Controversial opinions on dinosaur toys

[Mattyonyx]

I noticed you didn't touch two points I made in my post.  Ostrich legs are constructed completely different than T-rex legs, the bones are not in proportion to each other in the least.  One animal is made for running very fast and the other had to bear the weight of a full grown elephant on two legs.  A lighter animal is going to be able to bend and move in ways an elephant can't.  It's just physics and gravity.  I'm no expert, I've been pretty outspoken about that here and I defer to folks such as yourself that you know more about this than I ever will, but I also believe there is a way to get your point across without the condescending behavior. 

Even the worlds foremost dinosaur expert could use a full dose of humility in this respect.  Because even that person, as much as they may know about these animals and that person will know a lot more than most people on earth but in the grand scheme of things even that person is still going to know very little about the actual dinosaurs.  If the sum total of what we know about these animals fills a cup, what we don't know would fill several grand canyons combined.  I think it's comical that even these so called experts are constantly arguing and discrediting each other.  You know more than I but truth is neither one of us knows how a T-rex lay down or sat down or whatever.  We have general ideas and theories BUT, big but, nobody knows for sure.

I noticed you and L @Leyster are having a debate about what a paleoartist (and Lanzendorf award winner, by the way) said about Wilson in my interview on Paleo-Nerd.

First, When did "that person" lack in humility, exactly? Because I don't think you know him as much as I do... Also, are you really referring to paleontologists and paleoartists as "so-called experts"?

Second, You just wrote that "neither one of us knows how a T-rex lay down or sat down or whatever", and yet you keep telling us that Andrea's leg is wrong. Let me say it does not seem so coherent...

[Leyster]

What @Mattyonyx said. You pretend to know the only way a Tyrannosaurus should sit (after being wrong about how it walks, no less), and the you say "experts are not always right"? Please. Also, it's true that this is a thread about opinione, but an opinioni is "I don't like Wilson", if you say that Wilson's wrong for X and Y prepare yourself to be corrected. If you think you know Tyrannosaurus better than a renowed artist, which published papers too I should add, suit yourself, but there is only one here which needs humilty, and that's you.

[stargatedalek]

What @Mattyonyx said. You pretend to know the only way a Tyrannosaurus should sit (after being wrong about how it walks, no less), and the you say "experts are not always right"? Please. Also, it's true that this is a thread about opinione, but an opinioni is "I don't like Wilson", if you say that Wilson's wrong for X and Y prepare yourself to be corrected. If you think you know Tyrannosaurus better than a renowed artist, which published papers too I should add, suit yourself, but there is only one here which needs humilty, and that's you.

Plenty of "renowned" paleoartists and degree holding paleontologists have depicted Tyrannosaurus with oversized teeth, giant dinner plate scales, and impossible poses. Sometimes hobbyists are in a position to be less bogged down by tradition and more open to new ideas. IE; the exhaustive list of professionals who for almost two decades vehemently refused to even entertain the concept of flying Microraptor, despite data often in their own papers clearly indicating such.

Just because someone speaks from a position of authority, does not inherently make that statement correct. And I for one am decidedly not convinced by many aspects of both PNSO Tyrannosaurus, including the pose of the sitting one, the upper foot looks bowed in every image I see of it.

[SRF]

It seems that PNSO has to make a new Wilson just to keep up with the competition alone. That new render of Eofauna's Sue Tyrannosaurus is looking really, really good. I like the pose of it as well.

[Paleo Flo]

It seems that PNSO has to make a new Wilson just to keep up with the competition alone. That new render of Eofauna's Sue Tyrannosaurus is looking really, really good. I like the pose of it as well.

The continuing battle of the Rexes 

[SidB]

It seems that PNSO has to make a new Wilson just to keep up with the competition alone. That new render of Eofauna's Sue Tyrannosaurus is looking really, really good. I like the pose of it as well.

The continuing battle of the Rexes 

There's a big winner in this, and that is US!!!

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

It seems that PNSO has to make a new Wilson just to keep up with the competition alone. That new render of Eofauna's Sue Tyrannosaurus is looking really, really good. I like the pose of it as well.

The continuing battle of the Rexes 

There's a big winner in this, and that is US!!!

Just not our wallets or shelves eh? lol

[CARN0TAURUS]

I don't doubt she's strange, but, for me, thus why this is an OPINIONS thread, I was really looking to get the figure, but was severely put off after what people said. The same goes for many other figures, like the Schleich Gallimimus and the Papo Concavenator I really loved when they were revealed, but thanks to overwhelming negativity, was put off.

I find this type of post divisive and I fail to see how this sort of talk benefits this community.

This is the reason why, once again, I am talking about this in THIS THREAD and not some other one that is supposed to be beneficial. I don't see how this is hostile at all, just saying there's a good chance the general negativity may have put others off from buying the figure.

I do admit the post seems a bit accusing, however, things did go a little overboard in response to Andrea in my opinion.

Respectfully, I have dove into similar topics far too many times, so I won't go much farther in-depth than this.

Me too, I'll stay away from this thread going forward.  Don't let what anyone says about a figure dissuade you from getting it, I bought Andrea because I want to support efforts to make these types of unconventional figures.  And at the time I didn't have much to say about her one way or another.  But my initial reaction to it has not change one bit, I just felt that PNSO missed the mark on that one.  I do believe a lot of folks on here that talk bad about figures almost by default, they end up buying a lot of them anyways.  I like to read what people have to say either way, I find it entertaining at times but I ultimately decide what to add my collection regardless of how positive or negatively the figure was received by folks here.

[Mattyonyx]

What @Mattyonyx said. You pretend to know the only way a Tyrannosaurus should sit (after being wrong about how it walks, no less), and the you say "experts are not always right"? Please. Also, it's true that this is a thread about opinione, but an opinioni is "I don't like Wilson", if you say that Wilson's wrong for X and Y prepare yourself to be corrected. If you think you know Tyrannosaurus better than a renowed artist, which published papers too I should add, suit yourself, but there is only one here which needs humilty, and that's you.

Plenty of "renowned" paleoartists and degree holding paleontologists have depicted Tyrannosaurus with oversized teeth, giant dinner plate scales, and impossible poses. Sometimes hobbyists are in a position to be less bogged down by tradition and more open to new ideas. IE; the exhaustive list of professionals who for almost two decades vehemently refused to even entertain the concept of flying Microraptor, despite data often in their own papers clearly indicating such.

Just because someone speaks from a position of authority, does not inherently make that statement correct. And I for one am decidedly not convinced by many aspects of both PNSO Tyrannosaurus, including the pose of the sitting one, the upper foot looks bowed in every image I see of it.

I don't understand how the conversation between @CARN0TAURUS and L @Leyster has escalated into insults to the paleoartist I interviewed, just because he said he couldn't find anything so utterly wrong about Wilson's pose or Andrea's right leg.

Just to be clear, I'm fully aware that scientists and artists are not infallible, but IMHO it's up to colleagues in the field to prove them wrong, not hobbyists.

You don't share the paleoartist's opinion? Fine, that's your right, but saying that he's untrustworthy is downright offensive.

[CARN0TAURUS]

L @Leyster
@Mattyonyx

Hey, you win, I'm a bozo that doesn't know this from that, happy?  But this is the "controversial opinion thread" is it not?  Feel free to read thru my posting history and you'll find that I often take exception to gratuitous criticism of figures.  I've been outspoken about being respectful of all the people involved in bringing these toys to life.  As for insulting anyone, hardly, and if I did it was 100% unintentional.  To me it just sounds like you are drumming up drama for the sake of putting me in my place, winning an argument or making yourself feel justified in condescending  to fellow poster. 

You think my opinion is uninformed or dumb, that's fine.  But I do think there are ways to educate folks such as myself without writing things like "I 'hope' you are capable of understanding" or some such thing.  I consider myself a reasonable person and I try to learn from you guys everyday.  I don't like the winter wilson figure, I think it's a bad figure and that's why I never bought it. It's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.  I don't particularly like Andrea either and I think SHE's a bad figure too.  I'm entitled to voicing that as well, this is a safe place for us to talk about these things.  You don't have to go out of your way to humiliate me with your superior knowledge.  Just by pass my post next time.  You see, I admit it, I'm just a dumb old man that likes dinosaurs since I was a kid. As for Andrea, I bought her anyways to support PNSO's efforts to make unconventional figures, which I hope they continue to do.  Unfortunately it doesn't sound like my purchase meant a whole lot because she didn't sell very well.

I don't have any enemies on here and I'm not looking to make any.  We can talk anytme you guys want to, just tone down the condescending tone a bit and I'll gladly hear you guys out anytime

[stargatedalek]

I don't understand how the conversation between @CARN0TAURUS and L @Leyster has escalated into insults to the paleoartist I interviewed, just because he said he couldn't find anything so utterly wrong about Wilson's pose or Andrea's right leg.

Just to be clear, I'm fully aware that scientists and artists are not infallible, but IMHO it's up to colleagues in the field to prove them wrong, not hobbyists.

You don't share the paleoartist's opinion? Fine, that's your right, but saying that he's untrustworthy is downright offensive.

I have not insulted anyone. I don't even know who you're talking about. I called no one untrustworthy, I am only insisting we don't fall into appeal to authority fallacy. It's something the paleo community at large is very guilty of (IE blindly following the latest paper even though a lot end up being hogwash).

Plenty of paleontologists simply aren't practiced in things like life reconstructions or comparative anatomy, whereas that is the exact sort of things many hobbyists end up researching and practicing in depth. It's not something most degree courses even talk about let alone seriously train in.

[Leyster]

@stargatedalek we're talking about a paleoartist, which I'd say pretty much requires knowledge on comparative anatomy. And since he won a Lanzendorf, I'd say the jury recognized this, too, no?

@CARN0TAURUS had you simply wrote you don't like a figure, I wouldn't have commented further, but since you provider a list of things explaining why the figure was NOT "not your cup of tea" (opinions, and I respect your if you think so) but scientifically wrong (which is not an opinion), I felt compelled to answer, and I continue to do so if I see somebody saying the anatomy of a figure is wrong when it is not, and vice versa.

[CARN0TAURUS]

@stargatedalek we're talking about a paleoartist, which I'd say pretty much requires knowledge on comparative anatomy. And since he won a Lanzendorf, I'd say the jury recognized this, too, no?

@CARN0TAURUS had you simply wrote you don't like a figure, I wouldn't have commented further, but since you provider a list of things explaining why the figure was NOT "not your cup of tea" (opinions, and I respect your if you think so) but scientifically wrong (which is not an opinion), I felt compelled to answer, and I continue to do so if I see somebody saying the anatomy of a figure is wrong when it is not, and vice versa.

L @Leyster

Understood, and I stand corrected on Wilson's feet.  If you say the science proved that they are accurately sized then that's good enough for me.  Why would anyone lie about something like that?  I guess the photos I've seen aren't good angles or something because the feet looked really really big to me.  Did T-rex have bigger feet in proportion to other theropods?  That would make some sense since I've read that they tended to be on the robust and heavy side of things.

Where do you stand on Wilson's scales and his upper teeth?

[stargatedalek]

I didn't say anything about the feet on the standing one, and I should be clear when I said "upper foot" I meant the first section of the leg that is not touching the ground on the sitting rex.

The standing PNSO rex has a lot of serious issues. Oversized teeth, oversized scales, exposed teeth, and frankly more bald than makes sense even if you assume Tyrannosaurus was primarily unfeathered*.

You keep bringing up the walking pose, but I don't recall anyone even talking about that until this conversation. This model has serious issues that are fundamentally inaccurate, no reason to split hairs over things like the pose.

*Tyrannosaurus is not so far removed from feathered ancestors that it would likely be entirely devoid of feathers even if they were vestigial (which personally I don't agree with to begin with, but let's run with it anyway), thus making the scales larger so they are visible on the model, the same should be done with vestigial feathering ala fur on elephants or whales. To go so far as to say Tyrannosaurus should have absolute zero feathers is extremely speculative (not impossible, but a big leap of faith).

[Lynx]

Here's something that gets argued about a lot
A boring or just plain bad color scheme can ruin a wonderful figure, no matter how accurate or up-to-date. Note boring doesn't = dull colors.

A bad color scheme can have vibrant or mainly dull colors, what ruins it is how this is used, the patterns, or how much of each color.

A boring color scheme can also have both vibrant and dull colors, what makes a boring color scheme boring is the lack of excitement it generates. Compare the BOTM Pentaceratops to something like the PNSO Triceratops (I am NOT calling the PNSO Triceratops terrible, to clarify, it's just for example's sake.) Which catches your eye first? Which keeps you looking at it? Which would attract attention on a shelf?

The BOTM Pentaceratops has the same colors many claims to be 'boring' or even dull (orange and brown/grey) but the way the patterns and colors are applied makes it much more exciting, at least IMO.


For those who don't want to read all of that, in short, a bad or boring color scheme is defined by how it is applied. That is the issue, for me, behind many figures. The colors are fine, it is the way they are used that makes it much more unappealing.

Dull can still be exciting.


I 100%  wandered away from the original point, but I just wanna put my thoughts out there.

[Sim]

[...]
The standing PNSO rex has a lot of serious issues. Oversized teeth, oversized scales, exposed teeth, and frankly more bald than makes sense even if you assume Tyrannosaurus was primarily unfeathered*.
[...]
*Tyrannosaurus is not so far removed from feathered ancestors that it would likely be entirely devoid of feathers even if they were vestigial (which personally I don't agree with to begin with, but let's run with it anyway), thus making the scales larger so they are visible on the model, the same should be done with vestigial feathering ala fur on elephants or whales. To go so far as to say Tyrannosaurus should have absolute zero feathers is extremely speculative (not impossible, but a big leap of faith).

Regarding feathers on Tyrannosaurus, I think that's just your opinion.  Tyrannosaurus is separated from feathered tyrannosauroids by millions of years, I think it could easily have become featherless.  The PNSO Wilson not having visible feathers is not a "serious" issue.

Compare the BOTM Pentaceratops to something like the PNSO Triceratops (I am NOT calling the PNSO Triceratops terrible, to clarify, it's just for example's sake.) Which catches your eye first? Which keeps you looking at it? Which would attract attention on a shelf?

The PNSO Triceratops, definitely.  The BotM Pentaceratops looks unnatural to me.

[Lynx]

Compare the BOTM Pentaceratops to something like the PNSO Triceratops (I am NOT calling the PNSO Triceratops terrible, to clarify, it's just for example's sake.) Which catches your eye first? Which keeps you looking at it? Which would attract attention on a shelf?

The PNSO Triceratops, definitely.  The BotM Pentaceratops looks unnatural to me.
[/quote]

Ok. The question wasn't about if it was natural or not but I respect that.

[Eatmycar]

Definitely the Penta. The PNSO one looks like a retrosaur from a Charles Knight painting and I do not like that look... at all. It feels archaic.

[dinofelid]

The PNSO Wilson not having visible feathers is not a "serious" issue.

Yes, and it's key that having no visible feathers doesn't mean it was 100% lacking in them--models of elephants or white rhinos at that scale typically don't show the sparse body hair they have, it's plausible Tyrannosaurus could have had similarly sparse dinofuzz but the model's appearance doesn't conflict with that possibility.

[stargatedalek]

The PNSO Wilson not having visible feathers is not a "serious" issue.

Yes, and it's key that having no visible feathers doesn't mean it was 100% lacking in them--models of elephants or white rhinos at that scale typically don't show the sparse body hair they have, it's plausible Tyrannosaurus could have had similarly sparse dinofuzz but the model's appearance doesn't conflict with that possibility.

I literally said that. Sparse fuzz would be similar in size to scales, but the scales get sized up to diner-plates so that they're visible while the fuzz is just omitted.