HAOLONGGOOD - New for 2024

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Really interested to see the paint variants.  I wouldn't mind a reddish/brown like in Doug's art for Maia: A Dinosaur Grows Up. Even a Carnegie tribute color.

[postsaurischian]

It's not at all obvious to me from this photo that the crest is wrong. To me it looks like there is a continuous bar across the head, with only a very slight embellishments at the ends, over the eyes. .......

 Exactly my thoughts.

 The overhasty negativism is once again annoying. We should show HAOLONGGOOD more respect.

[Concavenator]

Another Stego teaser.

Pic from Baidu.

[vampiredesign]

Thank you very much. In fact, some product models have already been produced and there is no way to hastily make changes or modifications, just the colors are not yet available. The good news is that all products have plans, and I may only be able to focus on the design of a few products. There is also a plan for big shots, but it will be very cautious. There is a lot of work to be done, so if it cannot be completed this year, it can be continued next year. Even attempts at new processes and the development of other products will not stop, and we respect designers and consulting teams. Thank you very much everyone. Perhaps I came a bit slowly, but I will do my best to make some adjustments according to the situation.

[Ludodactylus]

The overhasty negativism is once again annoying. We should show HAOLONGGOOD more respect.

The words "perfect is the enemy of good" keep occurring to me.

I am very excited for that Stegosaurus! I've held off on getting any for a long time, waiting for one I could love the look of, and this looks to be the one.

[thomasw100]

It's not at all obvious to me from this photo that the crest is wrong. To me it looks like there is a continuous bar across the head, with only a very slight embellishments at the ends, over the eyes. .......

 Exactly my thoughts.

 The overhasty negativism is once again annoying. We should show HAOLONGGOOD more respect.

It should be possible to express fact based criticism like Flaffy did. Haolonggood had communicated earlier on this forum that they would seek input from the community for future models. They were praised for this approach and rightly so. They indeed asked for input for the prototypes of Euoplocephalus and Stegosaurus and this resulted in clearly visible improvements (e.g. the spikes on the thagomizer of Stagosaurus were moved further back). After these two examples, however, they seemed to have stopped asking for input, but still people posted useful feedback after photos of the herbivore lineup for 2024 appeared on social media. It appears though this feedback was not further considered.

I can therefore understand that some people who actually took the announcement of Haolonggood (i.e. to interact closely with the community) really serious and provided a lot of useful feedback may be somewhat disappointed when realizing that this has not been taken into account. Either you interact with the community and then improve the models in response to feedback or you just do your thing like PNSO does. Both approaches obviously have their pros and cons.

What I really like about PNSO is that despite doing just their thing they are quite transparent about it by communicating through the videos how a model was developed. This makes it much easier to understand why certain features look the way they do. Features that one might view as incorrect often just turn out to be the consequence of a justifiable decision based on a particular skeletal reconstruction or a given fossil specimen. If this is the case, I am perfectly OK with it even if I would disagree with that decision. There is no absolute way of knowing in science.

I can see that the decision of Haolonggood to returning back to rather doing their own thing might be borne out from the controversial discussions about the paint designs of the Alamosaurus. After the initial designs were posted here and on other social media, a flow of messages abounded that expressed either love or hate for one or the other scheme. But one has to be aware that paint designs are a completely different story. This boils down to individual taste rather than anything else. You cannot please everyone with a paint design, even if you offer 3 different variants.

But one should not draw the conclusion from the possibly frustrating discussion of paint designs that asking the community for feedback would be a waste of time. This is very useful when it comes to questions of scientific accuracy and there are many people with a solid paleontological knowledge around on this forum.

There could also be some issues related to the 3D designers that actually develop the sculpt of a model. As I have learned, some of the paleoartists have a very strong sense of independence and are not really ready or willing to interact with a community providing feedback on the scientific accuracy of a prototype. It could well be that different designers work for Haolonggood and some are quite OK with incorporating feedback while others are not.

[SidB]

It's not at all obvious to me from this photo that the crest is wrong. To me it looks like there is a continuous bar across the head, with only a very slight embellishments at the ends, over the eyes. That seems like a plausible soft tissue elaboration on the basic crosswise crest. It's possible I'm mistaken, I'd have to see it from a couple more angles to be sure.

Exactly my thoughts!

[Concavenator]

From Paleofiguras.

[Daspletodave]

The Stego and Maiasaura are both must haves for me.  I'm a little surprised at how small the Maiasaura is compared to the Stego (the Battat versions were about the same overall size).

[Flaffy]

It's not at all obvious to me from this photo that the crest is wrong. To me it looks like there is a continuous bar across the head, with only a very slight embellishments at the ends, over the eyes. That seems like a plausible soft tissue elaboration on the basic crosswise crest. It's possible I'm mistaken, I'd have to see it from a couple more angles to be sure.

The bigger issue is the presence of hornlets to begin with. Note that we have multiple specimens of Maiasaura that lack an obvious ridge (and thus the illusion of hornlets), particularly in juvenile-subadult individuals; so even if the model lacked a crest, it could still perfectly represent the genus had the hornlets been removed. I dont recall there being evidence for distinct orbital protrusions in Maiasaura. Note that the nasofrontal crest arises from the nasal bones and connects to the frontals, rather than being of lacrimal or orbital/postorbital origin as seen in other horned dinosaurs.

Moreover, the highest point of the crest according to fossil evidence would indeed be the lateral bar / median peak, rather than the supposed protuberances on either side.

[Flaffy]

It's not at all obvious to me from this photo that the crest is wrong. To me it looks like there is a continuous bar across the head, with only a very slight embellishments at the ends, over the eyes. .......

 Exactly my thoughts.

 The overhasty negativism is once again annoying. We should show HAOLONGGOOD more respect.

I once again don't see how discussions of inaccuracies in a civil manner is disrespectful. Everyone seems to like DinosDragons in depth accuracy discussions, yet when they're raised in the forum it's somehow unjustified "negativity"?

Nor do I understand this binary mode of thinking. Just because someone raises concerns about scientific accuracy does not mean they hate the model or company. Many folk here have expressed disappointment on the lack of thumb spikes on the Ouranosaurus, yet are happy to have the figure in their collection (me included). This lack of nuance in discussion alongside the use of inflammatory language is why people get polarised to extremes.

[Flaffy]

From Paleofiguras.

While I doubt the final product will look as nice, this serves as a very strong base for a mass produced paint scheme. The orange-yellow plates will surely look striking! Glad to see improvements in manus anatomy as well with only 2 clawed digits.

I reckon this will be the definitive S. ungulatus on the market. Should display quite nicely alongside the PNSO S. stenops.

[Carnoking]

I'm a little more keen to see that partially hidden variant. The red tones im seeing remind me of the old carnage resaurus stego

[Flaffy]

I'm a little more keen to see that partially hidden variant. The red tones im seeing remind me of the old carnage resaurus stego

Would make for quite the striking colour scheme indeed! Side note, I hadn't noticed that Safari took quite a bit of inspiration from the Resaruus design for their old 2008 Stegosaurus.

[Turkeysaurus]

As long as it's fair, criticsim is good for everyone. If we don't care small details what's the point making scientific models for those companies? PNSO & Haolonggood made a great name among many companies due to their scientific models.

Also it means how much people care about their products. Apathy over their upcoming products would be a bad sign.

With that said, I'm mostly curious about stegosaurus. PNSO has a great one but expensive because of being a museum model. If Haolonggood would cost less including shipping prince, it might be the one for me. It looks big as well.

[thomasw100]

From Paleofiguras.

Very nice Stegosaurus. People discussing this on Paleofiguras FB think that this could be the resin version. An unpainted resin model was also shown at that exhibition in China which featured the catalogue with the 2024 lineup of herbivores.

[thomasw100]

While I doubt the final product will look as nice, this serves as a very strong base for a mass produced paint scheme. The orange-yellow plates will surely look striking! Glad to see improvements in manus anatomy as well with only 2 clawed digits.

I reckon this will be the definitive S. ungulatus on the market. Should display quite nicely alongside the PNSO S. stenops.

What would you actually say about the size? Stegosaurus ungulatus was obviously larger than stenops, but how much larger is realistic? I have seen figures of about 8 to 8.5 meters, but some claim 9 meters.

[Flaffy]

While I doubt the final product will look as nice, this serves as a very strong base for a mass produced paint scheme. The orange-yellow plates will surely look striking! Glad to see improvements in manus anatomy as well with only 2 clawed digits.

I reckon this will be the definitive S. ungulatus on the market. Should display quite nicely alongside the PNSO S. stenops.

What would you actually say about the size? Stegosaurus ungulatus was obviously larger than stenops, but how much larger is realistic? I have seen figures of about 8 to 8.5 meters, but some claim 9 meters.

I'm personally not too fussed about precise size or scale so I'd be the wrong person to ask. But I personally tend to lean towards more conservative estimates rather then hypothetical maximums.

[thomasw100]

This is going to be a great year for completing the main genera of Stegosauria. With Stegosaurus ungulatus and Huayangosaurus coming from Haolonggood and Wuerhosaurus coming from PNSO, the gaps are really closing. If finally there would be a Kentrosaurus and a Hesperosaurus and maybe an updated Tuojiangosaurus with the correct size, this would be perfect.

[thomasw100]

While I doubt the final product will look as nice, this serves as a very strong base for a mass produced paint scheme. The orange-yellow plates will surely look striking! Glad to see improvements in manus anatomy as well with only 2 clawed digits.

I reckon this will be the definitive S. ungulatus on the market. Should display quite nicely alongside the PNSO S. stenops.

What would you actually say about the size? Stegosaurus ungulatus was obviously larger than stenops, but how much larger is realistic? I have seen figures of about 8 to 8.5 meters, but some claim 9 meters.

I'm personally not too fussed about precise size or scale so I'd be the wrong person to ask. But I personally tend to lean towards more conservative estimates rather then hypothetical maximums.

Thanks, I am also not a perfectionist when it comes to size, acknowledging that there is considerable variation in nature which we see already for extant species. And on top we have the sampling bias coming from the incomplete fossil record. But then again some species were on average larger than others and I would like the models to approximately reflect this.