PNSO: New for 2022

[Over9K]

I love him! why does deinocheirus always remind me of Big Bird? 

about PNSO's theropods, I really like them but I do think they tend to look a bit "samey". I think its b/c of how similar their color schemes tend to be.

See, I looked at this and thought "so that's what the child of Big Bird and Snufflupagus would look like."

[JohannesB]

That's a rather thick coat of fluff. Is there any reason (or evidence) for that (except as a convention in paleoart these days)? Genuinely curious.

http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2019/10/megafuzz-under-microscope-how-credible.html?m=1

Here's an interesting article on the matter, you might like it.

Yes, that is interesting. I was also thinking about how T. rex has "lost" its feathers/fluff recently, and that the case against fluff on a big animal like Deinocheirus is stronger than a case for it, for as far as I understand. In any case, this PNSO model is beautiful. I will just be waiting a little while before I acquire ;-)

[Lynx]

I also noticed the Cherius has an articulated jaw, opinions on it?

I don't mind, but I'm afraid with a jaw that small and thin it could potentially break pretty easily.

Maybe with in-hand pictures it won't look that way, but yknow.

[Dan]

Retail pricing has been announced by the manufacturer. I also had some requests to share this here:

Enter code 'dtfmember" for $6.00 off PNSO Deinocheirus
DansDinosaurs.com
https://stores.dansdinosaurs.com/pnso/
Expires 9/26

[Bread]

I also noticed the Cherius has an articulated jaw, opinions on it?

I don't mind, but I'm afraid with a jaw that small and thin it could potentially break pretty easily.

Maybe with in-hand pictures it won't look that way, but yknow.

PNSO have come a long way with their articulated jaws. I'd argue they are the best company to perfect these. So I wouldn't worry. It does however offer great photography with this figure.

I already have ideas on repaints of this one!!!

[Faelrin]

Price isn't too bad considering its size (nearly a foot long and half a foot tall). Just hope the paint apps don't disappoint. That would also help justify the price if it is nearly as elaborate as in the promo pics.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

I'm loving that Deinocheirus, it's in my opinion the most interesting theropod they've done in a while, and it looks gorgeous too. I do plan to replace the CollectA with this, though I do hope it isn't larger than 1:30 scale. It may need support too, but I love this gorgeous fluffy beast. And the colours, ahh.

[Faelrin]

Played with a scale calculator today. Taking the model's measurement of 29.2 cm, and the estimated measurement for the animal at 11m gives it a scale of about 1:37-1:38, whereas the longer estimate of 11.5 gives it a scale of about 1:39. So this should fit snuggly alongside those in the 1:35-1:40 scale range. That said I do wonder what the scale of the head will give it, which would probably be a more accurate way to get the scale (which looks appropriately proportioned).

Thinking about it more I kind of want to get the chonky Tarbosaurus now too to display alongside this one.

[Leyster]

@JohannesB Tyrannosaurus has not lost its feathering. The skin impressions come for areas which would be scaly anyway (ie. underside) or are of dubious nature (so they might not be scales at all, but skin akin that of a plucked chicken). All these specimens hail from arid settings so the corpse was mummified before fossilizing, so feathers could not have fossilized were they even there. ATM the whole "Tyrannosaurus skin thing" is "we don't know", not "Tyrannosaurus scaly".

Also Witton's blogpost is not so relevant since it was found that Fariña's calculations on sloths were erroneous (which explains some really weird results of that paper, like the thermal neutral zone of Mylodon). If you remove that from the equation (and keep in mind that dinosaurs too had likely different metabolic rates than mammal) Witton's results are pretty shaken.

@Falerin: keep in mind that dinosaur lenght is not measured in a straight line. You'd need to measure it along vertebra centra, in this case stretching the neck horizontally (it's a more complex matter, but I'm semplyfiying). So probably the scale is higher than your extimate, more along 1:30-1:35.

[bmathison1972]

Stunningly beautiful Deinocheirus, but I am content with the Safari version

[Sim]

I don't think skin impressions of Tyrannosaurus are dubious.  They all show detail very well, and the "plucked chicken skin" thing seems to be a meme more than an accurate description, since it keeps getting mentioned yet the skin impressions of Tyrannosaurus don't look like it.  I'm not convinced feathers wouldn't be preserved due to an arid environment, wouldn't scales or skin also not be preserved if that were true?  Also the skin impressions of Tyrannosaurus don't show any follicles for feathers.

[stargatedalek]

I don't think skin impressions of Tyrannosaurus are dubious.  They all show detail very well, and the "plucked chicken skin" thing seems to be a meme more than an accurate description, since it keeps getting mentioned yet the skin impressions of Tyrannosaurus don't look like it.  I'm not convinced feathers wouldn't be preserved due to an arid environment, wouldn't scales or skin also not be preserved if that were true?  Also the skin impressions of Tyrannosaurus don't show any follicles for feathers.

Having seen them they certainly don't look like anything I've ever seen from scales. "Plucked chicken skin" is a pretty silly comparison, but it's also a misrepresentation of what people have been saying. It looks like bald bird skin, not "plucked" skin.

Even compared to a best case scenario, a section of scales varying in size and shape, the Tyrannosaurus impressions are completely pattern-less and decidedly inconsistent with any example of scales. Could this be cornified skin? Possibly, but that's an odd feature to be present on the midsection of an animals body, and it still wouldn't be scales.

Compare here the Tyrannosaurus impressions to a vulture, and a section of lizard scales with as much variation in size as I could find. Even giving them the best possible chance these do not resemble scales.

Spoiler

[close]

There are a number of reasons skin might preserve without feathers. For that matter, we only have small portions of the skin, why didn't all of it preserve? Because that's just not very likely. There are a whole host of taphonomic processes that can damage or remove feathers but leave skin behind. Add to that this was an animal that likely had large sections of bald regions on its body even in the highest amounts of realistically proposed feathers, and the odds are actually pretty good you'd get skin without feathers preserved.

[Faelrin]

L @Leyster Yes I'm aware of that but wasn't sure how much room it should have. That's why I mentioned a more accurate estimate might be obtained from comparing the size of the head on the figure to the actual fossil remains. Unfortunately will need to wait until the figure goes up for sale and ends up in people's hands to know what that will be.

And while I have no dog in this race as far as a feathered or not feathered Deinocheirus goes, but I do want to point out that the model does seem to have a mostly featherless neck (only the backside has feathers), and bald underarms, belly, underside of the tail, and legs like one would see on an ostrich. I think that is a plausible balance between the two takes. Deinocheirus also has remains of a potential pygostyle, or attachment point for feathers on its tail, and some of its more derived relatives have direct evidence of feathers (such as numerous Ornithomimus specimens).

[EmperorDinobot]

I take it this figure is a hit with y'all, yes?


I'm closer to opening up a PNSO shelf, but I think it will be outside of Jurassic Park. Nothing else fits in there.

[Leyster]

@Sim it's not a meme. Lots of paleontologists expressed their doubts in them being scales. Also there are doubts if the neck patch comes from the neck at all (given the position of the specimen)... which would leave no scaly areas outside of the underside. Also the supposed "Tarbosaurus chest skin", another argument often used since it's quite a big patch, might not be Tarbosaurus at all.

I'm not convinced feathers wouldn't be preserved due to an arid environment, wouldn't scales or skin also not be preserved if that were true?

We have gulls fossilized in their guano. Scaly legs and no feathers. Also we have a supposedly "naked" impressions from Confuciusornis (which was, withouyt any doubt, feathered) suspiciously similar to the "Tyrannosaurus scales".

Also the skin impressions of Tyrannosaurus don't show any follicles for feathers.

See here.

[SidB]

Seems that Safari shouldn't give up on their feathered T-rex just yet.

[Bread]

Seems that Safari shouldn't give up on their feathered T-rex just yet.

Ehhh... It's a little dated. In terms of feathering, I doubt the animal in real life would be covered to that extent.

With L @Leyster added link https://twitter.com/deak_michael/status/1539271269534912515

Michael Deak's comparison of the barn owl displaying the "fuzz to grow out of the scale itself" seems the most likely scenario to me, if Tyrannosaurus really had both scales and feathers.

So with the giant nasal cavities of Tyrannosaurus, which is composed of blood vessel clusters, does this not display signs of large therapods using a mammal like pant mechanism to cool them down?

Please note that I am not saying they are related to mammals. This is more of a question about information I've seen/heard about.

Also, with the pant like mechanism mentioned, if true, gives more of a reason for a fully feathered Deinocheirus since it lacks the large sinuses compared to larger therapods.

[SidB]

Seems that Safari shouldn't give up on their feathered T-rex just yet.

Ehhh... It's a little dated. In terms of feathering, I doubt the animal in real life would be covered to that extent.

With L @Leyster added link https://twitter.com/deak_michael/status/1539271269534912515

Michael Deak's comparison of the barn owl displaying the "fuzz to grow out of the scale itself" seems the most likely scenario to me, if Tyrannosaurus really had both scales and feathers.

So with the giant nasal cavities of Tyrannosaurus, which is composed of blood vessel clusters, does this not display signs of large therapods using a mammal like pant mechanism to cool them down?

Please note that I am not saying they are related to mammals. This is more of a question about information I've seen/heard about.

Also, with the pant like mechanism mentioned, if true, gives more of a reason for a fully feathered Deinocheirus since it lacks the large sinuses compared to larger therapods.

I agree with you that the extent of the Safari rex's feathering is likely excessive, assuming that it was feathered. My supposition was rather along the line that I doubt that it would be in their financial interests at this point to scrap Watson's existing sculpt for another with somewhat less feathers. After all, the situation seems to be quite fluid.

[Sim]

Having seen them they certainly don't look like anything I've ever seen from scales. "Plucked chicken skin" is a pretty silly comparison, but it's also a misrepresentation of what people have been saying. It looks like bald bird skin, not "plucked" skin.

It's not a misrepresentation, people have been saying Tyrannosaurus skin impressions look like plucked chicken skin.  Leyster said it in their post which I was responding to.

Even compared to a best case scenario, a section of scales varying in size and shape, the Tyrannosaurus impressions are completely pattern-less and decidedly inconsistent with any example of scales. Could this be cornified skin? Possibly, but that's an odd feature to be present on the midsection of an animals body, and it still wouldn't be scales.

Compare here the Tyrannosaurus impressions to a vulture, and a section of lizard scales with as much variation in size as I could find. Even giving them the best possible chance these do not resemble scales.

Firstly, the Tyrannosaurus skin doesn't look like that vulture's skin.  The vulture skin has continuous elongated sections of bundled skin, the Tyrannosaurus skin doesn't have that.  Secondly, not all scales are the same.  The variation seen on the Tyrannosaurus skin is strikingly similar to the scales on a dodo's hindlimb:
  (Image source)

And while I have no dog in this race as far as a feathered or not feathered Deinocheirus goes, but I do want to point out that the model does seem to have a mostly featherless neck (only the backside has feathers), and bald underarms, belly, underside of the tail, and legs like one would see on an ostrich. I think that is a plausible balance between the two takes. Deinocheirus also has remains of a potential pygostyle, or attachment point for feathers on its tail, and some of its more derived relatives have direct evidence of feathers (such as numerous Ornithomimus specimens).

The pygostyle of Deinocheirus isn't necessarily an attachment point for feathers.  There's a paper on how the pygostyle of Beipiaosaurus isn't an attachment point for feathers and plesiosaurs have pygostyles too and no-one thinks they have feathers.  (Scaly plesiosaur skin has been found.)

@Sim it's not a meme. Lots of paleontologists expressed their doubts in them being scales. Also there are doubts if the neck patch comes from the neck at all (given the position of the specimen)... which would leave no scaly areas outside of the underside.

I'm not questioning that there are palaeontologists who think the skin isn't scales.  I'm putting forward that the skin doesn't look like plucked chicken skin, something that people keep repeating.  What do you mean with regards to the position of the specimen?  Also it's not true that there would be no other scaly areas except from the underside, there is a patch from the top of the pelvis.

We have gulls fossilized in their guano. Scaly legs and no feathers. Also we have a supposedly "naked" impressions from Confuciusornis (which was, withouyt any doubt, feathered) suspiciously similar to the "Tyrannosaurus scales".

What do you mean when you say "in their guano"?  The impression from Confuciusornis is just microscopic skin cells.  Isn't it what one would expect skin to look like under a microscope?  Also, the Tyrannosaurus skin detail is much larger and can be seen with the unaided eye.  Are you suggesting Tyrannosaurus's skin cells are that big?

Also the skin impressions of Tyrannosaurus don't show any follicles for feathers.

See here.

I don't see the things that user points out.  This also applies to the "scales" of Yutyrannus.  Additionally, the feathers seem to come out of bare skin on the owl, the "scales" with feathers inside look different to the scales right above them.

As for the Safari 2017 Tyrannosaurus, I'll only say that parts of its face which have feathers are on areas of a real Tyrannosaurus where there are osteological correlates for scales and a cornified sheath.  Source is Mark Witton's blog post here: http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2018/01/did-tyrannosaurs-smile-like-crocodiles.html

[Lynx]

Is this figure museum line or not? Might not get it if that is the case, too much paper and I won't watch the videos.