PNSO: New for 2022

[SidB]

@CARN0TAURUS , your description is reminiscent of the approach Vitae took last year with their much smaller output -  a layered one. Don't know how that turned out for them, but as a consumer, I found it an attractive one.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

The Tsintaosaurus is the only Hadrosaur that is close enough to 1:35 scale, the others are much too large, but since the others aren't marketed as such that's fine.

[SRF]

The Tsintaosaurus is the only Hadrosaur that is close enough to 1:35 scale, the others are much too large, but since the others aren't marketed as such that's fine.

I don't have the Tsintaosaurus but as far as I know, it's more like 1:40 scale or even smaller. The Lambeosaurus is closer to 1:35 scale I think.

What doesn't make sense the most is that the Tsintaosaurus is the smallest of their Hadrosaurs, but also by far the most expensive.

[Flaffy]

[Stegotyranno420]

This is a much better quote than "you're in the wrong hobby"

[Gwangi]

This is a much better quote than "you're in the wrong hobby"

Agreed! Never mind that this hobby, more so than many, can be as cheap or expensive as you want it to be.

[CARN0TAURUS]

This is a much better quote than "you're in the wrong hobby"

Agreed! Never mind that this hobby, more so than many, can be as cheap or expensive as you want it to be.

@Gwangi

You can't forget about the kids tho.  Without a new generation of collectors this hobby dies.  I've seen it happen before in other hobbies.  I bet that even the forum members that spend a lot of money on this hobby today probably all started out collecting affordable dinosaur toys a some point.    I've been a military plastic modeler for 40 plus years and I remember going to shows in the 1970s, my brother was in a club later on I was too.   Back then I could buy an airplane kit for $2-3, right now a kid would have to scrounge up $50-60 bucks for the lower end new kits coming out.  Some kits are over $100!  So a lot of that culture is disappearing, it might still be going on in other parts of the world but in the US it's not what it once was.  It breaks your heart to see these events nowadays and there's hardly anyone there and nothing but old and middle age men walking around complaining about prices etc.  And the clubs have mostly disappeared, it's all very depressing.

I posted about this earlier in regards to PNSO and to their credit they do have a large mini dinosaur line.  Unfortunately most of those molds predate their current sculpt standards, some are nice but some need to be refreshed.  It would be nice for kids and for many of us interested in collecting smaller and smaller pieces to maybe get some fresh new releases in the mini line that perhaps mirror the releases of the standard lines.

[CARN0TAURUS]

@CARN0TAURUS , your description is reminiscent of the approach Vitae took last year with their much smaller output -  a layered one. Don't know how that turned out for them, but as a consumer, I found it an attractive one.

S @SidB
I'm not trying to nitpick because I'm really loving a lot of what PNSO is currently doing.  It's just confusing to me when,..I mean, they aren't using a higher grade of PVC materials on premium products, correct?  And in a few instances the standard line items are arguable painted just as good as some museum pieces, correct?  In addition there doesn't seem to be a size factor as in "we used more material to mold this one" type of situation.  So is it just the posters, cards, boxes, and pamphlets that justify the prices?  There's seems to be a whimsical approach to what is and what isn't a qualifying factor to being in the museum line that opens PNSO up to criticism and accusations of price gouging etc.  it's almost as if someone at PNSO is saying, "hey man we need to generate blank amount of capital to cover our next three molds, slap some posters in this one and call it a museum line piece to help recoup costs."  There honestly doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason behind some of these decisions.  By having a better paint alternate/premium option I think people would be more understanding of why they have to pay that extra $20-30 bucks.  You'd get a fancier, rarer, and therefore more exclusive piece in a sturdier more protected package.  At the same time you make all the figures more available to midrange buyers.  The people that are going to spend more are always going to be around.  But you're not going to get the person that spends less to buy the premium stuff reliably in this current system.  Maybe I'm dead wrong and I'm the only one on this forum that's not buying these museum line pieces.

[CARN0TAURUS]

@Flaffy
That is hilarious!   

But I think that there is nothing wrong with catering to everyone, and the super rich can and will pay for more exclusive content which helps to bring money into the hobby and that's a good thing.  But just as important is that child that can't afford to pay $70 dollars for a Wilson T-rex, in a some years they could be the big spender of tomorrow helping to keep the hobby alive.  PNSO is in position to cash in 10-15 years down the road by building customer and brand loyalty with the little ones today.  It's not unreasonable to expect that they would still be around in 15 years especially when considering the quality of their current products.

[Flaffy]

But I think that there is nothing wrong with catering to everyone, and the super rich can and will pay for more exclusive content which helps to bring money into the hobby and that's a good thing.  But just as important is that child that can't afford to pay $70 dollars for a Wilson T-rex, in a some years they could be the big spender of tomorrow helping to keep the hobby alive.  PNSO is in position to cash in 10-15 years down the road by building customer and brand loyalty with the little ones today.  It's not unreasonable to expect that they would still be around in 15 years especially when considering the quality of their current products.

Given how later runs of PNSO figures almost always decrease in quality, this statement can certainly be contested. Unlike other companies, which generally at least try to keep quality consistent between batches. Heck some even go out of their way to fix issues present in the first production run.

What good is making great figures now when 10-15 years down the line, the young collectors who can finally afford them are met with sloppily painted, half-arsed husks of the original? Maybe I'm just naïve and this practice is common in the figure industry, but it certainly leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Doesn't help that PNSO promotional images are often far superior to the actual product.

Imagine you're a kid, finally scraping enough pocket money to afford a long anticipated PNSO model. You're being advertised this absolute beaut:


But then end up getting this...

[CARN0TAURUS]

But I think that there is nothing wrong with catering to everyone, and the super rich can and will pay for more exclusive content which helps to bring money into the hobby and that's a good thing.  But just as important is that child that can't afford to pay $70 dollars for a Wilson T-rex, in a some years they could be the big spender of tomorrow helping to keep the hobby alive.  PNSO is in position to cash in 10-15 years down the road by building customer and brand loyalty with the little ones today.  It's not unreasonable to expect that they would still be around in 15 years especially when considering the quality of their current products.

Given how later runs of PNSO figures almost always decrease in quality, this statement can certainly be contested. Unlike other companies, which generally at least try to keep quality consistent between batches. Heck some even go out of their way to fix issues present in the first production run.

What good is making great figures now when 10-15 years down the line, the young collectors who now can finally afford them are met with sloppily painted, half-arsed husks of the original? Maybe I'm just naïve and this practice is common in the figure industry, but it certainly leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Doesn't help that PNSO promotional images are often far superior to the actual product.

I've always thought that promotional photos being better was a common thing with all companies?  When I was kid I'd buy airplane model kit and it was beautifully painted by a professional on the box art.  It took me one time to learn that mine wouldn't look that good, LOL.  As my skills improved tho later on I was doing alright.  I never took it as false advertisement, I always seen it as a company wanting to put their product in the best light possible.  I'm probably wrong tho.  The way I've always interpreted the promotional photo paint work is that it allows folks to see the true potential of the sculpts and I think that's a good thing because the sculpts are not beefed up for the pictures to makemthem look better, you're going to get the same great sculpt but without someone that has an entire day to work on it paint wise.  The promotional paint deal doesn't bother me as most people because I realize the folks working on the factory have to wip these things out quickly.  On the other hand, Imhave been critical of poorly executed decision of how the items are to be painted in the assembly lines.  A lot of times I see these companies trying too hard and forgetting that often times with paint work, less is more.

[CARN0TAURUS]

@Flaffy

I responded before I saw your images.  Looking at your photos I wonder if the promotional pictures had looked exactly like the one you're holding in your hand, would you still have bought it?  I imagine you ask yourself the same exact thing? 

And here's what I think, I think you would have still bought it and you'd be very happy with it because it would look like the box and it's still head and shoulders above what most companies are producing especially at $38.99.

So it's all a matter of perspective for you because you still own a beautiful model that is IMO beautifully painted and you took those photos in bad light with your mobile phone.

[Kapitaenosavrvs]

Oof. I had to walk over to my shelf and have a look at my Version of the Essien 2.0... It was cheaper then and the Paintjob looks like from another world, compared to this one. That is absolutely not okay.

@CARN0TAURUS

I do not think this is meant here. Everyone is well aware of the professional Paintwork on Promopictures. But this Spinosaurus 2.0 did have a quite good paintapplication, when it came out. Not like in the Promo, but that is not what is meant here, i guess. Correct me please if i am wrong. But the Figures Paint app in the Picture looks like a Rip off from their actual Product, that came out in November/December 2020(is it that long ago already? Wow.)

EDIT: Looks like we both had a bad timing :D

[CARN0TAURUS]

Oof. I had to walk over to my shelf and have a look at my Version of the Essien 2.0... It was cheaper then and the Paintjob looks like from another world, compared to this one. That is absolutely not okay.

@CARN0TAURUS

I do not think this is meant here. Everyone is well aware of the professional Paintwork on Promopictures. But this Spinosaurus 2.0 did have a quite good paintapplication, when it came out. Not like in the Promo, but that is not what is meant here, i guess. Correct me please if i am wrong. But the Figures Paint app in the Picture looks like a Rip off from their actual Product, that came out in November/December 2020(is it that long ago already? Wow.)

EDIT: Looks like we both had a bad timing

I skipped the Essien so I'm not familiar with the dropoff from one production run to another.  I apologize because I honestly don't know.  I'm not trying to be insensitive.  Certainly even if the company doesn't make production versions that look like the promotional images, at least they should strive to be consistent from production run to production run.  I say that because I don't know the challenges of having to reboot a factory for a second run.  I know that in my own personal experience in modeling sometimes even the paints that you normally buy from a manufacturer can differ from one batch to the next.  So that sea grey I used on my airplane this time might not look exactly the same as the sea grey I use on my next model.  I'm not the most knowledgeable when it comes to paint but from my modeling experience I understand how difficult it can be to match paint hues from one batch to another.

[Flaffy]

@Flaffy

I responded before I saw your images.  Looking at your photos I wonder if the promotional pictures had looked exactly like the one you're holding in your hand, would you still have bought it?  I imagine you ask yourself the same exact thing? 

And here's what I think, I think you would have still bought it and you'd be very happy with it because it would look like the box and it's still head and shoulders above what most companies are producing especially at $38.99.

So it's all a matter of perspective for you because you still own a beautiful model that is IMO beautifully painted and you took those photos in bad light with your mobile phone.

That's not my pic, nor my model, though I do admit that the picture quality is not the best. But the main point is the in-hand model is a far cry from what people received in the first production runs. Another common example would be Sede the Ankylosaurus, and there's plenty of clear comparison pictures of first vs later production runs of that particular figure. Attached below is an in-hand picture of Eissen 2.0 from the first production run, from the DTB. Notice the intricate patterning on the body is absent/heavily-obscured on the ones from later batches.


I definitely wouldn't have spent $40 on a model that looked like that (figures from a later batch), even if it matched up with the promotional pictures. I propose the contrary: IF the promotional pictures looked as sloppy as the in-hand pics below, I'd certainly question PNSO's decision to price the model at $40; when it could just as easily be a $25-$30 model with that amount of effort (or lack thereof). I remember reading somewhere that the paint app takes up a significant portion of a figure's production budget? I could be wrong though.

I have plenty of better things to spend my money on given the sheer amount of quality dinosaur models on the market now. Not sure how you think you can accurately predict how I choose to spend my money. What you consider is acceptable may not be applicable to what I think is acceptable. PNSO is charging premium prices for their premium figures, and I expect the quality of their figures to match the price.

[Strepsodus]

This is what I like about Safari. Safari figures always look the same (or even better) in hand as they do in their promotional image because they don't use a prototype or a doctored image. PNSO often does stuff like this to bump up the price tag (and even add models to the "1:35 Museum Line" just to charge a higher price. It feels like their pandering to people who usually collect expensive resin models.

[Flaffy]

I skipped the Essien so I'm not familiar with the dropoff from one production run to another.  I apologize because I honestly don't know.  I'm not trying to be insensitive.  Certainly even if the company doesn't make production versions that look like the promotional images, at least they should strive to be consistent from production run to production run.  I say that because I don't know the challenges of having to reboot a factory for a second run.  I know that in my own personal experience in modeling sometimes even the paints that you normally buy from a manufacturer can differ from one batch to the next.  So that sea grey I used on my airplane this time might not look exactly the same as the sea grey I use on my next model.  I'm not the most knowledgeable when it comes to paint but from my modeling experience I understand how difficult it can be to match paint hues from one batch to another.

Ah that explains things. Yeah I would consider Eissen 2.0 to be one of those rare PNSO figures to match close-enough to the expectations set by the promo pics. While a drop off in quality is inevitable, it's certainly not egregious. The Parasaurolophus also stands as a shining example of what PNSO can achieve, where the in-hand model replicates the promo pics to near perfection, while not having silly prices like the Tsintaosaurus.

What's happening with PNSO is far more complicated than simple paint hues not matching up. It's the quality of how paint itself is used and applied that's concerning. E.g. Sede the Ankylosaurus; later runs are significantly more washed-out and grey than the first run. A couple shades of colour here and there are either entirely absent or heavily obscured by a sloppy grey coat of paint.

In contrast, a positive example for second production runs matching the quality of the initial batch would be Beasts of the Mesozoic. From what I've seen, the second batch of raptor figures closely matches the first, bar some changes made by David himself to more accurately depict what's seen on the package art. David cares deeply about what he produces, and rightfully so charges a premium on his figures for his efforts. In turn, customers can expect to receive premium quality products. Whether you're a fan of his fantastical paint schemes or not, I don't think anyone can deny that David puts immense amounts of time and effort into ensuring that his final products matches closely with the painted prototypes.

If a small company like Beasts of the Mesozoic can ensure paint quality is maintained, I don't see how PNSO, a notably larger company can't do the same.

[SenSx]

This is a classic sadly...
It happened to me with the Nanmu Spinosaurus Supplanter.
The white stripes are a lot less visible on mine, and the sail does not have any blue whatsoever on it, so that my model is less vibrant and darker.
I know Rebor did this as well with their King T-Rex, second production batch had a decrease in quality.
And of course, PNSO.

So yea it is always better to grap the figure immediately at release if you really want it.
There are exceptions, for exemple the W-Dragon Spinosaurus had a better paint job on a later production batch.

[Concavenator]

@Flaffy I saw that image of the newer wave of the PNSO Spino in baidu, and I was kinda shocked.

I'm generally quite tolerant with paint schemes on figures, as long as they're not disastrous, I'm fine. But that is disastrous. If I received that Spinosaurus, I would want to return it, it's, quite frankly, an insult to the customer who paid for it.

So yea it is always better to grap the figure immediately at release if you really want it.

If you can, undoubtely. But the thing is, if you have a limited budget, maybe you'd prefer to see what the company's releases throughout a certain amount of time are. If X company releases Y model and you like it, but then releases Z model which you like more and had wished to get instead, that could annoy you. This might not be so frustrating on this scale, but imagine paying 5800 $ for the PNSO bronze Borealopelta for then to PNSO to reveal another statue you would have preferred to get. This would be a tragedy!

@CARN0TAURUS , your description is reminiscent of the approach Vitae took last year with their much smaller output -  a layered one. Don't know how that turned out for them, but as a consumer, I found it an attractive one.

I miss Vitae too. Would love to see them releasing stuff again, but their latest figures were released in late 2020, so it's been a while. Anyone knows if they're still active as a company? Has anyone tried contacting them recently?

[SRF]

I always interpreted the differences between the Museum Line and the "standard" line like this: the Museum line was there for the best known, mostly larger species, like they did with their initial releases that included bases (T. Rex, Triceratops, Spinosaurus, Giganotosaurus etc.). With the release of Winter Wilson, they've seen to abandon the bases on their Museum Line figures, but the cool thing about that model is that it's based on a specific specimen displayed in an actual museum. So after the release of Winter Wilson, I thought the Museum Line would be the line in which PNSO releases figures based on popular museum mounts. And yes, the same does apply to the new Triceratops and the Stegosaurus, which to me validates that these figures actually "belong" in a "Museum" line, but it doesn't apply to all their figures in this line anymore.

I'm not sure if the Tsintaosaurus is based on a certain specimen. What baffles me the most is that the Tsintaosaurus doesn't seem to be in the advertised 1:35 scale, but even smaller, which makes it more into scale with the newer release of the Mamenchisaurus. I'm not sure if the Iguanodon is based on a specific specimen but the genus could well "qualify" for the Museum Line in my eyes. So does the Parasaurolophus, which has traits of the holotype specimen which actually would make it a contender to be in the museum line in my eyes. The figure is good enough for it, but I'm glad I've got it for the price I've paid for it of course.

Of course other figures in the Prehistoric Animal models line are based on actual specimens as well, but that's mostly we only have one specimen or only fragmentary remains of the animal (i.e. Carnotaurus, Qianzhousaurus, Carcharodontosaurus to name a few). The Allosaurus isn't based on a specific specimen and that is a missed opportunity in my eyes, but it makes it logical to me that despite the fact it's a very popular genus, it's released in the Prehistoric Animal models line.

To add to what I wrote yesterday: since the Museum Line is more expensive, I do of course expect more value for money from this line. A base or something extra (like a baby that came with the Stegosaurus, or the skull that came with the Triceratops) is a nice addition. I do agree however that this (combined with a bunch of posters) doesn't necessarily justify the big price difference that we see now. The extra research and sculpting work that should be invested by PNSO in a Museum Line figure however does justify a small price difference in my eyes.