PNSO - New for 2024

[Flaffy]

I think this comparison perfectly demonstrates why Schleich's Edmontosaurus is so problematic in its anatomy. One figure has a clear emphasise on anatomy, where you can clearly tell that the hindlimbs are being lifted. While the other is sculpted such that an errornous digitigrade ungulitigrade stance is implied.

[Gwangi]

I forgot that HLG was going to also release an Edmontosaurus. It might be a good idea to wait and see what they're offering.

[Tracewyrm!]

Size comparisons with Cameron seem to be my niche in the PNSO threads so, if PNSO's stated lengths are anything to go by, this seems to be how our new Edmontosaurus sizes up with a more or less standard 1:35 T. rex.
I used the lengths since they are a lot more straight forward than heights, where you could be using almost any part of each figure for measurement.

(PNSO's colour schemes here were similar enough that I had to set Cameron's opacity at 50% so that they don't blend into each other too much  )

Hope you find this helpful!

[Carnoking]

Might have liked him just a hair bigger, but they look like they'll go well together!

[Bread]

Might have liked him just a hair bigger, but they look like they'll go well together!

Agreed. I like my bulky hadrosaurs over their Tyrannosaur counterparts. But with the counterpart being Daspletosaurus and Albertosaurus, I think this E. regalis will suit well with those Tyrannosaurs from the Campanian formation.

Speaking of which, this Campanian formation is really filling up quite nicely. I'm honestly now considering dedicating its own shelf space for it.

[Tracewyrm!]

I was a lot less thorough with this one, pretty much eyeballing the sizes for the most part, but in case anyone wanted an extended group shot of Zabad with the better part of PNSO's Hell Creek(?) collection.

This was more of a secondary edit I made for fun, so apologies if any of these are off the mark, in terms of size!

[SRF]

Size comparisons with Cameron seem to be my niche in the PNSO threads so, if PNSO's stated lengths are anything to go by, this seems to be how our new Edmontosaurus sizes up with a more or less standard 1:35 T. rex.
I used the lengths since they are a lot more straight forward than heights, where you could be using almost any part of each figure for measurement.

(PNSO's colour schemes here were similar enough that I had to set Cameron's opacity at 50% so that they don't blend into each other too much  )

Hope you find this helpful!

What measurement for the length did you use? According to PNSOs own measurements, Cameron is 11.9 centimeters at the highest point while this Edmontosaurus is 12 centimeters high, probably at the highest point of the tail. That should mean that the Edmontosaurus is quite bigger than what you project here. Also to me it doesn't seem to be 32.5 centimeters long compared to Camerons 35 centimeters in this comparison.

[Faelrin]

@Flaffy Not digitigrade (which is correct), but unguligrade (or close to it). Too many joints regardless (something a lot of their recent figures suffer from. They were never this bad before on their anatomy).

@Perotorum I meant insofar as mass produced figures go. I'm sure there's lots of things of that nature, or others out there (such as Ancestors), but they typically remain outside my purview.

[Tracewyrm!]

What measurement for the length did you use? According to PNSOs own measurements, Cameron is 11.9 centimeters at the highest point while this Edmontosaurus is 12 centimeters high, probably at the highest point of the tail. That should mean that the Edmontosaurus is quite bigger than what you project here. Also to me it doesn't seem to be 32.5 centimeters long compared to Camerons 35 centimeters in this comparison.

I tried scaling via height prior, but that made the Edmontosaurus almost the same length as the T. rex. That is definitely not a 32.5-to-35 centimeter difference.

I have to assume it's something funny about the angles? I want to think that PNSO's measurements here are fairly reliable for both figures. In case people are more interested in the height, here's an alternate comparison.

[SRF]

What measurement for the length did you use? According to PNSOs own measurements, Cameron is 11.9 centimeters at the highest point while this Edmontosaurus is 12 centimeters high, probably at the highest point of the tail. That should mean that the Edmontosaurus is quite bigger than what you project here. Also to me it doesn't seem to be 32.5 centimeters long compared to Camerons 35 centimeters in this comparison.

I tried scaling via height prior, but that made the Edmontosaurus almost the same length as the T. rex. That is definitely not a 32.5-to-35 centimeter difference.

I have to assume it's something funny about the angles? I want to think that PNSO's measurements here are fairly reliable for both figures. In case people are more interested in the height, here's an alternate comparison.

I do think it has to do with the angles the figures are standing in. If PNSOs own measurements are correct (I never bothered to measure the height of Cameron myself) I do think that the height of these figures is the best way to compare them.

By the way thanks for the quick edit! They do display nicely together.

[Dusty Wren]

Well, okay, 2024 is off to a very good start! I am delighted to see another hadrosaur from PNSO, and I'll be picking this one up as soon as I can. Love how beefy it is, and how well that distinctive texture on the neck has been replicated.

[SenSx]

When I see that, I cannot imagine how cool a new Shantungosaurus would  look.

[Carnoking]

What measurement for the length did you use? According to PNSOs own measurements, Cameron is 11.9 centimeters at the highest point while this Edmontosaurus is 12 centimeters high, probably at the highest point of the tail. That should mean that the Edmontosaurus is quite bigger than what you project here. Also to me it doesn't seem to be 32.5 centimeters long compared to Camerons 35 centimeters in this comparison.

I tried scaling via height prior, but that made the Edmontosaurus almost the same length as the T. rex. That is definitely not a 32.5-to-35 centimeter difference.

I have to assume it's something funny about the angles? I want to think that PNSO's measurements here are fairly reliable for both figures. In case people are more interested in the height, here's an alternate comparison.

This is more of what I was hoping for but I agree that it seems less likely given the length disparity.

At the risk of sounding pedantic, it might have also been nice to see this figure sculpted with an open mouth to show off our current understanding of buccal anatomy in hadrosaurids. If I recall correctly, all of PNSO's recent hadrosaurids have been sculpted with a closed mouth.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Very nice. As others said it's Regalis again..I guess they think the crest makes it more unique?  Hope HLG does Annectens.

[SidB]

I forgot that HLG was going to also release an Edmontosaurus. It might be a good idea to wait and see what they're offering.

That's good advice. In either case, PNSO or HLG Edmontosaurus, this will retire my CollectA one.

[Gwangi]

I forgot that HLG was going to also release an Edmontosaurus. It might be a good idea to wait and see what they're offering.

That's good advice. In either case, PNSO or HLG Edmontosaurus, this will retire my CollectA one.

Ideally, HLG will make the other species and I can get both! 

[Tracewyrm!]

This is more of what I was hoping for but I agree that it seems less likely given the length disparity.

There's always the chance that one of the images I'm using are from slightly tilted angles, rather than being fully horizontal. That'd throw the length off.
For now, I view the two comparisons as the end caps of where this figure's size range could be. Using length gives the minimum size and using height gives the max.

Both have some sort of discrepency between them (I checked my figure and the 11.9cm point comes from the top of Cameron's neck, which would make the measurements weird if the Edmontosaurus was didn't have any points that passed it) but they offer a good size range. Looking at them, I am inclined to lean towards the larger side but I'm not going to hold my breath either.

[Tracewyrm!]

Last one for now, but an alternate version of the Hell Creek comparison for the folks who are more inclined to believe the height estimates for Zabad.

Enjoy!

[Stegotyranno420]

Pretty cool I guess.

[SRF]

Last one for now, but an alternate version of the Hell Creek comparison for the folks who are more inclined to believe the height estimates for Zabad.

Enjoy!

Great comparison yet again. I don't want to be that guy but Alamosaurus definitely didn't live in the Hell Creek formation. So I guess you mean Laramidia during the Maastrichtian.