The best figure of every species, according to Halichoeres

[Halichoeres]

Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts, everyone!

I'm not sure I understand the thing about comparisons offending folks here? I quite enjoy them. I also find them quite helpful, to see how the sculpts differ. Assuming it is pertaining to the figures themselves. I imagine if it's directly to the fossil material, well that's a different story and I can certainly see what you might mean in that case.

Well, all I mean is that when you get two high-quality figures and you're trying to decide between them, you have to get into smaller and smaller differences in accuracy or artistry, and I think some people are irritated by that kind of scrutiny. Like it ruins their enjoyment (see the occasional comments here and there on the forum about nitpicking). That, and in the cases where I replace a venerable vintage figure, I think people who cherish those for their nostalgic value or some other reason find the fact I'm replacing it objectionable as well.

It's great how well the Safari Pachyrhninosaurus holds up though. Shame they retired it, and I still have yet to acquire one. That said the Haolonggood one is a welcome addition, even if the Safari one beats it in the accuracy department (I'm guessing because of the positioning of the horns on their frill?). I think I do prefer the pose on the Haolonggood one, but I find it a tie as far as colorations between the two brands options. I think both are nice, and I don't have a particular preference for one over the other.

I think the Safari Pachyrhinosaurus is discontinued, which is another good reason for the Haolonggood figure to exist, at any rate. I prefer the Safari for several reasons:
• the arch in the forefoot formed by the metacarpals is present in the Safari, not the HLG
• the arrangement of digits on the forefoot is better in Safari's
• the position of the frill is better in the Safari's, being flared, rather than rolled down into a half tube in HLG's
• the tail on HLG's is short, as in a chasmosaurine, rather than moderately long
• and the jugal horn, which I think is what you're alluding to

Each of those is pretty small, but combined they make me favor the Safari.

Okay, now I want to see a nodosaur displaying the unken reflex, or doing Sceloporus-style pushups.

Ha ha, I was thinking more of the latter, some kind of mating display. Unken reflex sounds like a great idea when all your armor is on your back! 

[Faelrin]

Thanks for explaining. Yeah I guess I can see what you mean by that. The most important thing to remember it this is just what you do for your collection. Others are always free to have both figures, etc, if they so desire. Thanks for breaking down the anatomy between the two Pachyrhinosaurus figures as well. Information displayed in that format is really helpful.

Also curious, now that PNSO has revealed a Gorgosaurus, do you plan on going for that one, or the later BotM with lips? I'm guessing the former because of its smaller size, and jaw articulation aside, otherwise static nature? I think the current one in your collection is the Papo one right?

[Halichoeres]

Thanks for explaining. Yeah I guess I can see what you mean by that. The most important thing to remember it this is just what you do for your collection.

Absolutely. I hope I've never come across as trying to impose my collecting style on others. If I had unlimited space and money I might collect very differently. Moreover, the fact that there is demand for older figures makes my style tenable!

As for the Gorgosaurus, the BotM is probably the best there is, but the huge scale, and to a lesser extent the articulation, means I'll prefer a smaller option. I'm still deliberating on Papo vs. PNSO. Even if I get the PNSO, it won't be until they release something else I have a stronger interest in.

[Concavenator]

Really nice acquisitions, enjoy them! I hope Paleofiguras' rumours are true and Safari will be releasing a Stegouros too, that'd be some money and precious space saved.

Will you actually keep the Haolonggood Pachyrhinosaurus? Same with the Haolonggood Ouranosaurus. I ask because you have your 1 figure per species/genus rule, so you mentioning in this case that you will be keeping Safari's makes me curious about your new purchase - also considering the scale similarity with Safari's version. IIRC scale was a factor that could make you buy >1 figures of a given taxon.

About your collecting style, I think I said it before, but I actually copied it and went even further - no exceptions, not even for my favorite taxa, different scales, or whatever, literally 1 figure/genus. It's kind of a challenge, because sometimes it's difficult to follow, but it helps me save space and forces me to get a new genus every time I get a new figure. So even if I buy figures of related animals, the phylogenetic diversity is at least higher than on the species level. It has really redefined my collecting, so I have to thank you for coming up with that idea!

[Faelrin]

So looking over the post with the Kaiyodo Ornithomimus, I took notice of that Scolosaurus figure. I found out there are some other figures of it out there yesterday, but not sure how "accurate" they are, but I figure I'd point them out just in case. Remember those other bath bomb figures made by Nol Corporation? Well they have made two sets with dinosaurs, both of which include little figures labeled Scolosaurus. There seems to be some differences between the two sets sculpts? No doubt these are just as tiny as the other ones. I honestly found it kind of odd they went with Scolosaurus, since the rest in these sets are your typical famous dinosaurs.

Original release (2018; Gakken no Zukan Live Dinosaur Bath Ball/ 学研の図鑑ライブ 恐竜バスボール):

Spoiler

[close]

Second release (2022; Gakken no Zukan Live Dinosaur Bath Ball 2/ 学研の図鑑ライブ 恐竜バスボール2 ):

Spoiler

[close]

Here's a link to the product page with the company that makes these (I don't expect it to work once it is discontinued, as happened with some others I was researching): https://www.ec-nol.jp/view/item/000000002637

They can also be found on Amazon Japan, and elsewhere. Though they are obviously blind bag type figures like the other series they've done, which might make tracking down one of these harder, assuming you would be interested. Though it might be possible to track down them individually on mercari JP, etc through some effort, and/or patience.

[Leyster]

@Faelrin those look absurdly good for what they are

[Halichoeres]

Especially with things like the Life Miniatures, because there are so many, or PNSO/Safari/CollectA figures, because they get featured so often, I don't like to bump this thread for just one item. It just feels kinda spammy. But once in a while I get something more special, and I think that deserves its own post.


custom Macropoma willemoesi
Scale: 1:2
Sculptor/painter: Ansley McDaniel
Completed: 2023
Upper Jurassic
Etymology: "large cover" in reference to the large operculum (gill cover) of the type species


A year or two ago, I became aware of some plaster models by someone named Pocock (the first name escapes me). One was the Mesozoic coelacanth genus Macropoma, which is known from several parts of Europe. This species is known from the Solnhofen limestone (along with, for example, Archaeopteryx and Pterodactylus, and was described long after the Pocock model was produced. The photo in Prehistoric Times suggests the Pocock model was somewhat crude, and anyway it's close to impossible that I would be able to hunt one down. So I decided to commission one instead. I scanned the description and sent it to Ms. McDaniel for reference.


McDaniel was great to work with: very professional and open to input. She hadn't done a lot of fishes before, so I offered some guidance on anatomy. Any remaining errors are oversights on my part. She chose the color scheme based on some photos I sent of ecological analogues like groupers and rockfishes, rather than the modern gombessa, which lives in an environment unlike any fossil coelacanth.


The base is a reef of rudist bivalves. Rudists are essentially clams on platforms that they secrete themselves, or that were secreted by their predecessors. The larvae would settle in a place with a nice current, glue itself to the substrate, and filter-feed, gradually building up layers of shell underneath itself until it looks a little like a garbage can.


The gaps between rudist stalks would accumulate scraps of other material that would accrete, forming walls of calcium carbonate, with minor contributions from other minerals. I've long found them fascinating, and they coexisted with Macropoma in at least some places, so this seemed like a good opportunity.


Douvilleiceras coexisted with other species of Macropoma, although not M. willemoesi. Still, there would have been similar ammonites in the neighborhood.

Really nice acquisitions, enjoy them! I hope Paleofiguras' rumours are true and Safari will be releasing a Stegouros too, that'd be some money and precious space saved.

Will you actually keep the Haolonggood Pachyrhinosaurus? Same with the Haolonggood Ouranosaurus. I ask because you have your 1 figure per species/genus rule, so you mentioning in this case that you will be keeping Safari's makes me curious about your new purchase - also considering the scale similarity with Safari's version. IIRC scale was a factor that could make you buy >1 figures of a given taxon.

About your collecting style, I think I said it before, but I actually copied it and went even further - no exceptions, not even for my favorite taxa, different scales, or whatever, literally 1 figure/genus. It's kind of a challenge, because sometimes it's difficult to follow, but it helps me save space and forces me to get a new genus every time I get a new figure. So even if I buy figures of related animals, the phylogenetic diversity is at least higher than on the species level. It has really redefined my collecting, so I have to thank you for coming up with that idea!

A smaller Stegouros would be tempting!

The Haolonggood Pachyrhinosaurus and Ouranosaurus are back in their boxes. Eventually I'll sell or trade them, so for now I just have one of each on my shelves.

Well, I'm flattered to have had a little influence! When I first decided to start collecting, I set those rules for myself because I knew I couldn't afford/accommodate everything that caught my eye. Erstwhile forum member splonkadumpocus had a similar style, as does Chad (although I think he has some rare stuff that I do not).

@Faelrin thanks for the heads-up on that! It is certainly a more accurate Scolosaurus than the one in my collection. If it's similar in size to the "Extinct for a Reason" bath bomb figures, I think the Scolosaurus will be excluded on scale grounds. It's silly, but I'd rather have a somewhat inaccurate figure of an animal that is more in scale with my collection than one that is wildly out of scale. For similar reasons, I have one of Schleich's Saichania figures rather than the Kaiyodo. Now that the genus is resurrected I expect someone will make a larger, nicer Scolosaurus at some point. (Never mind that my Battat Euoplocephalus might as well be a Scolosaurus.)

@Faelrin those look absurdly good for what they are

They are pretty nice for their size and the fact that they are prizes in novelty bath items!

[Bread]

Ansley always does a fantastic job!
Congratulations on your acquisition, and I am also glad to see more of her work here on the forum.

[Faelrin]

That's such a beautiful fish model. Good idea to have something of this nature commissioned. Could be a very long wait otherwise.

[Dusty Wren]

Ansley did such a good job on the Macropoma, especially if she hasn't done a lot of fish before. The colors are really nice, too--flashy, but still naturalistic.

The info about the bivalves is neat. I like how much detail and texture Ansley gave them. It's nice to see even the smaller elements of a sculpture get that level of attention.

[bmathison1972]

You've influenced my collection habits, too, to some degree. When I finally decided to expand beyond arthropods (which, wow, has been about 6 years now), I was trying to decide between small figures (TOOBS/gashapon), even if it meant multiples of the same species, or a synoptic collection of good exemplars. I finally decided on the latter!
Also, when I started adding dinosaurs to the synoptic portion of my collection, I used this thread heavily for influence. I would say we are probably 95% in agreement. The few things that differ are mainly because the ones I chose are not in a preferred scale for you.

[Halichoeres]

Thanks for visiting, everyone! Always nice to log in to some comments.

Ansley did such a good job on the Macropoma, especially if she hasn't done a lot of fish before. The colors are really nice, too--flashy, but still naturalistic.

The info about the bivalves is neat. I like how much detail and texture Ansley gave them. It's nice to see even the smaller elements of a sculpture get that level of attention.

I was really impressed. She asked for as much reference material as I had, and she sent mock-up sketches from multiple angles to make sure she was getting dimensions right. An absolute pro. When I told her about rudists, she astutely compared them with the rugose corals that are found in her region, so she has some natural history knowledge, which helps a lot!

That's such a beautiful fish model. Good idea to have something of this nature commissioned. Could be a very long wait otherwise.

Yep, that was my reasoning. If you're a fossil coelacanth, the only way to get a toy made of you is to have coexisted with Spinosaurus!

Ansley always does a fantastic job!
Congratulations on your acquisition, and I am also glad to see more of her work here on the forum.

Thanks! I also happen to think she could charge higher rates than she does...

You've influenced my collection habits, too, to some degree. When I finally decided to expand beyond arthropods (which, wow, has been about 6 years now), I was trying to decide between small figures (TOOBS/gashapon), even if it meant multiples of the same species, or a synoptic collection of good exemplars. I finally decided on the latter!
Also, when I started adding dinosaurs to the synoptic portion of my collection, I used this thread heavily for influence. I would say we are probably 95% in agreement. The few things that differ are mainly because the ones I chose are not in a preferred scale for you.

Well, I'm glad I could be a bad influence! I suppose it stands to reason we should generally agree, given we were both trained in the persnickety discipline of taxonomy.

[Chasmosaurus]

For similar reasons, I have one of Schleich's Saichania figures rather than the Kaiyodo.

And what do you think of the sachania from de museum of Kanna?

[ceratopsian]

The commission worked beautifully. A very eye-catching result indeed.

[Halichoeres]

For similar reasons, I have one of Schleich's Saichania figures rather than the Kaiyodo.

And what do you think of the sachania from de museum of Kanna?

Oh, it's obviously a superior representation. A beautiful figure. That said, I tend to avoid figures made in fragile materials, except for fish. There are so many resin figures of dinosaurs that I would go broke trying to get the best version of every genus. I do have two Kanna figures, but one is an undescribed fragmentary genus that nobody else has made or is likely to make, and the other is a fish. Saichania is sufficiently famous that I think a good version by a PNSO or Haolonggood or even Safari is pretty much inevitable.

The commission worked beautifully. A very eye-catching result indeed.

Thank you! I'm very pleased.

[BlueKrono]

Kanna made a fish? Which one?

[SBell]

Kanna made a fish? Which one?

I think it's the Lepidotes that came with the Spinosaurus.

[Concavenator]

Hey @Halichoeres , sort of unrelated, but I noticed a potential mistake in your review of the Safari Daspletosaurus.

You show a photo you took of a Daspletosaurus skull at the FMNH, and you mention it's the skull of the holotype of Daspletosaurus torosus. However, Carabajal et al. (2021) mention the holotype of D. torosus is CMN 8506. And based on Warshaw & Fowler (2022), the specimen at the FMNH is FMNH PR308, which has been proposed to represent a novel, as of yet unnamed, species of Daspletosaurus.

[Sim]

Saichania is sufficiently famous that I think a good version by a PNSO or Haolonggood or even Safari is pretty much inevitable.

Oh, I hope so!  I'm liking thyreophorans more than ever recently!

I was looking at the list in the original post of this thread and I think you've misspelt Ceratosuchops.

[Halichoeres]

Kanna made a fish? Which one?

I think it's the Lepidotes that came with the Spinosaurus.

Yep, that's the one! Their other Spinosaurus came with a coelacanth and some other fish, but I wasn't happy with them and won't keep them. ALSO the Kanna Lepidotes might actually be Adrianaichthys (not to be confused with the modern, and much smaller, Adrianichthys).

@Concavenator @Sim thanks, I've fixed the typo on page 1, and I'll fix the review shortly. I'm not sure why I thought the FMNH skull was a holotype, I don't think I'd have assumed that unless the sign said so. But you're right, the D. torosus holotype is housed at the Canadian Museum of Nature. As always, the best way to get someone to reply to a thread is to make a mistake about theropods