks and all always avail themselves of their supports.

Glad I could put you at ease, ha ha. And I agree, I like the peace of mind of a prop for bipeds.

Excellent parade of sculpts, clearly showing the benefits of the latest fabrication technology and research. Your comments on the possible impending replacement of the Battat Cryo with the new Safari reminded me that one of the most interesting aspects of your collecting strategy is its demonstration of this progress, as well as the tension between acceding to this thrust and holding onto the best of the past. Since I tend to collect multiples of far, far fewer taxa, it's a fascinating process that I don't have to necessarily experience. All the better from my perspective, since I'm frequently nostalgia driven and often hold onto figures way beyond their "expiry date". I also appreciate the effort that you continuously make to ascertain the scales of your figures. Most helpful, @Halichoeres.

Glad to be of service! Maybe if I stay in the hobby longer, I'll eventually feel the pull of nostalgia, but so far I haven't. I can appreciate the best of the past as you put it, without feeling the desire to own it (my wallet wishes I could view all figures that way!).

Wonderful additions, Tim! I recently also received the Safari Cryolophosaurus. I love it (but I have nothing to compare/contrast it with lol). I also have the Lingwulong. I decided to stay with my Safari Deinocheirus, however Watson theropods take priority with me, hehe, but I did also just receive the PNSO Therizinosaurus!

The Safari Deinocheirus is really good! Just a bit smaller than my scale preferences. I don't have the Therizinosaurus because I didn't see it at Happy Hen, but next shipment they get I'll definitely go for it.

@5aurophaganax I can see why you'd be irritated. I find the Safari Suchomimus satisfactory, but I don't have any particular attachment to the genus and I'm not an expert on the group so there are probably problems with it that I wouldn't notice.

As for the Gorgosaurus, the BotM one really is excellent. More like Gorgeous-aurus, am I right? But it is very large, rather expensive, and articulated, and Gorgosaurus is a taxon that is pretty likely to get additional figures in the future, so I haven't preordered it. I have something like 8 of the tyrannosauroids on order, that's plenty!

[Loon]

That's a really impressive haul. You've made me seriously reconsider my stance on not buying the "Sinopliosaurus." It's a really lovely sculpt and it's a shame that PNSO didn't just call it Suchomimus, no matter how wrong that might be. It would certainly make it more justifiable to my OCD.

[ceratopsian]

Funny you should say that - I'm in exactly the same position.  I almost ordered it at the weekend and will almost certainly buy it after all.

That's a really impressive haul. You've made me seriously reconsider my stance on not buying the "Sinopliosaurus." It's a really lovely sculpt and it's a shame that PNSO didn't just call it Suchomimus, no matter how wrong that might be. If would certainly make it more justifiable to my OCD.

[Halichoeres]

Well, I guess PNSO should be paying me commissions then! But then again I have bad-mouthed their Sinraptor on several occasions.

A few more Cretaceous saurischians:


Mattel Dryptosaurus
Scale: 1:15 - 1:18
Released: 2023, nominally
Maastrichtian of North America
I stopped by Target last week on my way home from work and was surprised to find a whole mess of 2023 releases in stock. Is it me, or has Mattel improved their distribution? Anyway, I bought the ones for taxa I don't have in any other form, and that includes Dryptosaurus. I'll leave this one in the package for now, with its tail detached, in expectation of reselling it upon release of the Creative Beast version due out next year. This isn't bad as Mattel goes. A funny thing about my particular style of collecting: it's always satisfying to add a good figure, but it's somehow more satisfying if at the same time you're ditching an ugly one.


Mattel Sinotyrannus
Scale: 1:20
Released: 2023, nominally
Aptian of Eurasia
One of the more interesting and elaborate paint jobs on a Mattel figure. I'd expect this animal to have feathers in life but Mattel went for the bald look.


Mattel Eocarcharia
Scale: 1:12?
Released: 2023, nominally
Albian of Africa
I wouldn't expect this animal to have feathers. This figure is chockablock with baffling choices but that's the most obvious. A real stinker. Mattel assigns traits with a reasonably strong phylogenetic signal more or less at random to any old theropod.


The tail looks like it was colored by a toddler with a crayon.


If you didn't know what Mattel had called them, would you be able to identify them? I don't think I would. You get the impression that they're designing some vaguely theropod-shaped toys and then assigning them names pulled out of a hat.


Toy Major Rebbachisaurus
Scale: 1:20 - 1:25
Released: 2010 or thereabouts
Cenomanian of Africa
Toy Major is a Hong Kong-based company that makes or at least exports a variety of ugly dinosaur toys, including some that were exclusive to Toys R Us, at least in the US. They may still be sold at Toys R Us elsewhere, but they're a bit too proletarian for the chain's current status as a Macy's department. That means this isn't available at retail anywhere in the States, so I got it on eBay when I stumbled across one that was cheap enough to justify it.


The maker's mark is on the belly, and a bit hard to make out, but under good light it's pretty clear who's responsible for this toy.


But because of this more visible stamp on the foot, you'll sometimes see this listed as Maidenhead instead of Toy Major, since people (understandably?) mistake it for a company name. This is a UK corporate office address for Toys R Us in Maidenhead, England. While Maidenhead is kind of a weird name for a town, it would be a downright demented name for a [children's] toy company.


The Toy Major version is certainly larger than I prefer, but it might actually be less objectionable than the 2008 CollectA effort, with its braying donkey head and cartoon elephant feet. I don't know, anybody care to weigh in?

[Faelrin]

Regarding those Mattel 2023 theropods, that was exactly the case when they got leaked. Even the last of the bunch I have no ideas on what it could be (the small green one with the funky crest). Most of them are skips for me. The only one I had a suspicion about was the Herrerasaurus, but before it was revealed, I wasn't so sure it was that because they never did such a complete resculpt. At least that one turned out to be true. It's much better then their previous one. Not completely accurate (the usual issues-shrinkwrapping, huge feet, skinny short tail), but still a winner to me. Hoping to pick that, and the Nothosaurus up next month, which hopefully will be stocked in store. I did hear the case with the Nothosaurus did show up in Rite Aid stores so I may need to check there too.

Edit: The Austroraptor was a pretty easy guess too.

[ceratopsian]

You have earned your commission!  My Spinosauridae indet. arrived yesterday - with a few friends from Everything Dinosaur.

I'd never even thought about Maidenhead being an odd name for a town - but then I'm British and so accustomed to it from childhood!  It can be amusing to have an "outsider" point out the oddities of one's home country.

[Fembrogon]

I, too, have been tempted more and more to buy "Spinosauridae indet." with each new photo I see; it's a lovely-looking model overall, and spinosaurids are an inherently cool group of theropods for me. It's just a shame, as others have said, that PNSO didn't apply this care to producing a figure representing a more definite genus like Suchomimus.

[SidB]

I, too, have been tempted more and more to buy "Spinosauridae indet." with each new photo I see; it's a lovely-looking model overall, and spinosaurids are an inherently cool group of theropods for me. It's just a shame, as others have said, that PNSO didn't apply this care to producing a figure representing a more definite genus like Suchomimus.

Doubtlessly it's a strikingly handsome design. Perhaps some day fossil material will become available that is generally congruent with PNSO's construct:

[Halichoeres]

Thanks for stopping by, everyone! I think I've got the reference list on page 1 fully updated.

I'd never even thought about Maidenhead being an odd name for a town - but then I'm British and so accustomed to it from childhood!  It can be amusing to have an "outsider" point out the oddities of one's home country.

Where I grew up there were always people moving in, so we were pretty aware of which names were odd, like the suburban town called Surprise, because, according to lore, the founder 'would be surprised if it ever amounted to much.'

Regarding those Mattel 2023 theropods, that was exactly the case when they got leaked. Even the last of the bunch I have no ideas on what it could be (the small green one with the funky crest). Most of them are skips for me. The only one I had a suspicion about was the Herrerasaurus, but before it was revealed, I wasn't so sure it was that because they never did such a complete resculpt. At least that one turned out to be true. It's much better then their previous one. Not completely accurate (the usual issues-shrinkwrapping, huge feet, skinny short tail), but still a winner to me. Hoping to pick that, and the Nothosaurus up next month, which hopefully will be stocked in store. I did hear the case with the Nothosaurus did show up in Rite Aid stores so I may need to check there too.

Edit: The Austroraptor was a pretty easy guess too.

The Herrerasaurus is definitely an improvement on their previous incarnation. And yeah, the Austroraptor was recognizable. The Elaphrosaurus is really similar to their Coelurus, though, and neither looks like either genus apart from theropod generalities (and to be fair, theropods are mostly quite similar, but not THAT similar). You've probably already seen that JPToys is guessing that the new crested figure is Piatnitzkysaurus. Considering the lack of resemblance between the figure and anything in the phylogenetic vicinity of Piatnitzkysaurus, if JPToys' guess is correct, they and Mattel should both be embarrassed!

Nice photo, S @SidB. I like a well-planted shelf. And yeah, @Fembrogon, it's a little weird to make this fragmentary taxon, all I can figure is maybe it's due to a bit of provincialism on PNSO's part--I don't think China has a good complete spinosaurid, but they do have this tooth. The pliosaur's name has "Sino-" in it, but "Siamosaurus" sure doesn't! But hey, given that PNSO sometimes makes little clusters of related animals, additional spinosaurids could be in the offing.

[dinofelid]

And yeah, @Fembrogon, it's a little weird to make this fragmentary taxon, all I can figure is maybe it's due to a bit of provincialism on PNSO's part--I don't think China has a good complete spinosaurid, but they do have this tooth. The pliosaur's name has "Sino-" in it, but "Siamosaurus" sure doesn't! But hey, given that PNSO sometimes makes little clusters of related animals, additional spinosaurids could be in the offing.

There was some plausible speculation here that PNSO designed the model as a Suchomimus, since its body shape looked pretty much identical to a Suchomimus skeletal in this paper from Fabbri et al. (preprint here, the skeletal is on p. 27), and that they may have felt the need to change its name because they got an early look at this paper from Sereno et al. with a different reconstruction of Suchomimus (which no longer had a dip in the neural spines near the hip, and no longer had such a wide tail), and it could have been too late in the production process to make changes to the model. I'd be interested to know if the difference between the two skeletals is a matter of Sereno at al. having improved data or if it's more a matter of differences in interpretation (both papers are from 2022), if the latter it could be that the PNSO still works fine as a plausible reconstruction of Suchomimus.

[SidB]

And yeah, @Fembrogon, it's a little weird to make this fragmentary taxon, all I can figure is maybe it's due to a bit of provincialism on PNSO's part--I don't think China has a good complete spinosaurid, but they do have this tooth. The pliosaur's name has "Sino-" in it, but "Siamosaurus" sure doesn't! But hey, given that PNSO sometimes makes little clusters of related animals, additional spinosaurids could be in the offing.

There was some plausible speculation here that PNSO designed the model as a Suchomimus, since its body shape looked pretty much identical to a Suchomimus skeletal in this paper from Fabbri et al. (preprint here, the skeletal is on p. 27), and that they may have felt the need to change its name because they got an early look at this paper from Sereno et al. with a different reconstruction of Suchomimus (which no longer had a dip in the neural spines near the hip, and no longer had such a wide tail), and it could have been too late in the production process to make changes to the model. I'd be interested to know if the difference between the two skeletals is a matter of Sereno at al. having improved data or if it's more a matter of differences in interpretation (both papers are from 2022), if the latter it could be that the PNSO still works fine as a plausible reconstruction of Suchomimus.

Yeah, I'd fleeting thoughts along the same lines. At the moment it's speculative, and perhaps will remain that way, but I too would like to know more firmly if Sereno et al. is based on new data or is rather a reinterpretation of existing material.

[Lynx]

is it intended that the entire section of dinosaurs on the first page is gone?

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

Lovely figures on the previous page, not quite so lovely on this page but nice all the same.

[ceratopsian]

......  But hey, given that PNSO sometimes makes little clusters of related animals, additional spinosaurids could be in the offing.

Prophetic words!

[SBell]

I, too, have been tempted more and more to buy "Spinosauridae indet." with each new photo I see; it's a lovely-looking model overall, and spinosaurids are an inherently cool group of theropods for me. It's just a shame, as others have said, that PNSO didn't apply this care to producing a figure representing a more definite genus like Suchomimus.

And they just revealed one! Which is certainly more tempting

[Halichoeres]

And yeah, @Fembrogon, it's a little weird to make this fragmentary taxon, all I can figure is maybe it's due to a bit of provincialism on PNSO's part--I don't think China has a good complete spinosaurid, but they do have this tooth. The pliosaur's name has "Sino-" in it, but "Siamosaurus" sure doesn't! But hey, given that PNSO sometimes makes little clusters of related animals, additional spinosaurids could be in the offing.

There was some plausible speculation here that PNSO designed the model as a Suchomimus, since its body shape looked pretty much identical to a Suchomimus skeletal in this paper from Fabbri et al. (preprint here, the skeletal is on p. 27), and that they may have felt the need to change its name because they got an early look at this paper from Sereno et al. with a different reconstruction of Suchomimus (which no longer had a dip in the neural spines near the hip, and no longer had such a wide tail), and it could have been too late in the production process to make changes to the model. I'd be interested to know if the difference between the two skeletals is a matter of Sereno at al. having improved data or if it's more a matter of differences in interpretation (both papers are from 2022), if the latter it could be that the PNSO still works fine as a plausible reconstruction of Suchomimus.

Yeah, I'd fleeting thoughts along the same lines. At the moment it's speculative, and perhaps will remain that way, but I too would like to know more firmly if Sereno et al. is based on new data or is rather a reinterpretation of existing material.

Well I guess at least one aspect is settled now! It doesn't seem like the so-called Sinopliosaurus was intended as a Suchomimus. Good news for Suchomimus fans.

is it intended that the entire section of dinosaurs on the first page is gone?

Whoops, nope. Ever since the forum post character limit changed, I keep a plain-text backup of the reference list in three files, and I just copy-pasted the wrong one. Should be fixed now, thanks for calling my attention to it!

Lovely figures on the previous page, not quite so lovely on this page but nice all the same.

Don't worry, the next update will have some real beauties...

......  But hey, given that PNSO sometimes makes little clusters of related animals, additional spinosaurids could be in the offing.

Prophetic words!

Well, as long as I'm clairvoyant, I foretell a cluster of Paleozoic synapsids, a cluster of Mesozoic turtles, a cluster of basal sauropterygians, and a cluster of placoderms. Aaaany minute now.

I, too, have been tempted more and more to buy "Spinosauridae indet." with each new photo I see; it's a lovely-looking model overall, and spinosaurids are an inherently cool group of theropods for me. It's just a shame, as others have said, that PNSO didn't apply this care to producing a figure representing a more definite genus like Suchomimus.

And they just revealed one! Which is certainly more tempting

I'd find them both more tempting if they came with a fish, of course.

[Faelrin]

It's really too bad no one has done a proper Onchopristis that either isn't an accessory, or 3D printed only. It boggles my mind one would do the research for a dinosaur, but not put in the same effort for its contemporaries, accessory or not. Also rather unfortunate too. Other fish would be welcome too, but still.

Like I just saw your response on the Star Ace Spinosaurus, and man does it bum me out again.

[Concavenator]

Yeah, excellent timing there!  @Halichoeres

@5aurophaganax I can see why you'd be irritated. I find the Safari Suchomimus satisfactory, but I don't have any particular attachment to the genus and I'm not an expert on the group so there are probably problems with it that I wouldn't notice.

As for the Gorgosaurus, the BotM one really is excellent. More like Gorgeous-aurus, am I right? But it is very large, rather expensive, and articulated, and Gorgosaurus is a taxon that is pretty likely to get additional figures in the future, so I haven't preordered it. I have something like 8 of the tyrannosauroids on order, that's plenty!

The Safari Suchomimus is okay, but there are some problems with it:

Spoiler

The scales are oversized and are arranged probably too regularly to be realistic. Plus it has some crocodilian-like integument (especially along the dorsal part) which is typical of older reconstructions of spinosaurids that take the crocodile analogy too far, there's no real reason supporting a similar integument for spinosaurids. On another hand, comparing the snout to basically every skeletal you can find (Sereno et al. 2022, Auditore 2022, Franoys 2019, Hartman 2011...) it appears to be too wide and proportionally not long enough, Suchomimus is famous for its very long and slender snout. Citing its description paper:

The remains, which represent a new genus and species, reveal the extreme elongation and transverse compression of the spinosaurid snout.

On another note, the subnarial gap should be more pronounced (based on the pics I've seen) and the difference in size in the hands' digits isn't portrayed well, the first digit should be the shortest with the biggest claw, on the Safari figure all the hand digits are the same or almost the same length, and the thumb claw should be proportionally longer (all these observations are made looking at online pics/reviews as I don't have that figure, maybe I'm wrong in one or several aspects). These might or might not be trivial aspects, but the new PNSO gets these details right.

[close]

That said, I could have easily gotten the Safari figure, but I decided to wait and see if a better version appeared. Luckily, it worked out (and I imagine the reason why is because it's a very large, carnivorous theropod, even if the ecology of spinosaurids differs from the average predatory theropods, if we were talking about one of those groups you mentioned you would as well be waiting forever).

As for Gorgosaurus, I too think we will be getting a good, smaller figure at some point.

Also, won't you be keeping the Star Ace Spino? FWIW it's more up to date than the PNSO 2019 due to it showing the new tail morphology.

[Halichoeres]

It's really too bad no one has done a proper Onchopristis that either isn't an accessory, or 3D printed only. It boggles my mind one would do the research for a dinosaur, but not put in the same effort for its contemporaries, accessory or not. Also rather unfortunate too. Other fish would be welcome too, but still.

Like I just saw your response on the Star Ace Spinosaurus, and man does it bum me out again.

Yeah, that one was a letdown specifically because Cooper usually does really good work. The Wonders of the Wild Elasmotherium and Dunkleosteus are certainly outdated, but the sculpts are old, so that's understandable. That argument doesn't really work for the brand-new Onchopristis. I've only seen video reviews that similarly treated the fish as an afterthought, so it's possible some of my initial impressions are wrong. Maybe that's another one that would be worth reviewing for the blog once I have it in hand.

@5aurophaganax thanks for the breakdown on Suchomimus. I agree the PNSO one is definitely more current, and as a more premium product it certainly has nicer paint and so forth. So I'll probably get it it in time, even though I usually prefer Safari's theropods to PNSO's for the same taxa. (I guess PNSO's lipless style works better on spinosaurids, so there's that.)

As for the Star Ace Spino, I do have it on preorder, so I've already paid for it. Considering the PNSO Spino's prey was also worse than the Star Ace Spino's prey, maybe I'll keep the latter for a while. But truthfully I've gotten to the point with Spinosaurus that I don't even like looking at the taxon anymore! There was some discussion of this in another thread, but we don't even know that the neotype should be considered Spinosaurus at all (I personally find the case weak, partly based on comments from a UChicago paleontologist I talked to about it several years ago). I embrace figures of fragmentary or problematic taxa more than most, but the combination of uncertainty and overexposure that characterizes Spinosaurus kind of makes me want to avoid it. HOWEVER, since it's the species most often sold with a fish, I keep buying it...and boxing the dinosaur itself away, or in the case of the awful DamToys version, selling it. I think the last time I bought a Spinosaurus that didn't have a fish was CollectA's 2016 version.

Anyway. The relative shortage of good fish has prompted me to take it on myself to commission some. That's in the next update.

[Dusty Wren]

Anyway. The relative shortage of good fish has prompted me to take it on myself to commission some. That's in the next update.

Oh, I'm excited for this. Really curious about the process; did you have to find an artist who specializes in fish to get the details right?