CollectA-New for 2015

[tyrantqueen]

They're both acceptable in terms of feathering. I personally like Martyniuk's better (although maybe it could be a little shaggier) because I feel as though the cassowary look is getting overused.

Actually, I agree that the cassowary look is overused, but I prefer that to Martynuik's which doesn't count as feathered in my opinion (I only has wings and a tuft on its tail, which isn't much more than what Favorite's model did). I would like the Collecta model to be like the drawing I posted except with a feathered neck and face and different coloration (a quail like pattern would be pretty cool).

Interesting. I thought the whole thing was feathered. I took it for granted that the lighter brown was just fine feathering (like very fine fur), and he didn't draw in the fuzz details because of the scale. And the tufts and wings were just where the feathering was particularly thick. Not sure if that makes sense. The artist's style sort of makes it hard to tell anyway. That's a disappointment

I don't know why people refer to the Favorite Ltd. as feathered in the first place. It has a row of hairs along its back...which doesn't really count for me. It's more naked than it is feathered

[Takama]

Okay I have to get that Daeodon ! As for the Smilodon, it looks good so far but I'll have to wait for better pics of it to be sure I want to get it.

The Smilodon looks better than the original. Is it definitely a Smilodon? Or a different sabre tooth?

Maybe its a different Smilodon Species

[Yutyrannus]

Interesting. I thought the whole thing was feathered. I took it for granted that the lighter brown was just fine feathering (like very fine fur), and he didn't draw in the fuzz details because of the scale. And the tufts and wings were just where the feathering was particularly thick. Not sure if that makes sense. The artist's style sort of makes it hard to tell anyway. That's a disappointment

I don't know why people refer to the Favorite Ltd. as feathered in the first place. It has a row of hairs along its back...which doesn't really count for me. It's more naked than it is feathered

Yeah, he did a more feathered one too, I think, I'll see if I can find it.

Exactly my point.

EDIT: Here's the feathered version of Martynuik's picture:

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Dear Tanystropheus and Bokisaurus - of course all ceratopsians share the same body plan. That can also be said of any dino group - allosaurs, stegosaurs, sauropods, hadrosaurs, etc. The GOOD sculptors like Dan LoRusso vary the poses to give us interesting animals within the same group - ie the Battat Triceratops, Styracosaurus, and Pachyrhinosaurus are all unique.
The Collecta sculptors are just being lazy.

Dave please watch the way you word your comments there in regards to CollectA sculptors.

I'm sure they work as hard as they are paid to. There is no proof they have used the exact same body thst I've seen, however should they choose to do it's probably a matter of keeping costs low for their business than being lazy.

[Saurian]

 T Rex with feathers is the work of John Conway, this beautiful and elegant  , what is above, looks uncomfortable

[tanystropheus]

I would rather it look like this, that one by Matthew Martynuik doesn't really qualify as feathered to me:

Jim Henson would be proud

[Yutyrannus]

T Rex with feathers is the work of John Conway, this beautiful and elegant  , what is above, looks uncomfortable

Thanks for reminding me! Something like this would be VERY cool as a figure:


Something similar to Mark Witton's depiction would be cool too:

[Concavenator]

This depiction by Yutyrannus would be awesome too:
http://s669.photobucket.com/user/michaellambson/media/Tyrannosaurus_zps17023651.jpg.html

[amargasaurus cazaui]

To my own eyes I think all of the restorations lack any aesthetic symmetry or natural flow. I just cannot see nature doing any of those in an animal as presented.....I think people are trying to infer that the way Yutyrannus looks in death is how Tyrannosaurus would look in life. They just choose to ignore all of the evidence mounting against these interpretations....I feel if Tyrannosaurus had feathers, which is by no means a given, that it would have followed the evidence so far which is suggestive if feathers only in certain areas if at all. Making a puffball out of something we have evidence for scaling in seems like a weird quest for validity of someones views in a world dictated by factualism. Even then, if one must do so, the animal should at least have a natural flow and aesthetic value that most predators and avians tend to have.....just my two cents, and I will shhhh

[Appalachiosaurus]

I would rather it look like this, that one by Matthew Martynuik doesn't really qualify as feathered to me:

Ha! I love it when they are so feathered that you can't see their little arms under the fluff!

[amanda]

I do not think Fluffisaurus Rex is at all likely. That said, I kind of give CollectA a pass on that type of stuff for the most part. As a company they seem to have adopted an extreme speculation work ethic quite some time ago, rushing to do toys of species with scant remains and such. For them to do a feathered Tyrannosaurs and quilled ceratopsians is a given and even just a little predictable for them.

[SpartanSquat]

If I have to see a feathered t-rex I want to see a model similar to Vlad model that he made for The Stomping Land.

[stargatedalek]

saying that scale impressions from the neck of gorgosaurus point towards tyrannosaurus lacking feathers is like saying skin impressions on the head of a vulture means eagles are likely to not have any feathers

a thick coating of feathers might be speculative, but the conservative assumption is that tyrannosaurus did have feathers in some capacity

[Yutyrannus]

This depiction by Yutyrannus would be awesome too:
http://s669.photobucket.com/user/michaellambson/media/Tyrannosaurus_zps17023651.jpg.html

Thanks !

[amargasaurus cazaui]

saying that scale impressions from the neck of gorgosaurus point towards tyrannosaurus lacking feathers is like saying skin impressions on the head of a vulture means eagles are likely to not have any feathers

a thick coating of feathers might be speculative, but the conservative assumption is that tyrannosaurus did have feathers in some capacity

Err no and no and well No, sorry. First the most famous and well known scale impressions for Tyrannosaurids are from Wyrex, a Tyrannosaurs rex. We also have multiple other known scales impressions from other Tyrannosaurids, and from other anatomical areas. Aside from this the specimens we have are often for areas the feathered Tyrannosaurids do have feathering.  So the idea of feathers of any kind for Tyrannosaurus Rex is speculative, not conservative, with the fossil evidence this far supporting nothing for feathers and at least something im multiple specimens, species and areas for scales. The phylogenetic bracketing may imply otherwise but the hard fossil facts so far betray the charts and graphs and are the evidence.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Another thing to think about of interest in Wyrex is this was a ten foot long specimen demonstrating scales......many people who are so adamant about scaled Tyrannosaurs insist they must have had down as juveniles and yet, there you go.

[Sim]

In addition to scales found on Tyrannosaurus and Gorgosaurus, scales were also found on Tarbosaurus: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarbosaurus#Skin_impressions_and_footprints

The scaly skin found on these tyrannosaurids is very interesting, and it makes sense considering the reduced feathering on the Ostrich, as seen here: http://dinogoss.blogspot.co.uk/2011/02/heat-feathers-and-half-arsed.html  There's also a picture showing the feathering of it's smaller relative, the Greater rhea.  With ratites, it looks like the bigger they get, the more their feathers reduce.


I find the parasites on the Pliosaurus unpleasant and very distracting.  I also don't like it when an animal's eyes are just painted black.

[SpartanSquat]

I think the Tyrannosauridae probably all vestigial feathers, just like us we have vestigial fur from the primates. And thnks Amargasaurus to mention to remember Wyrex specimen. We make feathers to all tyrannosaurs only for one (Yutyrannus) and this one is very very primitive compared to Tyrannosaurus. Probably Tyrannosaurus, Tarbosaurus and Gorgosaurus could be full feather in juvenile, but in adulthood could have vestigial feathers.
Wyrex skin.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

I think the Tyrannosauridae probably all vestigial feathers, just like us we have vestigial fur from the primates. And thnks Amargasaurus to mention to remember Wyrex specimen. We make feathers to all tyrannosaurs only for one (Yutyrannus) and this one is very very primitive compared to Tyrannosaurus. Probably Tyrannosaurus, Tarbosaurus and Gorgosaurus could be full feather in juvenile, but in adulthood could have vestigial feathers.
Wyrex skin.

Again, it bears noting the Wyrex specimen was ten feet long so definitely not adult....wether juvenile, or sub-adult I could not say, as Tyrannosaurids are not my thing. I do offer if a full grown T-rex hit 40 feet and some change , then a ten foot specimen could hardly be an adult..to my thinking at least.

[stargatedalek]

(last I knew) all of the impressions were from the; legs, underside of feet, lower base of tail, and throat
all of these skin or scale impressions are from the exact places that would be expected to be bald on a feathered animal