HAOLONGGOOD - New For 2023

[SidB]

I'm looking forward to see how HLG paints up this rather potentially flamboyant fellow. Until then I'm not getting too hyped-up; I think that I'm suffering from the PNSO-induced glut of theropods for 2023. Having raced to get every one of their theropods in the 1/35ish range so far, I'm on hold at the moment, not yet committing to the last three and counting tyrannosaurids. Now here's another theropod by HLG, so I'm going to stay in the holding pattern for now too. The coloration may change my present attitude. In the meantime I still have the old Papo Dilophosaurus on display.

[Quiversaurus]

Ngl, I genuinely thought it was gonna be an Allosaurus next, but this is good too.

I am definitely glad this genus is getting a "full" update for a figure. Why I quoted full was due to, as far as I can tell, lack of lips. The only downfall this has so far, UNLESS, they pull a rebor a do 2 variants one with and without lips.

Wow you're right, with their current trend of putting out two variants, it may be possible that one will come with lips and one without. Heck, imagine if they did one with lips and feathers (a more avian look), and one "awesomebro" version.

[TheCambrianCrusader]

I definitely would've rather it had lips. Feathers I can take or leave with Dilo. Still curious to see how the paint job is gonna look

[Sim]

I think pycnofibers should be considered feathers because they are identical to filamentous feathers, just like we call the filaments of arthropods "hair" even though they don't share the same origin as mammal hair.  However, I don't think it's known that feathers were ancestral to dinosaurs or ornithodirans.  The silesaurid Lewisuchus has osteoderms, and it's either a basal ornithischian or a close relative.  Also, the possible pterosaur ancestor Scleromochlus is covered with scales.  If Coelophysis had feathers, it could have evolved them separately from ornithischians and pterosaurs.

I don't think the Haolonggood Diophosaurus looks awesomebro.  I think it's a realistic reconstruction of what was a rather "awesome" and extreme animal.  Even with its teeth fully in their sockets, Dilophosaurus had long teeth.

[Faelrin]

@Sim I can't speak for others but the spikes on the top and underside of the neck kind of make it look a bit more like a dragon to me, which is why it looked kind of fantastical in my eyes upon initial impression. Not that I find it aesthetically problematic or whatever, just not sure that it would be plasuible from what we know of dinosaur skin so far, from theropods, etc. The rest of it is pretty tame though and up to date (lack of lips or not). I still rather like it, and can't wait to see what they do with the colorations for this one. I imagine they could do something really bold for those crests.

[stargatedalek]

I think pycnofibers should be considered feathers because they are identical to filamentous feathers, just like we call the filaments of arthropods "hair" even though they don't share the same origin as mammal hair.  However, I don't think it's known that feathers were ancestral to dinosaurs or ornithodirans.  The silesaurid Lewisuchus has osteoderms, and it's either a basal ornithischian or a close relative.  Also, the possible pterosaur ancestor Scleromochlus is covered with scales.  If Coelophysis had feathers, it could have evolved them separately from ornithischians and pterosaurs.

I don't think the Haolonggood Diophosaurus looks awesomebro.  I think it's a realistic reconstruction of what was a rather "awesome" and extreme animal.  Even with its teeth fully in their sockets, Dilophosaurus had long teeth.

And what about the genetic markers in crocodilians? Furthermore, every dinosaur group that does have scales have scales that are distinct from one another. The feathers we see, barring gradual increases in complexity among Ceoulorosaurs and some Pterosaurs, are all near identical in structure. Meanwhile Sauropod scales look nothing like Ceratopsian scales or Tyrannosaur scales, etc..

Lewisuchus has a single row of small, highly raised osteoderms along its back. They are hardly a full body covering like crocodilians. In fact, they are pretty clearly display structures. Nothing about their presence implies the animal was bald. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271938665_Osteology_of_the_Middle_Triassic_archosaur_Lewisuchus_admixtus_Romer_Chanares_Formation_Argentina_its_inclusivity_and_relationships_amongst_early_dinosauromorphs

Scleromochlus is both poorly known and poorly described. The seemingly only paper mentioning it had osteoderms has been heavily criticized by later reconstructions which incorporated additional remains, stating preivious reconstructions included details that were misinterpreted due to damage. I don't know if that includes the osteoderms or not, but it's the only mention of them I could find. Most reconstructions give it feathers too.

[Sim]

I've seen the presence of feather genes in crocodilians get brought up sometimes, but I'm not sure what it's based on.  I've tried looking at papers which mention this subject, but I haven't found anything conclusive there.

As for different dinosaur groups having different types of scales, perhaps that is due to different adaptations?  There are different types of scales present in lizards and snakes but I don't know of anyone arguing they come from a different origin.  Plus, hadrosauroids and ceratopsids have different scales yet they are both ornithischians.  Even more relevant, the scales of Psittacosaurus are different from ceratopsid scales.  Would that suggest Psittacosaurus and ceratopsids lost feathers at different points?

I will challenge the claim that the osteoderms of Lewisuchus are "pretty clearly display structures".  We don't know that, and the primary purpose for a bone-filled scale is defence, I think.  Why else would an osteoderm have a bone core when it's possible to have a scale without that costly material?  The link you provided doesn't seem to say something about the osteoderms of Lewisuchus as far as I can see.  It's true that it's possible an animal with osteoderms could be feathered too, but that is less likely than being completely scaly.

I don't know about Scleromochlus having osteoderms, I just said it was covered with scales.  I also don't know the history of Scleromochlus study.  All I know is what Mark Witton said here: http://markwitton-com.blogspot.com/2014/08/scleromochlus-taylori-more-than-just.html
I think Witton is giving too much belief to Scleromochlus having feathers, personally.

[Halichoeres]

@stargatedalek Are you talking about Holthaus et al. 2018? I don't construe that study as supporting genes for feathers in crocodilians. The authors call them "epidermal differentiation genes," which only means that in both lineages they help specify what will form from epidermal cell populations. There is some genetic homology, just as there is between the genes that specify insect segments and those that specify vertebrate segments, but it doesn't make the structures formed from them homologous. It's possible to make a reasonable case for homology in integument among pterosaurs, ornithischians like Kulindadromeus, and theropods, but I don't think that can be extended to all archosaurs based on current knowledge.

[Fembrogon]

Dilophosaurus WIP

I WANT to be very excited for this one, but I'll wait until we have better pictures. I have some reservations about the look in that shot.
(does anyone else see sunken antorbital fenestrae?)

[Lynx]

Dilophosaurus WIP

I WANT to be very excited for this one, but I'll wait until we have better pictures. I have some reservations about the look in that shot.
(does anyone else see sunken antorbital fenestrae?)

In complete honesty, no, it just looks like a ridge from the crest or whatever else

[Flaffy]

I WANT to be very excited for this one, but I'll wait until we have better pictures. I have some reservations about the look in that shot.
(does anyone else see sunken antorbital fenestrae?)

No. Even then, the antorbital fenestra would've been mobile/flexible in life and certainly wouldn't have stayed in one position. So I personally don't understand why some folk focus on this area to point out "shrink wrapping" when in reality there is none to be found.

Outlined and/or sunken antorbital fenestra does not necessarily equate to shrinkwrapping, very much so based on the individual reconstruction. See Brian's infamous Dilophosaurus puppet, with a noticeable concavity yet wouldn't be considered shrinkwrapping.

[SidB]

No, honestly, sunken fenestrae don't seem obvious to me either. The more that I look at this figure, the more that I like it. This may well replace my old Papo one - will have to see.

[vampiredesign]

Dilophosaurus Not so fast yet. We need to modify the model, make posture adjustments, stand up, and solve many problems. Due to size issues, Very challenging.
But the good news is that Allosaurus Coming soon, a 1:35 scale, 8-meter restoration.In the hot summer, standing is our main solution, and the details of the proportion of oral teeth are very challenging.   and we will be preparing to take photos soon.
Dilophosaurus There have been many product arrangements before, which will not disappoint everyone.

[Quiversaurus]

But the good news is that Allosaurus Coming soon, a 1:35 scale, 8-meter restoration.In the hot summer, standing is our main solution, and the details of the proportion of oral teeth are very challenging.  and we will be preparing to take photos soon.

This makes me so happy! "1:35 scale" and "8-meter restoration" especially. It looks like the Haolonggood team knows exactly what issues to focus and spend more time on.

Looking forward to the incoming photos 

[Samrukia]

BOOM!

[Faelrin]

Wow they look great, and this isn't even the best image quality. Looks like they might have lips too? Hard to tell. Think I'm leaning towards the blue one, but both are good no doubt.

Curious what the price point for these will be since they have articulated jaws. No doubt will go very nicely with their recent Apatosaurus pair too.

Edit: Blue one reminds me of the highly articulated Jurassic Park toy done by one of David Silva's pals. Name escapes me atm, but I'm sure you all know the toy I mean.

[Skorpio V.]

Awaiting better photos, but this definitely seems more like fragilis to me.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Looks interesting, need to see more detailed pics. The head/mouth sort of looks like the Walking with Dinosaurs Allo a bit.

[Quiversaurus]

BOOM!

!!! These look good indeed. The blue one does look like it might have lips. Can't wait to see clearer photos!

Can't tell if the enlarged thumb claw is there yet though. May very well end up being more to PNSO's...

Also, I like how there's a different logo on the box art here distinguishing it as a carnivore, whereas the herbivores have a leaf/branch logo.

[vampiredesign]

Apatosaurus I haven't been involved in paint design work since then, I'm busy with other things。
Please provide me with feedback on the design plan for the paint, and I will pay attention when I have time. Thank you very much for your support.