Safari Ltd - new for 2014

[Dan]

More Monolophosaurus photos on the Dan's Dinosaurs Facebook page here:

https://www.facebook.com/DansDinosaurs

Brilliant work, Patrick. Mind if I post that for others to see?

[leidy]

Unlike the Spinosaurus and carnotaurus, among others, this Tyrannosaurus cannot be glued to a base in a horizontal position as everything would still be arching verticle and it would look silly horizontal. So this pose is one we are stuck with, so I pass. Shame too since I am looking for a nice accurate, modern and larger Tyrannosaur figure.

Tyrannosaurus didn't live 100% horizontal 24 hours a day.  I don't think the position is outside of the range of motion for the spine/hips/tail/legs.  It's not some ancient kangaroo pose where you have to break bones and dislocate joints to make it work. 

Even if the pose may be a bit stiff and awkward, I think it's well within the range of possibilities.  And I think it probably could be improved with slight repositioning. 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I received my new Carnegie Rex today.   

Negatives first. The glossy-ness seems to be spread out over different areas..almost like it was sealed and then some color was airbrushed over ?   It's not truly smooth anywhere than I can tell..there is a pattern but it's quite shallow in the sculpt on the main body. A couple tiny pinholes in teeth here and there.  The paint apps are pretty low quality compared to the prototype.  It only superficially resembles the patterns and detail shown before.

Positives.  If left on the clear stand his tail is off the ground.  He can be tilted forward in a more neutral position if you prop the tail up..it doesn't look bad for those that didn't like the pose.  The head sculpt is the best I've seen o na piece to date. Big, round and robust..looks a LOT like STAN to me.  Arms and legs look good if a bit closer to the gracile type than a more thicker bodied animal..but that works for the type it appears to be. Hips look right, rib cage is rounded and nice.   You could argue this one represents STAN and the previous Ann. Rex was more like SUE I think.

I give it an 7 out of 10. 

Pics coming as soon as I have some good daylight.

[tyrantqueen]

Would you say it is inferior or superior to the previous Anniversary rex?

[tyrantqueen]

Here's the Mono everyone was requesting. Here you go:







Filched again from Dan's FB.

[tanystropheus]

That Monolophosaurus is a winner...such a huge difference these individually parted teeth make  The model looks believable as far as I can tell. A nice Mono from WS, and a nice Dilo from Papo.

[tyrantqueen]

Teeth are too straight, in my opinion. In this diagram you can see the teeth gently curve back.



And yes, I am nitpicky about things like this.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Would you say it is inferior or superior to the previous Anniversary rex?

In some ways it's an improvement in others  step back..I'd say it's more accurate for the Rex type it seems to portray, but it seems a step back in detail ( for the main body ) and paint apps.  The Ann. Rex also developed the warped eye so if you compared it to that it's rating goes up a bit. 

I think the detail loss on the body might be a paint issue...too thick or too much.  I find it odd some parts of the figure are matte and others are gloss ..on the body itself. 

[darth daniel]

The Monolophosaurus looks better than on the official photo, especially when viewed from the distance. I´d love to see what a really good custom paint job could make of it.

[alexeratops]

Here's the Mono everyone was requesting. Here you go:







Filched again from Dan's FB.

Wow, nice going Safari! The teeth are a little weird to me but I saw the skull that Tyrantqueen posted and realized that it was correct. Also, shouldn't the tail be raised a bit more?

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

It looks really nice, colors and all. I am curious if they can do teeth this well why do all the Carnegie's seem to suffer from malformed ones ?

Tail is possible since it's slightly rearing up.  I'm betting it stands without the support on a level surface fine.

[KeU]

Would you say it is inferior or superior to the previous Anniversary rex?

In some ways it's an improvement in others  step back..I'd say it's more accurate for the Rex type it seems to portray, but it seems a step back in detail ( for the main body ) and paint apps.  The Ann. Rex also developed the warped eye so if you compared it to that it's rating goes up a bit. 

I think the detail loss on the body might be a paint issue...too thick or too much.  I find it odd some parts of the figure are matte and others are gloss ..on the body itself.

I wonder what is happening to the Carnegie production line.
They used to have fantastic paint application.
Look at Giganotosaurus, Spinosaurus, Diplodocus or Carnotaurus. Tylosaurus too. They all had great paint work.
Everything took a steep dive last year with the Concavenator. Seems like the 2014 Tyrannosaurus is suffering too.

[Concavenator]

Would you say it is inferior or superior to the previous Anniversary rex?

In some ways it's an improvement in others  step back..I'd say it's more accurate for the Rex type it seems to portray, but it seems a step back in detail ( for the main body ) and paint apps.  The Ann. Rex also developed the warped eye so if you compared it to that it's rating goes up a bit. 

I think the detail loss on the body might be a paint issue...too thick or too much.  I find it odd some parts of the figure are matte and others are gloss ..on the body itself.

I wonder what is happening to the Carnegie production line.
They used to have fantastic paint application.
Look at Giganotosaurus, Spinosaurus, Diplodocus or Carnotaurus. Tylosaurus too. They all had great paint work.
Everything took a steep dive last year with the Concavenator. Seems like the 2014 Tyrannosaurus is suffering too.

And I'm wondering why's there so many criticism for Carnegie.Since 2008,the only figure(in my opinion that could be considered as a letdown is just the Concavenator.So I really don't understand what's with the Tyrannosaurus.Now everyone's stating that it looks bad due to the tripod pose,but I don't recall people telling this issue with,say,the Carnegie Giganotosaurus or Carnotaurus.This one has a brighter paintjob and so the criticism begins.That's not fair,I think.
And the previous Carnegie theropods were not very detailed either,so again,what's with the Tyrannosaurus?  Now,I hope anyone's taken offence.

[tanystropheus]

Teeth are too straight, in my opinion. In this diagram you can see the teeth gently curve back.



And yes, I am nitpicky about things like this.

I think they did a pretty good job on the teeth (I suppose it could have been curved a bit more...the effect is more pronounced because we are looking at extreme close-ups of the figure). The Suchomimus, on the other hand, not so much (the figure could benefit from dental implants).

[amargasaurus cazaui]

"nuff said"

[Concavenator]

Awesome pics!Thank you very much for posting pics of this guy,what a great figure it is!

[Yutyrannus]

Before I was not convinced about the Carnegie Rex but now I am sure I will get it. There are just too many awesome figures next year !

[KeU]

Yea... there is less skin texturing and details compared to the earlier figures. Still gonna get it anyways.
I'm a sucker for theropods.
So relieved that it scales well with the others.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Yea... there is less skin texturing and details compared to the earlier figures. Still gonna get it anyways.
I'm a sucker for theropods.
So relieved that it scales well with the others.

My "take" from examing the dinosaur is that the texture and scales are there, just sized to the proper size and level for an animal roughly forty feet long. I found you can carefully balance the dinosaur to stand without using the tail, as well....which somewhat negates much of the criticism I have seen for it. My two nitpicks are the feet claws are painted similar to the feet in color, and the teeth look like white picket fence....a little greying or a toned wash would have really calmed that down a bit. It is a nice dinosaur and scales quite well the previous model as you stated. Together they could be a mated pair.

[tanystropheus]

T-rex does look good, despite the lack of texture details (glazed surface), but it almost looks like it has a ventral hernia