Bases

[Neosodon]

Since there seems to be allot of opinions both ways I thought it would be interesting to see where most of the forum stands. First time doing a poll so go ahead and say something if I screwed it up.

[stargatedalek]

I would be fine with bases if they were:
A) all removable ALA Colorata or REBOR, or
B) all extremely subtle, refined, and transparent ALA some Takara sets (http://animaltoyforum.com/index.php?topic=2148.0)

To my eye CollectA and Safari bases look cheap, just generic slabs of sand or mud coloured plastic with occasionally some very basic detail work (footprints etc). I can't get over the impression that looking at them feels like they couldn't be bothered spending the time or money to find another way in production (IE metal rods in the legs) to make them stand so they request a base.

[suspsy]

I don't love bases, but I still much prefer them to figures that keep falling over or figures with oversized feet.

[Jose S.M.]

I don't care about bases but I wish the Collecta ones where better, at least regarding colors, they are all the same color  all over the surface, and with minimal detail. The only one that doesn't bother me is the Struthiomimus one because it's different color, almost flat and very small and unobtrusive. I'm thinking of adding some color to the other Collecta bases.
But I do agree that a base it's better than toppling figures, I have to make a removable base for my beloved safari Tyrannosaurus and for their Dracorex too. And also agree that removable bases would  be the best option.

[Patrx]

Generally speaking, I'm all for bases. The alternatives tend to be oversized feet (like Suspsy mentioned) or poses that I dislike, with tails or wings or claws contacting the ground in addition to the two feet.
CollectA's bases do tend to be kind of ugly; I wonder if maybe they shouldn't just switch to some kind of solid plastic platform instead of a piece of earth.

[Shonisaurus]

I sincerely prefer the non-removable bases as it happens with the theropods of Collecta or the giganotosaurus of Safari.

The extractable bases for me are a nuisance apart from that they occupy a lot of space, they do not guarantee from my point of view the stability of the animal. I like the dinosaurs of Favorite or Kaiyodo very much, but if for example you extract fukuiraptor, concavenator or pelecanimimus from their bases, this figure is ruined and falls down.

I am in favor of the theropods having fixed and permanent bases.


What I would like to see are permanent but less obdurate bases, that is to say with vegatición, water, skeletons of dinosaurs or dead animals next to the theropod

[John]

In my opinion,the non-removable base option for bipedal dinosaurs is the best one.It most easily allows for things to be not only stable,but more properly proportioned too.

[Libraraptor]

To me it is the overall impression of a figure that matters.  If a Base supports it in a non clumsy way then it is okay by me.

[Sim]

I dislike threads/polls about bases.  Each time they've been made, nothing good ever really seems to come out of them.  And oddly, each time some seem to forget that bases don't always keep a figure stable, there's been a lot of posts on this forum by different members about CollectA dinosaurs on permanent bases drooping.

I'm tired of giving reasons I have for wanting dinosaur figures to not have bases each time a topic about bases is started, so I'll just say I have no desire to have dinosaur figures that are permanently attached to bases.  No base at all is my preferred option.  I don't want dinosaur figures with oversized feet/hips either though, both of which don't guarantee a figure stays standing.  I like the general direction Safari is taking with their bipedal dinosaur figures.

I think an additional part of the animal touching the ground for stability in addition to the feet can work very well on a figure if done right.  For example the poses of the Wild Safari 2017 Velociraptor and Coelophysis make them look like active animals, and I find their poses nice as well.

I hope that companies like CollectA and Safari will continue to make bipedal dinosaurs with or without bases respectively, so that people who do and don't want bases can both be happy.

[Halichoeres]

I'm mostly fine with some of my figures having bases and some not. It doesn't usually affect my decision to buy a figure. If all my theropods were un-based, there'd be a lot more of them toppling. If they all had bases, they'd take up more space (and some would still be toppling because CollectA has a sagging problem). As it is now, I can lean the un-based against quadrupeds or based figures and things are mostly pretty hunky-dory.

Removable bases are nice in theory, but Favorite theropods don't work well with their bases, and most Colorata theropods have pegs sticking out of their feet that make them pretty useless without their base (the feathered dinos set is an exception). I'm all about those clear rods, though.

[Bokisaurus]

I personally don't have issues with bases, in fact I would prefer a base and have the feet accurately proportioned than having a large, oversized feet. Same goes with the tripod pose.
Having a base gives opportunity to pose figures in a more interesting and active pose.
Base also help keep figures from falling all over the place. My two Carnegie figures, the Spino and Giga, both tripod pose, have issues with standing and warping of the legs. They both now look like they are sliding, with the feet curling outward!
The Favorite figures comes with removable base, however, take them out of the base, they can't stand on their own, so for me, it's pointless. The only time I would not want a base  is if I am using a figure for a diorama.
Also, when my figures go up on display, unless they are on the very front, any base are easy obscured by the other figures in the front row. I have also played with using the base on fire as a mini-diorama base.
One day I would like to show what I have done to spice up those otherwise plain bases with easy to do diorama, I find it really fun.

Any other elaborate base would increase the cost $ of the figure, so I can understand how keeping them to a minimum is more practical.
Anyway, I guess it all depends on personal preference in the end.
Cheers!

[Neosodon]

I dislike threads/polls about bases.  Each time they've been made, nothing good ever really seems to come out of them. 

Has there already been a poll on this question?

The point isn't to argue about weather they're good or not. It is just to see how popular they are. Companies probably watch this forum and polls like this could be helpful for them deciding to incorporate them or not.

[Sim]

Has there already been a poll on this question?

There has already been a poll about bases: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=3995.0

The point isn't to argue about weather they're good or not. It is just to see how popular they are. Companies probably watch this forum and polls like this could be helpful for them deciding to incorporate them or not.

I had a feeling this might be why this thread/poll was made.  Some people like bases on bipedal dinosaurs, other people dislike bases on bipedal dinosaurs.  Currently, between different companies bipedal dinosaurs are offered with and without bases.  Why try to change this?

[bmathison1972]

While I don't collect therapods or dinosaurs in general, I LOVE bases. Especially diorama-style ones with rocks, logs, plants. As most of you know, I collect primarily arthropods, and without bases most arthropods are made flat and 'sprawling' with their legs jutting straight out under their bodies. Bases help lift the figure and give it volume (and look cool, too  ).

And even though I don't collect dinosaurs or vertebrates, I still love them when they are on bases. For example, I love birds on twigs (although I know it drives stars bonkers at time ).

[Ravonium]

OK, guess it's time to state my opinion on the matter.


I do think that CollectA and Safari Ltd bases could do with a bit more effort put into them. I would definitely like to see those two companies adding plants or rocks to their bases, instead of their bases just being slabs of occasionally textured plastic with footprints on them. This being said, their bases are still better solutions than putting their figures in tripod poses.


I decided to vote "No real preference" because I don't buy figures on the basis that they have a base or lack of a base, since a majority of bases are not meant to add anything to the figure in terms of detail.

[stargatedalek]

While I don't collect therapods or dinosaurs in general, I LOVE bases. Especially diorama-style ones with rocks, logs, plants. As most of you know, I collect primarily arthropods, and without bases most arthropods are made flat and 'sprawling' with their legs jutting straight out under their bodies. Bases help lift the figure and give it volume (and look cool, too  ).

And even though I don't collect dinosaurs or vertebrates, I still love them when they are on bases. For example, I love birds on twigs (although I know it drives stars bonkers at time ).

If all bases were half as nice as most of the ones I've seen you show off it would never be an issue!

[Neosodon]

Has there already been a poll on this question?

There has already been a poll about bases: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=3995.0

Well the last poll is almost 3 years old. General opinion has definitely changed since then.

[Lanthanotus]

While I am a great fan of small diorama ensembles and therefor make bases for quite a few of my figures myself (even for quadruped figures) I generally like to buy unbased figures. However, as I also customize quite some of my figures I do not hesitate to either add a base of my liking or customize oversized feet to an apropriate level where possible (after all, I still could add abase afterwards ).

On the other hand I grew up with figures (mainly horses, comboys and the likes) that came with basic bases just because they could not stand up otherwise. I did not really like those simple bases, but knewing that none of those figures would stand right as I wanted without it, it was easy to accept. So today, a (permanent) base has no effect on my decision wether to buy a figure or not.

[Faelrin]

I like when bases are optional, mostly so I can inspect a figure without it being in the way. If a figure is to have a permanent base I would prefer it would be as minimal as possible (the two figures from the Safari Ltd Cambrian Life toob come to mind), so as to not take up too much display space where another figure could get crammed in. I do realize that for some species or poses, bases are necessary to achieve the look (without oversized feet), though even then I would still be concerned about warping on a figure's legs. On the other hand I do like bases that are well designed to look like a part of the creature's habitat. A lot of Rebor's bases do just this, or even the ones for the Beasts of the Mesozoic. I do get that could drive up production costs though, but if a figure must have a base then why not go for that? At the very least it would become more appealing then just a drab piece of plastic added.