PNSO New for 2025

[Trenchcoated Rebbachisaur]

T @Trenchcoated Rebbachisaur Having the same thing happen. Same plugin.

Pretty sure I saw you asking about that issue somewhere; and that's how I figured out that it was a thing! (If it wasn't you it was someone else here sorry for the mixup). Small world, small world

[Faelrin]

T @Trenchcoated Rebbachisaur Probably was me yeah. I think in the Haolonggood thread.

[thomasw100]

Now if they would only diversify the patterns. I'm seeing stripes, vertical stripes, stripes, and stripes.

That comparison image is cool but I don't know that I needed to see it four times. 

The Coronosaurus does not really have much of stripes.

[thomasw100]

I think the point about some figures being the best on the market for a particular genus, and consequently it being unlikely their producer will replace them, is relevant.  PNSO's Ankylosaurus is one of their best-selling figures and I wouldn't call its detail "crude", just a different style.  I also think PNSO's figures with more conspicuous scales are fine in that regard, it's just another style.  We don't say crocodilians have "crude" integument after all.
As far as I'm aware there hasn't been a change in the undrestanding of the curvature of Ankylosaurus's tail.  I don't think the figure's tail is inaccurate, but if you do it would have always been, it's not a new thing.

PNSO's earlier hadrosaurids have detail in the current style.  I don't see anything "crude" about them.  I also don't think PNSO feels there's a problem with the size of any of their figures, if they did they wouldn't have made them in their size to begin with.  The only reason I could see PNSO replacing these figures is because of stability problems.  Their Parasaurolophus doesn't have that and I can't imagine PNSO replacing it with the available knowledge about its species.

The current PNSO Triceratops and PNSO Torosaurus I think there's no way PNSO will replace for the forseeable future.  I see no reason why they would.  I think its a bit crazy to think PNSO might.

I think expceting PNSO to remake some of these is at odds with what's actually happening: PNSO is reluctant to remake species they've already made in standard-size.  Plus I don't think there's enough demand for these, e.g. Sauropelta and Megalosaurus which have top-quality versions by Safari (I think the PNSO Megalosaurus is top-quality too, but the Safari has lips which is the only reason for wanting PNSO to remake it), and Ankylosaurus which has the new Eofauna version.

I agree with most what you say in this post. Note however that PNSO Ankylosaurus is sold out in several places right now, including for example Lana Time Shop. But maybe they will produce a new batch rather than making a new version.

[Joel1905]

I think the point about some figures being the best on the market for a particular genus, and consequently it being unlikely their producer will replace them, is relevant.  PNSO's Ankylosaurus is one of their best-selling figures and I wouldn't call its detail "crude", just a different style.  I also think PNSO's figures with more conspicuous scales are fine in that regard, it's just another style.  We don't say crocodilians have "crude" integument after all.
As far as I'm aware there hasn't been a change in the undrestanding of the curvature of Ankylosaurus's tail.  I don't think the figure's tail is inaccurate, but if you do it would have always been, it's not a new thing.

PNSO's earlier hadrosaurids have detail in the current style.  I don't see anything "crude" about them.  I also don't think PNSO feels there's a problem with the size of any of their figures, if they did they wouldn't have made them in their size to begin with.  The only reason I could see PNSO replacing these figures is because of stability problems.  Their Parasaurolophus doesn't have that and I can't imagine PNSO replacing it with the available knowledge about its species.

The current PNSO Triceratops and PNSO Torosaurus I think there's no way PNSO will replace for the forseeable future.  I see no reason why they would.  I think its a bit crazy to think PNSO might.

The figures that are actually in need of redoing are the ones that have:

• Less finer textures and details (Pachyrhinosaurus, Sauropelta)

• Their earlier, less anatomically correct and/or out of scale figures (Corythosaurus)

• Animals that have had big changes to their reconstructions thanks to new studies (Dunkleosteus)

• The lipless theropods (Tyrannosaurus, Giganotosaurus, Acrocanthosaurus, Megalosaurus)

• Figures that have a combination of more than one of those faults (Ankylosaurus, Parasaurolophus, Carnotaurus)

I think expceting PNSO to remake some of these is at odds with what's actually happening: PNSO is reluctant to remake species they've already made in standard-size.  Plus I don't think there's enough demand for these, e.g. Sauropelta and Megalosaurus which have top-quality versions by Safari (I think the PNSO Megalosaurus is top-quality too, but the Safari has lips which is the only reason for wanting PNSO to remake it), and Ankylosaurus which has the new Eofauna version.

Please note that my comment about certain dinosaurs being remade by PNSO was in direct response to the Triceratops/Torosaurus comment.

My point was that if PNSO were to remake any figures, the ones I mentioned have more reasons to be remade, as opposed to the Triceratops & Torosaurus that have pretty much no good reasons to be remade, especially the Torosaurus, which at the moment would be in PNSO's top 5 figures of all time in my opinion.

[Gwangi]

Now if they would only diversify the patterns. I'm seeing stripes, vertical stripes, stripes, and stripes.

That comparison image is cool but I don't know that I needed to see it four times. 

The Coronosaurus does not really have much of stripes.

You're right. And I like that about it. But let me fix myself. Stripes, vertical stripes, stripes, faint stripes.

[SRF]

If AMNH 5116 turns out to be a Torosaurus than that would be a big reason for PNSO to redo their Triceratops. Actually it's the one genus we're discussing right now that I would expect a new figure of from PNSO somewhere down the line.

Mainly because it's one of the most famous dinosaurs and every genus PNSO did multiple figures of (not counting any of the minis) has at least one model in PNSO's Museum Line.

[GojiraGuy1954]

I like the mouth details. Paint application is different to previous 3 releases and first time there are no specific paint patterns on frill. Some details in that area remind me a bit of their pachyrhinosaurus release. Pose is dynamic enough and I believe it will be good fit with other 3 newest ceratopsians.

Coronasaurus is very nice, although we are yet to have super exciting model released this year. As for ceratopsians, I would not mind re-do of Torosaurus or Triceratops.

I'm struggling to think of reasons why Torosaurus & Triceratops need redoing? Both have PNSO's current manufacturing quality and finer detailing, both are anatomically sound and there's been no subsequent discoveries or papers that have rendered either inaccurate (yes, I'm aware that AMNH 5116 has a problematic frill, but still)

The figures that are actually in need of redoing are the ones that have:

• Less finer textures and details (Pachyrhinosaurus, Sauropelta)

• Their earlier, less anatomically correct and/or out of scale figures (Corythosaurus)

• Animals that have had big changes to their reconstructions thanks to new studies (Dunkleosteus)

• The lipless theropods (Tyrannosaurus, Giganotosaurus, Acrocanthosaurus, Megalosaurus)

• Figures that have a combination of more than one of those faults (Ankylosaurus, Parasaurolophus, Carnotaurus)

Neither of them have an exoparia

Not a big enough reason. Bear in mind the authors of the paper still say they could be wrong, so time will tell.

In the meantime, giving their rictus a repaint will give the impression of an exoparia.

If lips are a big enough reason then a major shift in how we understand the rest of the oral anatomy of dinosaurs is too

[Trenchcoated Rebbachisaur]

Nahh the rest of oral anatomy is hidden when the mouth is closed. And you can technically achieve many outdated pre-exoparia-revelation looks with the help of extra soft tissue anyway. Exoparia definitely falls in the camp of ignorable details if I've ever seen any.
Other oral anatomy fixes, like forked Mosasaur tongues and secondary jaws; or the true shape of Pliosaur tongues once we figure that old chestnut out, maybe aren't, but exoparia? Please. That's like rejecting dinosaur figures for not having a sculpted cloaca or mammal figures for a lack of nipples.

[DefinitelyNOTDilo]

The biggest issue to my eyes with including the exoparia is that it makes traditional articulation basically impossible, as Eofauna has demonstrated. I wouldn't be opposed to non-articulated theropods, but I doubt the big companies will go that far.

[Joel1905]

The biggest issue to my eyes with including the exoparia is that it makes traditional articulation basically impossible, as Eofauna has demonstrated. I wouldn't be opposed to non-articulated theropods, but I doubt the big companies will go that far.

There are many ways of reconstructing Theropods with exoparia, and some do still include a crease that could be used to accommodate traditional articulation. Don't take the Eofauna interpretation as gospel.

[DefinitelyNOTDilo]

The biggest issue to my eyes with including the exoparia is that it makes traditional articulation basically impossible, as Eofauna has demonstrated. I wouldn't be opposed to non-articulated theropods, but I doubt the big companies will go that far.

There are many ways of reconstructing Theropods with exoparia, and some do still include a crease that could be used to accommodate traditional articulation. Don't take the Eofauna interpretation as gospel.

I have issue with those reconstructions as in order to do so they add unnecessary amounts of soft tissue, the exoparia is not like other jaw muscles in that it actually sits on top of the skull, not within it, so to keep that same crease would require adding extensive soft tissue over the exoparia. I'll post the best reference for reconstructing it I've come across so far.

[DefinitelyNOTDilo]

[Flaffy]

The hypothesised presence of an exoparia effectively renders dinosaurs models with prominent/keratinised jugal horns inaccurate (save for the groups that do exhibit clear keratinous structures like Marginocephalia & Thyreophora), as the jugal horns would in fact be a site of ligamentous/muscular attachment as per the diagrams @DefinitelyNOTDilo posted.

I am certainly open to companies adapting this new structure to their future models. Hopefully we'll see less unecessary jaw articulation across the board too.

[Faelrin]

Unpopular opinion, but I like my jaw articulation, but when it is designed well with the (current understanding of the) anatomy in mind.

Perhaps other then what Eofauna did, I imagine PNSO would be the one to figure it out like they did with their Dunkleosteus. Curious how this would impact Creative Beast's figures going forward too.

[Trenchcoated Rebbachisaur]

Oh, thanks for the graphic! A bit more of a change than expected, then. Definitely doesn't seem like it would be too hard to make new models work with this mechanically, at least. I am no longer judging people for considering this worthy of hoping for model updates over, but I also won't hold my breath that they'll happen anytime soon.

[Sim]

I keep looking at the PNSO Centrosaurus brinkmani, I'm very happy PNSO is making it and I look forward to having it!

[Joel1905]

"The extent of the 'cheek' is unrelated to the exoparia"

The artist says so themselves.

https://x.com/ren_wenyu/status/1906345616420266147?s=46&t=Pus0wh-zA89du_YxI6kt_A

This one has the 'crease' and doesn't have an unnecessary amount of soft tissue?

[DefinitelyNOTDilo]

"The extent of the 'cheek' is unrelated to the exoparia"

The artist says so themselves.

https://x.com/ren_wenyu/status/1906345616420266147?s=46&t=Pus0wh-zA89du_YxI6kt_A

This one has the 'crease' and doesn't have an unnecessary amount of soft tissue?

As good of an artist as Wenyu is, I do think they used a somewhat unnecessary amount of soft tissue, if you look closely they've basically recreated the line of the jugal while the jugal itself is almost entirely covered by muscle. And yes there still could be a crease (although I find it unlikely), but it really would not be large enough for the purposes of articulation.

[DefinitelyNOTDilo]

Looking closely I also think they made the exoparia sit a bit too low on the jugal, but that's a bit harder to confirm.