Safari Ltd - New for 2022

[Stegotyranno420]

Of course not everything is going to interest every person, but "fantasy" is really hyperbolic here. I get that from time to time an animal known from poor remains turns out to be significantly different from what people predicted, like Deinocheirus, but that's the exception, not the rule. There are a couple of different basic flavors of titanosaur skulls, they're small relative to the overall body so affect the overall appearance in a relatively modest way, and for animals of this size it's just so rare to find them articulated because of preservation bias that I don't think it makes sense to hold them to the same standard as animals that can easily preserve whole-body specimens.

Exactly, spot on.

As for the whole Shane leaving thing, I think we might need a new rule on this specific thing.
I do have my criticisms and all, but in recent times, I realized how hard it is for everyone in the company to produce it. And I know everyone has said this before, but it's sad and embarrassing seeing a member who wanted to be apart of our community just abused for his knowledge, bombarded by questions and negativity.

As for the figure, it is a beautiful figure, and while my dream of a colosal sauropod isn't fulfilled, I'm fine as there's always eofauna.

[Shane]

Exactly, spot on.

As for the whole Shane leaving thing, I think we might need a new rule on this specific thing.
I do have my criticisms and all, but in recent times, I realized how hard it is for everyone in the company to produce it. And I know everyone has said this before, but it's sad and embarrassing seeing a member who wanted to be apart of our community just abused for his knowledge, bombarded by questions and negativity.

As for the figure, it is a beautiful figure, and while my dream of a colosal sauropod isn't fulfilled, I'm fine as there's always eofauna.

I'm not "leaving" I'm just choosing to be a less active voice here (I swear, I am really doing it this time).

For the record, I don't think there should be a rule about how a company's figures can be discussed here. Real unfiltered opinions are valuable and part of the whole thing is, I don't want them to be tempered on my account.

No one has been negative toward me, specifically. It's not even about negativity toward the figure; that's fine, people like or don't like things on their own terms.

When I first stepped into Safari related threads, it was to do damage control because there was a general "Safari is doomed" atmosphere. Now there is a similar "this is it?" atmosphere from some folks, and that's what I'm mainly speaking toward. It's the realization that nothing I can say or do will change certain minds.

So it's probably better - at this time - to just let you guys discuss it all freely without me butting in. No need to make it any more dramatic than that.

Safari will continue to be interested in the thoughts and feedback from members of this forum, whether or not you're talking to me directly, I promise. Nobody's being "scared away".

*smoke bomb*

[Halichoeres]

Of course not everything is going to interest every person, but "fantasy" is really hyperbolic here. I get that from time to time an animal known from poor remains turns out to be significantly different from what people predicted, like Deinocheirus, but that's the exception, not the rule. There are a couple of different basic flavors of titanosaur skulls, they're small relative to the overall body so affect the overall appearance in a relatively modest way, and for animals of this size it's just so rare to find them articulated because of preservation bias that I don't think it makes sense to hold them to the same standard as animals that can easily preserve whole-body specimens.

Put another way...

"All brontosauruses are thin at one end, much, much thicker in the middle and then thin again at the far end." --Ann Elk

Lol thank you for reminding me of that sketch.

[TaranUlas]

Hey folks, what did I mi-

Oh.

So I have my thoughts on the Patagotitan, but I think it's important to address some things that I just find bizarre.

Safari figures have always, ALWAYS, looked worse in the promotional white pics than they do in person or in more personal pics and reviews. We went through this in 2020 with everyone thinking that they initially looked like bad kid toys and then when the more detailed pics came out, it was blatantly obvious that there was still a lot of detail there. This figure is likely to not be an exception and it seems silly to me for people to assume that we are seeing the best detailed pics of it in these promo pics. I would wait until more personal pics and reviews come out before making decisions about it.

Also for anyone complaining about the size of the Patagotitan compared to the Amargasaurus... First of all, do you own the Amargasaurus figure? I do and this blasted thing is one of the longest figures in my collection at 16.1 inches. A Patagotitan, at 102 feet in length, in scale with that Amargasaurus figure would be 68 inches or 5 and a half feet in that pose at its smallest (If you go for the 121 length, it's 80 inches or 6 and a half feet.) I don't need to say anything further on that idea. Second of all, it's still a 15 inch long sauropod figure and takes a solid 3rd for longest sauropod in Safari's products with only the Amargasaurus and the Diplodocus beating it. Would I have liked it bigger? Yes. To be frank though, I also have to consider basic things like shelf space. A 34 inch or 41 inch long Sauropod figure (The size at 1:35 length wise for Patagotitan) sounds fun, but the majority of us probably don't have that much room for such a figure. Plus in addition, it would likely be a very expensive figure that wouldn't sell too terribly well for Safari. At the end of the day, from a smaller toy company, this is probably amongst the biggest they can physically make it while still being profitable.

Personally I like the figure. It's not my favorite figure to be revealed this year, but it's a solid enough Sauropod figure and quite frankly it's of a Sauropod that I don't see getting too many figures precisely because it is so big. As long as it has Safari's typical detail on it (Which even a brief glance at the photos on the site show that it likely does), I can definitely see myself enjoying this figure.

[Flaffy]

Also for anyone complaining about the size of the Patagotitan compared to the Amargasaurus...

Can't speak for others, but I certainly wasn't expecting it to scale with the humongous Amargasaurus. That figure is an outlier, even among sauropod figures.
I just wanted it to match the size of the 2019 Camarasaurus (not length, but body size). I feel like the 2019 Camarasaurus strikes the goldilocks zone for sauropod figures. Not too large where it'll hog what little remains of my shelf space; but not too small so that it'll have some nice bulk and shelf presence, along with affording the sculptor more physical space to work-in finer details.

For comparison: Safari Camarasaurus with Carnegie Brachiosaurus, so the 2019 Camarasaurus is essentially a "step down" in the size department.

As to the fourth toenail, is this a situation like the PNSO Amargasaurus, where the claws weren't actually sculpted, but someone at the factory decided to paint them on anyway?

@Halichoeres  That's what I was thinking too. The first 3 digits look to be properly curved outwards like the 2019 Camarasaurus, can't tell with the fourth digit however considering the low resolution of the picture. Once in-hand pics or reviews come out, we'll find out.

[SidB]

Exactly, spot on.

As for the whole Shane leaving thing, I think we might need a new rule on this specific thing.
I do have my criticisms and all, but in recent times, I realized how hard it is for everyone in the company to produce it. And I know everyone has said this before, but it's sad and embarrassing seeing a member who wanted to be apart of our community just abused for his knowledge, bombarded by questions and negativity.

As for the figure, it is a beautiful figure, and while my dream of a colosal sauropod isn't fulfilled, I'm fine as there's always eofauna.

I'm not "leaving" I'm just choosing to be a less active voice here (I swear, I am really doing it this time).

For the record, I don't think there should be a rule about how a company's figures can be discussed here. Real unfiltered opinions are valuable and part of the whole thing is, I don't want them to be tempered on my account.

No one has been negative toward me, specifically. It's not even about negativity toward the figure; that's fine, people like or don't like things on their own terms.

When I first stepped into Safari related threads, it was to do damage control because there was a general "Safari is doomed" atmosphere. Now there is a similar "this is it?" atmosphere from some folks, and that's what I'm mainly speaking toward. It's the realization that nothing I can say or do will change certain minds.

So it's probably better - at this time - to just let you guys discuss it all freely without me butting in. No need to make it any more dramatic than that.

Safari will continue to be interested in the thoughts and feedback from members of this forum, whether or not you're talking to me directly, I promise. Nobody's being "scared away".

*smoke bomb*

To address this issue and specifically @Stegotyranno420 's idea of a rule, I 'd like to share the following, briefly. The concern, IMO, is not so much the rough cut and thrust that goes on in many new product threads as people exchange their often very strong opinions. A certain passion and energy is unavoidable and even welcome, with the exception of any individual who is habitually rude and unnecessarily self-opinionated to the point of damaging the interests of the community. We al know who these are (very few, fortunately) and we usually made allowances for their temperments. No, a certain argumentativeness and dismissiveness is not really the problem, since the community as a whole can and does handle that okay.
The concern becomes a problem when we have a special visitor or guest, if you will, such as Shane (for Safari) the late Dan Lorusso or Doug Watson as prominent paleoartists. Do we want such visitors/ members on the Forum. OF COURSE WE DO! Obviously I'm implying that for that to be a possibility, a certain (probably unwritten) code of behavior is necessary. This is commonsensical. It's one thing when I crudely criticize a product in the absence of the artist or manufacturer's representative, totally another when it's done IN THEIR PRESENCE. Would I insult a guest to my home in my home? Of course not, unless I was a boor or fool. But that's what has  (again) just happened here: serious disrespect for the rep, little sense that we are privileged (not entitled) to have him in our midst. @suspsy was properly justified in calling us out on this account.

Shame on us for for TOLERATING this behavior yet again. I don't think that a rule would necessarily work, but really, the moderators could be a more proactive in attending to this type of rudeness. I know that it's impossible to patrol every thread, but this problem seems to assert itself on the new product threads in particular, so these need special attention. I'm not saying that we need to be hyper-nice, just that we need to show proper respect. I  know that the vast majority of members do and are, but the concern, in this limited, particular circumstance is to exert a certain discipline on those who treat special guests as if they didn't matter at all. They do and something needs to be in place, otherwise this will continue to happen and we will continue to lose the participation of these unique people. It diminishes us as a community, and undermines our collective integrity.

[Shonisaurus]

Honestly, the patagotitan together with the amargasaurus looks magnificent! Outstanding figure that identifies the species one hundred percent. The size is decent and acceptable. The era of giant solid PVC sauropod dinosaurs is over. If they made a gigantic sauropod out of solid PVC or even vinyl from PNSO's huanghetitan-type Patagonian it would be the downfall of the company and no DTF member would want that, right? At least as far as I am concerned, not as Suspsy said in a masterful way.

I have large figures in mind, I even think they are made of solid PVC like the iToy paraceratherium and in this case I would not put my hand in the fire if said figure (magnificent) could mean the bankruptcy of said company because it represents a commercial risk (little known prehistoric animal or rather little loved by children and even collectors) and economical at the same time for the amortization of production costs.

On the other hand, the amargasaurus from Safari is one of my favorite figures. In its day, horrible things were said about it because it had no lips, but in my case it is a well-modeled figure whose painting details are outstanding, on the other hand, the camarasaurus from Safari it gives a thousand turns to its counterpart in Safari / Carnegie is more scientific, better modeled and better painted.

Regarding my opinion of the malawisaurus, it is only a constructive opinion, but it does not underestimate in any way the brilliant work of painting of that unique figure in the toy dinosaur market and that, without a doubt, has a sculpture that few scientific dinosaur companies can to match (I think of Collecta, PNSO or Eofauna) and on the other hand I am a lucky DTF member in this case to have it on my shelves like so many other DTF members, I am aware that a high quality repaint would mean a rise in prices and costs of said product and only high-end dinosaur companies such as resin dinosaur companies like Sideshow for example can venture to do so.

I am also in favor of moderating negative comments to a certain company and to members of those companies such as Shane, Doug Watson, Rebor or any other, these commercial members and sculptors represent an enrichment of the DTF and provided that constructive criticism does not exceed one negativity that removes the denomination of constructive should be reason to call attention to a member of DTF among which I include myself.

Going to the point of the thread of Safari 2022, that Patagotitan sculpture looks very good and is a figure of the outstanding invoice of Safari and I am glad that this year many more figures of dinosaurs will be made and hopefully of other prehistoric animals.

[KrazyKaprosuchus]

Exactly, spot on.

As for the whole Shane leaving thing, I think we might need a new rule on this specific thing.
I do have my criticisms and all, but in recent times, I realized how hard it is for everyone in the company to produce it. And I know everyone has said this before, but it's sad and embarrassing seeing a member who wanted to be apart of our community just abused for his knowledge, bombarded by questions and negativity.

As for the figure, it is a beautiful figure, and while my dream of a colosal sauropod isn't fulfilled, I'm fine as there's always eofauna.

I'm not "leaving" I'm just choosing to be a less active voice here (I swear, I am really doing it this time).

For the record, I don't think there should be a rule about how a company's figures can be discussed here. Real unfiltered opinions are valuable and part of the whole thing is, I don't want them to be tempered on my account.

No one has been negative toward me, specifically. It's not even about negativity toward the figure; that's fine, people like or don't like things on their own terms.

When I first stepped into Safari related threads, it was to do damage control because there was a general "Safari is doomed" atmosphere. Now there is a similar "this is it?" atmosphere from some folks, and that's what I'm mainly speaking toward. It's the realization that nothing I can say or do will change certain minds.

So it's probably better - at this time - to just let you guys discuss it all freely without me butting in. No need to make it any more dramatic than that.

Safari will continue to be interested in the thoughts and feedback from members of this forum, whether or not you're talking to me directly, I promise. Nobody's being "scared away".

*smoke bomb*

Thanks for saying this, Shane. It was generally feeling like everyone was shaming the people who DARE have problems with the figure for a bit there. I was probably a tad too negative with my thoughts though, as I really don't think it is an awful figure, just not to my liking.

Thanks for posting here though, I really do appreciate your input.

[CARN0TAURUS]

Reading all the gratuitous negativity associated with this figure is making me feel like buying this big time!  Now I'm going to buy one even tho I don't  normally collect sauropods.  Reading Shane's comments makes we want to support Safari's efforts.  It's so refreshing to see a company represented with so much class!

[Sim]

I disagree, I think no dinosaur is a must, it's all up to what an individual wants.  Plus, Argentinosaurus and Patagotitan are known from such fragmentary remains that any figure of them is fantasy.  I don't like having fantasy dinosaurs in my collection.

Of course not everything is going to interest every person, but "fantasy" is really hyperbolic here. I get that from time to time an animal known from poor remains turns out to be significantly different from what people predicted, like Deinocheirus, but that's the exception, not the rule. There are a couple of different basic flavors of titanosaur skulls, they're small relative to the overall body so affect the overall appearance in a relatively modest way, and for animals of this size it's just so rare to find them articulated because of preservation bias that I don't think it makes sense to hold them to the same standard as animals that can easily preserve whole-body specimens.

No, my use of "fantasy" wasn't hyperbolic, it's how I truly feel about these animals.  We don't know what their head looked like, we don't know their posture, and in Argentinosaurus's case we don't even know its general proportions.  These animals get so much attention but a lot of them is not actually known.  Personally, I think they get too much attention and I don't think they are a good choice for being made into a figure.  Safari's Patagotitan basically looks like a generic sauropod toy to me, due to lacking defining features.

[Duck]

It pains me to see so much drama and criticism over this one small figure. That's one of the reasons why I'm not so active anymore. We should be able to enjoy these little pieces of art without bashing the crap out of them.

[suspsy]

Exactly, spot on.

As for the whole Shane leaving thing, I think we might need a new rule on this specific thing.
I do have my criticisms and all, but in recent times, I realized how hard it is for everyone in the company to produce it. And I know everyone has said this before, but it's sad and embarrassing seeing a member who wanted to be apart of our community just abused for his knowledge, bombarded by questions and negativity.

As for the figure, it is a beautiful figure, and while my dream of a colosal sauropod isn't fulfilled, I'm fine as there's always eofauna.

I'm not "leaving" I'm just choosing to be a less active voice here (I swear, I am really doing it this time).

For the record, I don't think there should be a rule about how a company's figures can be discussed here. Real unfiltered opinions are valuable and part of the whole thing is, I don't want them to be tempered on my account.

No one has been negative toward me, specifically. It's not even about negativity toward the figure; that's fine, people like or don't like things on their own terms.

When I first stepped into Safari related threads, it was to do damage control because there was a general "Safari is doomed" atmosphere. Now there is a similar "this is it?" atmosphere from some folks, and that's what I'm mainly speaking toward. It's the realization that nothing I can say or do will change certain minds.

So it's probably better - at this time - to just let you guys discuss it all freely without me butting in. No need to make it any more dramatic than that.

Safari will continue to be interested in the thoughts and feedback from members of this forum, whether or not you're talking to me directly, I promise. Nobody's being "scared away".

*smoke bomb*

Thanks for saying this, Shane. It was generally feeling like everyone was shaming the people who DARE have problems with the figure for a bit there. I was probably a tad too negative with my thoughts though, as I really don't think it is an awful figure, just not to my liking.

I stand by everything I wrote earlier in this thread. There is not a thing wrong about the Safari Patagotitan. Indeed, all this unjustified negativity is making me seriously consider getting it for no other reason than to support Safari during these ongoing hard times.

And yes, the term "fantasy" is absolutely hyperbolic considering that Patagotitan is one of the most complete titanosaurs in the world, second only to Dreadnoughtus.

[stargatedalek]

I disagree, I think no dinosaur is a must, it's all up to what an individual wants.  Plus, Argentinosaurus and Patagotitan are known from such fragmentary remains that any figure of them is fantasy.  I don't like having fantasy dinosaurs in my collection.

Of course not everything is going to interest every person, but "fantasy" is really hyperbolic here. I get that from time to time an animal known from poor remains turns out to be significantly different from what people predicted, like Deinocheirus, but that's the exception, not the rule. There are a couple of different basic flavors of titanosaur skulls, they're small relative to the overall body so affect the overall appearance in a relatively modest way, and for animals of this size it's just so rare to find them articulated because of preservation bias that I don't think it makes sense to hold them to the same standard as animals that can easily preserve whole-body specimens.

No, my use of "fantasy" wasn't hyperbolic, it's how I truly feel about these animals.  We don't know what their head looked like, we don't know their posture, and in Argentinosaurus's case we don't even know its general proportions.  These animals get so much attention but a lot of them is not actually known.  Personally, I think they get too much attention and I don't think they are a good choice for being made into a figure.  Safari's Patagotitan basically looks like a generic sauropod toy to me, due to lacking defining features.

But, Patagotitan is known from good remains... we know its general proportions and its posture. Just about the only thing we don't have is a skull.

I'm not likely going to get it, too small for my tastes (has anyone calculated a scale for it?), and I'm rather annoyed by the continuation of sauropods with low slung necks, even if that is a plausible posture the animal could be in briefly, as it's continued overuse promotes the idea this was the animals comfortable neutral posture. But I see little truly bad about this figure, besides maybe the extra claw, just not what I'm looking for.

[Strepsodus]

While I personally believe we can infer a lot about Argentinosaurus from its close relatives like Futalongnkosaurus, I could understand the premise that we know very little about it because we have only fragments. I also believe that Patagotitan has a more vertical neck compared to the figure, but that doesn't mean it wasn't craning it's neck down to look at something

[Duck]

Exactly, spot on.

As for the whole Shane leaving thing, I think we might need a new rule on this specific thing.
I do have my criticisms and all, but in recent times, I realized how hard it is for everyone in the company to produce it. And I know everyone has said this before, but it's sad and embarrassing seeing a member who wanted to be apart of our community just abused for his knowledge, bombarded by questions and negativity.

As for the figure, it is a beautiful figure, and while my dream of a colosal sauropod isn't fulfilled, I'm fine as there's always eofauna.

I'm not "leaving" I'm just choosing to be a less active voice here (I swear, I am really doing it this time).

For the record, I don't think there should be a rule about how a company's figures can be discussed here. Real unfiltered opinions are valuable and part of the whole thing is, I don't want them to be tempered on my account.

No one has been negative toward me, specifically. It's not even about negativity toward the figure; that's fine, people like or don't like things on their own terms.

When I first stepped into Safari related threads, it was to do damage control because there was a general "Safari is doomed" atmosphere. Now there is a similar "this is it?" atmosphere from some folks, and that's what I'm mainly speaking toward. It's the realization that nothing I can say or do will change certain minds.

So it's probably better - at this time - to just let you guys discuss it all freely without me butting in. No need to make it any more dramatic than that.

Safari will continue to be interested in the thoughts and feedback from members of this forum, whether or not you're talking to me directly, I promise. Nobody's being "scared away".

*smoke bomb*

Thanks for saying this, Shane. It was generally feeling like everyone was shaming the people who DARE have problems with the figure for a bit there. I was probably a tad too negative with my thoughts though, as I really don't think it is an awful figure, just not to my liking.

I stand by everything I wrote earlier in this thread. There is not a thing wrong about the Safari Patagotitan. Indeed, all this unjustified negativity is making me seriously consider getting it for no other reason than to support Safari during these ongoing hard times.

And yes, the term "fantasy" is absolutely hyperbolic considering that Patagotitan is one of the most complete titanosaurs in the world, second only to Dreadnoughtus.

I may do the same, buy the figure just to support the company. It seems like a good cause to me.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

I'm definitely getting the Patogotitan, it looks great to me, really impressive, and even if it wasn't I'd still buy it because no one else has done Patogotitan.
I will decide where to put it after the fact. I'm sure someone in the US who will get the beauty first will provide some in hand photos too.
I would like to see what this looks like near the Eofauna Giganotosaurus, CollectA Mapusaurus (both new ones), the Carnegie Amargasaurus, CollectA Bajadasaurus. I may see if it works as a sub adult or not, otherwise I can put it with the other scale figures.

[suspsy]

I think it would scale reasonably well with the most recent CollectA Mapusaurus.

[Skorpio V.]

Meanwhile Rebor is getting absolutely SLANDERED on the Ekrixinatosaurus review on DTB Sorry I just had to.

I imagine a mini diorama would be perfect for this guy being a huge centrepiece relative to, say a 1/72 Shapeways model, maybe?

[Flaffy]

I think it would scale reasonably well with the most recent CollectA Mapusaurus.

According to Safari's website, the Patagotitan is 15 inches. And since the real animal is estimated to be 30m, it puts the figure at roughly 1:75 scale.
The small CollectA Mapusaurus is 9 inches long, with the real animal being estimated at 12.23m (Franoys). Putting the figure at roughly 1:54 scale.

I feel they would scale well if one were to display the sauropod as a subadult / young adult; which actually would make more sense since a younger, less massive individual would certainly have been a better choice of prey than a full-sized healthy adult. Looking forward to seeing how they display together.

[Bread]

Meanwhile Rebor is getting absolutely SLANDERED on the Ekrixinatosaurus review on DTB Sorry I just had to.

To be fair and honest, that figure could and should have been better. Its the exact same model of the Carnotaurus rex with a color change and removal of horns. Rebor could and again should have done just a repaint of the Carnotaurus rex, like they teased originally using the sideshow Carnotaurus' colorschemes.

Sorry for the off topic ramble, anyways, besides my questioning of Safari's plans to more 2022 releases, I don't mind this sauropod. Other than the neck posture, I don't see what's all the fuss about. I am glad more and more sauropods are getting attention.