HAOLONGGOOD - New For 2023

[Sim]

i believe it's the opposite, rectangular pupil helps with panoramic vision. also, goats' eyes work such way that the pupil is always parallel to the ground

Yes, thanks for the correction.  I looked it up and you're right.  What I had originally read I think had switched an effect of vertical and horizontal pupils.  However, I'm not sure such a large species as Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai would benefit from horizontal pupils?

[Samrukia]

i believe it's the opposite, rectangular pupil helps with panoramic vision. also, goats' eyes work such way that the pupil is always parallel to the ground

Yes, thanks for the correction.  I looked it up and you're right.  What I had originally read I think had switched an effect of vertical and horizontal pupils.  However, I'm not sure such a large species as Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai would benefit from horizontal pupils?

most probably inspired by Prehistoric Planet Pachyrhinosaurus.

this is what i found on reddit when the following question was asked:
"What was the reason for giving Pachyrhinosaurus "goat like" pupils?"

Darren Naish:

"The pupil thing is complicated, and represents the fact that we wanted to highlight the notion that dinosaurs may well have had more diversity in pupil form that usually thought: both lizards and birds have more diversity than usually thought (there are teiid lizards with semi-horizontal pupils) , plus it's consistent with adaptation to a relatively open habitat."

[TheImmortalEye]

@quiversaurus
The Pachyrhinosaurus is listed as 18 x 8.5 cm
Wuerhosaurus: 18 x 6.5 cm

I can't remember if it was mentioned already or announced somewhere - do we have the measurements for the Pachy and Wuerhosaurus yet?

That would put Pachyrhinosaurus at 1:44 scale and Wuerhosaurus at 1:39 if I base that on the lengths given at: http://www.prehistoric-wildlife.com

it can literally range from anywhere theres no point in trying to pinpoint the scale of these animals to double diggets. <lakustai varies from 5 up to freaking 8 metres XD and fossils are a 0.00001 percent estimate of the live animals, which even now vary massively (northern rats as tiny as mice or as big as a cat) https://carnivora.net/pachyrhinosaurus-lakustai-v-albertosaurus-sarcopha-t11599.html

You could have said this in a more friendly way actually.

Sorry if it came out too harsh but it does annoy me sometimes how we talk about scales as if its set in Stone to single diggets, as if paleontology hasnt been wrong on fragmentary animals almost always ( see dunkleosteus and spinosaurus most recent)

Again just saying these are animals not modell planes, animals in life vary massively in size due to genetics, region , enviromental conditions etc. Basicly if u want ur pachy to be 5 m or 9 m is both within reasonable plausibility as fossils make up less than 0.00001 of the animals as a whole , and unless articulated it is just an educated estimate ( an informed guess )

This excludes well researched animals , with many skeletons and often articulated ( protoceratops, psittscosaurus , some hadrosaurs) or ones where the guess is based on close family ( even then it can be way off)

I just made a quick scale estimate based on some general length assumptions about these species. There was nothing said about 2 digits. There was also nothing said that this should be any definitive number. Probably it is better to convert the quoted size of the model into length of the dinosaur rather than calculating a scale. I understand very well that young individuals, young adults or fully grown adults obviously have different sizes. It was implicit that the size should apply to an adult, otherwise any model size comparison between species would become meaningless. Also environmental conditions will affect the maximum size of the fully grown adults. But there is certainly a limit to the size an adult of a given species would reach given the optimum environmental conditions. This is probably a factor of genetic programming of the growth process and the life expectancy of a species. You would agree that for example Pachyrhinosaurus would not have reached 30 m in length?

Yes thats ofc not logical , but take for example the ones mentioned, i can 100 percent believe 5 or even 4 meter full adults of Pachyrrhinosaurus existed if for example food was scarce , despite the average prob being 7m , or on the other hand a 9 m absolute unit of a bull during a paradise like time of short stability. Those are seen within extand animals all the time, esp within birds and reptiles.
An alligator can easily stop growing at 2.5-3m due to bad food, too many other gators, or simple genetics, or it can surpass 5.8 meters ( recordholder) if the enviroment allows. Those are quite massive while being the same species.

Applied to t rex , i believe both a 9 m adult and a 14 m adult are within reasonable limits of believability using the tiny sample size of our fossiles 11-12m

[Sim]

Thanks for that @erlectric!  I had read that the only birds which don't have a circular pupil are skimmers, which are highly adapted to their unusual lifestyle.  I wonder if Darren Naish was implying there are other birds with a non-circular pupil?  In any case, I still prefer circular pupils for dinosaurs.  I find it difficult to see the Haolonggood Pachyrhinosaurus's pupils as pupils.  It just looks like it's closing its eyes to me.

[Quiversaurus]

And yet more from Paleofiguras!

From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmontonia, it seems like Edmontonia's fossil remains are actually rather complete/extensive, comparable to Borealopelta's even. Is this correct, or am I missing something?

Wondering why so few models of this species have been made if remains are this complete!

[Sim]

@quiversaurus, Edmontonia is known from very complete remains as far as I'm aware!  I don't know why it hasn't been made into a figure more often.  I'm looking forward to Haolonggood's!

[Faelrin]

I've been wondering that for a long time. Been so many years since I've been waiting for someone to do a new figure of this one. At least someone finally has, thanks to Haolonggood. I wonder when these will be available. I need this Edmontonia like since yesterday lol.

Edit: Oh before I forget, I think my red Ouranosaurus arrived last night. Mom picked up a package for me at the motel's office and brought it in here pretty late, as I was going to bed. Just got up now (I was up briefly earlier when I posted the HC Brachiosaurus in the Mattel thread but went back to sleep).

Edit 2: It was not. It was a cup? I don't recall ordering something like that. Must have been something mom got for me? I'm confused. Anyways, a bit more of a wait to go it seems.

[Quiversaurus]

@quiversaurus, Edmontonia is known from very complete remains as far as I'm aware!  I don't know why it hasn't been made into a figure more often.  I'm looking forward to Haolonggood's!

Thank you for the confirmation! Yes, definitely looking forward. Waiting for the actual product images, feels like it may come any day now.

Also, I know this isn't the Hopes and dreams thread but I really want a Stegosaurus ungulatus... Maybe there's hope, since there's an incoming Edmontosaurus, and V @vampiredesign and HLG really do listen to feedback...

[SidB]

It's so encouraging to see that our feedback has a live audience, agreed. Such an absolute contrast with companies like Schleich, Papo and the post-Lorusso Battat.

[Perotorum]

i believe it's the opposite, rectangular pupil helps with panoramic vision. also, goats' eyes work such way that the pupil is always parallel to the ground

Yes, thanks for the correction.  I looked it up and you're right.  What I had originally read I think had switched an effect of vertical and horizontal pupils.  However, I'm not sure such a large species as Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai would benefit from horizontal pupils?

most probably inspired by Prehistoric Planet Pachyrhinosaurus.

this is what i found on reddit when the following question was asked:
"What was the reason for giving Pachyrhinosaurus "goat like" pupils?"

Darren Naish:

"The pupil thing is complicated, and represents the fact that we wanted to highlight the notion that dinosaurs may well have had more diversity in pupil form that usually thought: both lizards and birds have more diversity than usually thought (there are teiid lizards with semi-horizontal pupils) , plus it's consistent with adaptation to a relatively open habitat."

I wonder if it would not be more accurate to reconstruct ankylosaurids as having square pupils with ceratopsians having rounder pupils, as square, goat-like pupils are a specific adaptation to low-level grazing, which ankylosaurids seem better adapted for, and rounder pupils (still square like, more like those of a cow or deer) seem to be better adapted at mid-level browsing, which fits better with ceratopsians due to both size, limb proportion, and general habitat all lending to a more browsing friendly eating habit, rather than the low-sitting, short stature, and general adaptations of ankylosaurids and nodosaurids, which seem better adapted to graze, and thus horizontal pupils that can scan a horizon would be more useful.

[Quiversaurus]

i believe it's the opposite, rectangular pupil helps with panoramic vision. also, goats' eyes work such way that the pupil is always parallel to the ground

Yes, thanks for the correction.  I looked it up and you're right.  What I had originally read I think had switched an effect of vertical and horizontal pupils.  However, I'm not sure such a large species as Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai would benefit from horizontal pupils?

most probably inspired by Prehistoric Planet Pachyrhinosaurus.

this is what i found on reddit when the following question was asked:
"What was the reason for giving Pachyrhinosaurus "goat like" pupils?"

Darren Naish:

"The pupil thing is complicated, and represents the fact that we wanted to highlight the notion that dinosaurs may well have had more diversity in pupil form that usually thought: both lizards and birds have more diversity than usually thought (there are teiid lizards with semi-horizontal pupils) , plus it's consistent with adaptation to a relatively open habitat."

I wonder if it would not be more accurate to reconstruct ankylosaurids as having square pupils with ceratopsians having rounder pupils, as square, goat-like pupils are a specific adaptation to low-level grazing, which ankylosaurids seem better adapted for, and rounder pupils (still square like, more like those of a cow or deer) seem to be better adapted at mid-level browsing, which fits better with ceratopsians due to both size, limb proportion, and general habitat all lending to a more browsing friendly eating habit, rather than the low-sitting, short stature, and general adaptations of ankylosaurids and nodosaurids, which seem better adapted to graze, and thus horizontal pupils that can scan a horizon would be more useful.

That's an interesting train of thought. I don't see why not! There should be a paper written on this heh.

[SidB]

Making a general observation about all of these subtopics within the Haolonggood for 2023 thread - I took a look at the most-liked topics section at the DTF Info/statistics center. It was interesting to see that five of the ten top ones were comments on Haolonggood subjects and NONE on PNSO. What a dramatic rise on the part of the former, but maybe not such a mystery for the latter, with their current monoculture of megatheropods. It's also encouraging to observe that V @vampiredesign is responsive to our input, though I'm hoping that Haolonggood wasn't put off by the recent scepticism (proven unfounded) on the part of some regarding the CE/ C E symbols.

[PoptartDoodle]

i believe it's the opposite, rectangular pupil helps with panoramic vision. also, goats' eyes work such way that the pupil is always parallel to the ground

Yes, thanks for the correction.  I looked it up and you're right.  What I had originally read I think had switched an effect of vertical and horizontal pupils.  However, I'm not sure such a large species as Pachyrhinosaurus lakustai would benefit from horizontal pupils?

most probably inspired by Prehistoric Planet Pachyrhinosaurus.

this is what i found on reddit when the following question was asked:
"What was the reason for giving Pachyrhinosaurus "goat like" pupils?"

Darren Naish:

"The pupil thing is complicated, and represents the fact that we wanted to highlight the notion that dinosaurs may well have had more diversity in pupil form that usually thought: both lizards and birds have more diversity than usually thought (there are teiid lizards with semi-horizontal pupils) , plus it's consistent with adaptation to a relatively open habitat."

I interpreted it as helping prevent or reduce the effects of snow blindness, since rectangular pupils reduce light from above and below.

[Sim]

Due to the presence of Nanuqsaurus with the Prehistoric Planet Pachyrhinosaurus, I believe the environment they were shown in is the Prince Creek Formation.  I was looking at its environment on Wikipedia and it mentions the coldest temperatures there were on average 2 to 4 degrees celsius, so possibly not cold enough for snow to have been regular?  It also says the Prince Creek Formation would have probably experienced 120 days of darkness due to its location, would a round pupil be more appropriate if the species didn't migrate away, since the slit pupils reduce light entering the eye?

[Faelrin]

My first Haolonggood first arrived today, the red Ouranosaurus:



Accuracy issues with the hand, maybe the head aside, beautiful little figure. A little smaller then I expected, but I'm sure that helps keep the cost down. It's about 1/35 scale too right? Seems to be a smaller animal then some of its ornithopod relatives, so I'd guess this is probably about right. Surely satisfies my need for an Ouranosaurus in my collection for the time being, and I still would like to pick up the green one at some point. Got one of those little aquarium plants from the seller too lol (My Online Toy Store, on Aliexpress). Can anyone verify if this is only because I opted for the no box option, or did those who order the boxed version get those too? I assume it's only this seller that does this right?

Also I'll be honest I did notice two things that I'd like to ask others about. The figure does seem to have a strong smell, that I picked up on as I was inspecting the detail work of the figure up close. Not sure if it is the paint or from the plastic bag it was shipped in (inside the foam package), but definitely chemical vibes of some kind? I smelled my PNSO Lambeosaurus, and some of my other figures, and they don't have such a smell, or very faint plastic smell. The paint/figure also felt powdery? Not really sure how to describe it. It's a strange tactile feel. Not sure if I'd encountered this on my other figures before. Can anyone vouch for what I've encountered with their Ouranosaurus (if not anyone other Haolonggood figures)?

[PoptartDoodle]

Due to the presence of Nanuqsaurus with the Prehistoric Planet Pachyrhinosaurus, I believe the environment they were shown in is the Prince Creek Formation.  I was looking at its environment on Wikipedia and it mentions the coldest temperatures there were on average 2 to 4 degrees celsius, so possibly not cold enough for snow to have been regular?  It also says the Prince Creek Formation would have probably experienced 120 days of darkness due to its location, would a round pupil be more appropriate if the species didn't migrate away, since the slit pupils reduce light entering the eye?

Fair point, with that in mind rectangular pupils would hinder them more than help.
I do enjoy the interpretation nonetheless, I'm always down for throwing different ideas of how these animals possibly existed.
I wonder if this is a one off inspired by PP or if they plan on making this a trend, in which case a variant with different pupils would be nice.

[ceratopsian]

You get the aquarium plant if you order with box as well @Faelrin. I've not encountered any powdery feel on my Haolonggood figures.

[SidB]

No powdery feel, nor chemical smell on my ouranosaurus.

[thomasw100]

My first Haolonggood first arrived today, the red Ouranosaurus:



Accuracy issues with the hand, maybe the head aside, beautiful little figure. A little smaller then I expected, but I'm sure that helps keep the cost down. It's about 1/35 scale too right? Seems to be a smaller animal then some of its ornithopod relatives, so I'd guess this is probably about right. Surely satisfies my need for an Ouranosaurus in my collection for the time being, and I still would like to pick up the green one at some point. Got one of those little aquarium plants from the seller too lol (My Online Toy Store, on Aliexpress). Can anyone verify if this is only because I opted for the no box option, or did those who order the boxed version get those too? I assume it's only this seller that does this right?

Also I'll be honest I did notice two things that I'd like to ask others about. The figure does seem to have a strong smell, that I picked up on as I was inspecting the detail work of the figure up close. Not sure if it is the paint or from the plastic bag it was shipped in (inside the foam package), but definitely chemical vibes of some kind? I smelled my PNSO Lambeosaurus, and some of my other figures, and they don't have such a smell, or very faint plastic smell. The paint/figure also felt powdery? Not really sure how to describe it. It's a strange tactile feel. Not sure if I'd encountered this on my other figures before. Can anyone vouch for what I've encountered with their Ouranosaurus (if not anyone other Haolonggood figures)?

I had that smell also on one of the Haolonggood figures (I think it was the Tianzhenosaurus), but it clearly came from the packaging material. After the figure was placed on my shelf the smell disappeared in a few days.

[BlueKrono]

No powdery feel, nor chemical smell on my ouranosaurus.

Nor on mine.