CollectA-New for 2015

[suspsy]

Something else just occurred to me. Although the humongous head is obstructing much of the T. Rex's body in the TF pic, it appears as though it's not as insanely wide in the hips as the 2014 Carcharodontosaurus.

Fingers crossed...

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Something else just occurred to me. Although the humongous head is obstructing much of the T. Rex's body in the TF pic, it appears as though it's not as insanely wide in the hips as the 2014 Carcharodontosaurus.

Fingers crossed...

Would be nice if they moved away from that...though it's for stability I think.

[triceratops83]

Even if the new Tyrannosaur is wide-bodied, it might look more acceptable than the Carnosaurs because of the fluffy feathering.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Even if the new Tyrannosaur is wide-bodied, it might look more acceptable than the Carnosaurs because of the fluffy feathering.

That's one thing..fur/hairy feathers cover a lot of mistakes...

[suspsy]

All this waiting is getting to me. When are the North Anerican stores going to get in their CollectA shipments already?!

[stargatedalek]

I'm not opposed to the wide hips CollectA shows, when it boils down to it I just don't see anything inaccurate about that. The skull shrink wrapping however, that is something I take issue with. Shrink wrapping only parts of the animal makes the whole thing look unbalanced, I'd bet if they didn't shrink wrap their skulls the hips would look more natural.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

I'm not opposed to the wide hips CollectA shows, when it boils down to it I just don't see anything inaccurate about that. The skull shrink wrapping however, that is something I take issue with. Shrink wrapping only parts of the animal makes the whole thing look unbalanced, I'd bet if they didn't shrink wrap their skulls the hips would look more natural.

Precisely this...and so well stated. Starved in the face and gorged in the hips.....the two traits together look quite......out of place. On an interesting side note, I was looking over some invicata pictures the other evening and never noticed how shrink wrapped the bodies of some of their sauropods were, but it slides past your eye somewhat more easily because the figure looks balanced.

[suspsy]

If the issue of shrink wrapping bothers you that much, then politely email CollectA about it. Sure beats merely complaining about it.

So far it hasn't bothered me that much, but I'll be curious to see what the final versions of the FTR and the Acro are like.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I'm not opposed to the wide hips CollectA shows, when it boils down to it I just don't see anything inaccurate about that. The skull shrink wrapping however, that is something I take issue with. Shrink wrapping only parts of the animal makes the whole thing look unbalanced, I'd bet if they didn't shrink wrap their skulls the hips would look more natural.

The wider hips are incorrect but it's a clever way to make them more stable and most don't think about how really thin large carnivores are.  Here's an example ( Ceratosaurus since I'm currently working on one) :


Most theropods look this way from above..a pretty slender build overall.

I usually chalk up the shrink wrapping to malnourished animals, or on the head just thicker surface osteoderms that outline the skull...probably not accurate either but it works in my head.. lol

[amargasaurus cazaui]

If the issue of shrink wrapping bothers you that much, then politely email CollectA about it. Sure beats merely complaining about it.

So far it hasn't bothered me that much, but I'll be curious to see what the final versions of the FTR and the Acro are like.

Clearly missing the point yet again, the issue is not simply the shrink wrapped face and head, the problem is then placing it upon an animal that looks gorged..which then means the entire sculpt is out of balance as both Stargate and I stated, and I do believe that we are allowed to state this is a problem here, regardless. We are not merely complaining about it, we are stating it in a forum so people can read it and understand the issue for what it is and allow that to factor in their decisions to purchase theropods which are not well sculpted, thanks.

[suspsy]

If the issue of shrink wrapping bothers you that much, then politely email CollectA about it. Sure beats merely complaining about it.

So far it hasn't bothered me that much, but I'll be curious to see what the final versions of the FTR and the Acro are like.

Clearly missing the point yet again

Please don't be rude and condescending like that.

the issue is not simply the shrink wrapped face and head, the problem is then placing it upon an animal that looks gorged..which then means the entire sculpt is out of balance as both Stargate and I stated

I'm asking this in earnest: you do understand that wider hips are necessary in order to create a large bipedal theropod figure that can stand freely, right? It's not due to a lack of research on the sculptor's part. The only alternatives are to mount the figure on a base, pose it in a tripod stance, or enlarge the feet. In all cases, it's not ideal, but that's just how it is with theropod dinosaurs. I'm not fond of it myself, but I still prefer the wide hips to giant feet or a tripod stance.

and I do believe that we are allowed to state this is a problem here, regardless. We are not merely complaining about it, we are stating it in a forum so people can read it and understand the issue for what it is and allow that to factor in their decisions to purchase theropods which are not well sculpted, thanks.

Since I never suggested that you shouldn't be allowed to state your personal opinions, this is a straw man.

What I did suggest (and have suggested in the past) is that if the issue of shrink wrapping upsets you that much, you should share those feelings with the manufacturer. You've complained about CollectA so many times now, and yet do you ever do anything beyond that? You're clearly a well-read, informed, and up-to-date dinophile. Why do you not try to help CollectA instead of just attacking them?

[amargasaurus cazaui]

If the issue of shrink wrapping bothers you that much, then politely email CollectA about it. Sure beats merely complaining about it.

So far it hasn't bothered me that much, but I'll be curious to see what the final versions of the FTR and the Acro are like.

Clearly missing the point yet again

Please don't be rude and condescending like that.

the issue is not simply the shrink wrapped face and head, the problem is then placing it upon an animal that looks gorged..which then means the entire sculpt is out of balance as both Stargate and I stated

I'm asking this in earnest: you do understand that wider hips are necessary in order to create a large bipedal theropod figure that can stand freely, right? It's not due to a lack of research on the sculptor's part. The only alternatives are to mount the figure on a base, pose it in a tripod stance, or enlarge the feet. In all cases, it's not ideal, but that's just how it is with theropod dinosaurs. I'm not fond of it myself, but I still prefer the wide hips to giant feet or a tripod stance.

and I do believe that we are allowed to state this is a problem here, regardless. We are not merely complaining about it, we are stating it in a forum so people can read it and understand the issue for what it is and allow that to factor in their decisions to purchase theropods which are not well sculpted, thanks.

Since I never suggested that you shouldn't be allowed to state your personal opinions, this is a straw man.

What I did suggest (and have suggested in the past) is that if the issue of shrink wrapping upsets you that much, you should share those feelings with the manufacturer. You've complained about CollectA so many times now, and yet do you ever do anything beyond that? You're clearly a well-read, informed, and up-to-date dinophile. Why do you not try to help CollectA instead of just attacking them?

Again, as I stated before and not it is not condescending. You are missing the point..the issue is not simply shrink wrapping. Please note, the issue being discussed is the shrink wrapping being used to accompany enlarged hips. This is what is being questioned...no oversimplification of the matter resolves it.
  The choices are somewhat wide....either stop shrink wrapping the faces and heads of the theropods they construct or...use a tripod stance and make the figure more gaunt but more accurate. Or another option, use larger feet, rather than wider hips to augmument the starved head appearance. It is a two fold issue...either they need to stop shrink wrapping or make their figures stand in some manner other than implying the dinosaur ate one too many late night pizzas. It is really a toss up in the model world wether the figure has larger feet , a tripod stance, or wider hips...by itself. HOWEVER when other anatonomical aspects support a starved look it is a problem. The short answer for me would be, stop shrink wrapping the skulls and exaggerating the hips both, as neither is particularly accurate nor appealing. The fact you choose to prefer wider hips is a personnal choice, and many others do not share it. Some like the larger feet, or tripod stance...but noone enjoys a dinosaur that is starved in the head and fat in the tummy.
  I will tell you why I have not sent these thoughts to collecta...I am sure you remember the email you posted stating as being from their head of operations or whatever the title. He denied the issue...he debunked nothing, made no evidence to support his claim and further then acted offended. He did not do the things you might expect an operating officer from a company faced with such a complaint to do...provide, pictures, facts, evidence, supporting information or anything of real value. A denial. Just so you know, a few days after your email I sat and wrote him a similar letter, to yours, and took the time to write quite properly and carefully stating the obvious concerns I had. I was sent a nearly identical form letter to yours denying ....again no effort to support, give evidence or demonstrate anything beyond a denial. If they refuse to address the issues with their replicas, the best thing I can see to resolve the problem is increase awareness why the models are inferior and what the evidence is.
   You have presented yourself as an educator so the question comes full circle...why would you continue supporting models that , aside from myself, many others have chimed in and validated are not accurate? If I am said to be attacking this company then my question would have to be why you, as an educator, with a higher mandate to the public than mine, would defend them

[suspsy]

Again, as I stated before and not it is not condescending. You are missing the point..the issue is not simply shrink wrapping. Please note, the issue being discussed is the shrink wrapping being used to accompany enlarged hips. This is what is being questioned...no oversimplification of the matter resolves it.

Amargasaurus, I've addressed the wide hips issue at least three times now, including in my previous post. Did you not read what I wrote? Blade-of-the-Moon addressed it as well.

As for shrink wrapping, you're speaking of it as though it were a settled issue, with no further room for debate, when in fact it is an ongoing paleontological issue that remains far from decided. There is still much we do not know, and will never know about their anatomy. Theropods may not have been as gaunt as Ely Kish and Willim Stout used to portray them back in the 1980s', but it doesn't necessarily follow that outlines of fenestrae on the skull are an artistic crime.

I do agree with you that it is an odd juxtaposition. I simply don't share your level of disdain for it.

The fact you choose to prefer wider hips is a personnal choice, and many others do not share it. Some like the larger feet, or tripod stance...but noone enjoys a dinosaur that is starved in the head and fat in the tummy.

Bwah? You just made a lengthy, passionate speech about how people have different personal choices, but then you conclude by presumptuously proclaiming that no one likes a dinosaur that has a lean head and a wide body. Who are you to speak for everyone else? You're being self-contradictory, Amargasaurus.

Also, since when has anyone ever stated that they like oversized feet or tripod stances?

I will tell you why I have not sent these thoughts to collecta...I am sure you remember the email you posted stating as being from their head of operations or whatever the title.

That would be Peter Leung, the general manager of CollectA.

He denied the issue...he debunked nothing, made no evidence to support his claim and further then acted offended.

So you're saying that the general manager of a major toy company cannot be trusted at his word? What proof do you have to back up that claim? Do you know of any previous instances of Mr. Leung telling lies? If so, please share them.

He did not do the things you might expect an operating officer from a company faced with such a complaint to do...provide, pictures, facts, evidence, supporting information or anything of real value.

Do you seriously believe that the GM of a major toy company is going to immediately bend over backwards strictly for the sake of a couple of inquiries from adult fans? Do you imagine that he has that much free time on his hands? Talk about unrealistic expectations. And furthermore.....

A denial. Just so you know, a few days after your email I sat and wrote him a similar letter, to yours, and took the time to write quite properly and carefully stating the obvious concerns I had. I was sent a nearly identical form letter to yours denying ....again no effort to support, give evidence or demonstrate anything beyond a denial. If they refuse to address the issues with their replicas, the best thing I can see to resolve the problem is increase awareness why the models are inferior and what the evidence is.

....furthermore, why would Mr. Leung need to go out of his way to provide proof on demand when he was fully secure in the knowledge that he and his company would be completely vindicated in only a couple of weeks once the toys in question were shown at Toy Fair? The photos don't lie, Amargasaurus. All your angry claims about CollectA recycling their moulds were shown to be false. You were proven dead wrong. Anyone who reads your previous posts in this thread can see it. And yet you're still acting as though you weren't. Why the denial, man?

You have presented yourself as an educator so the question comes full circle...why would you continue supporting models that , aside from myself, many others have chimed in and validated are not accurate? If I am said to be attacking this company then my question would have to be why you, as an educator, with a higher mandate to the public than mine, would defend them

I can toss that question right back in your face and ask why you enthusiastically praise and support the likes of Carnegie and Wild Safari when their theropods are just as inaccurate, albeit in different ways. What about that WS Ceratosaurus, T. Rex, and Yutyrannus, with their ginormous clown feet? Or all those Carnegie theropods that look like they're chorus dancing(poorly!) when you line them up together? Why are you not castigating them as well?

The fact is, if you adamantly insist on only supporting companies that make 100% accurate dinosaur toys, then you might as well throw your entire collection in the garbage. Again, it comes down to a matter of personal choice and taste. Me, I find CollectA's wide hips less offensive than WS's oversized feet or Carnegie's generic tripod poses (although I love all three companies nonetheless). And as for shrink wrapping, meh. Not a big deal in my book.

That's my stand and I shall be sticking to it.

[John]

I have a better solution than sending any e-mail to a company who's products I'm not happy with:not buying them.My wallet will speak louder than any letter ever will!

[Shadowknight1]

"Shrink-wrapped" head or not, I'm looking forward to that feathered T. rex.  After closer examination though, they'll have to show a massive improvement between the preview photo and final product to get me back to wanting Acrocanthosaurus.

[stargatedalek]

On their own I don't mind either well rounded or shrink wrapped dinosaurs. I prefer accuracy but when push comes to shove that's not ultimately what makes or breaks a figure for me (that would be art style). I generally like the heavy bodied CollectA dinosaurs, I know its speculative at times but I still don't find it especially unlikely. Definitely more reasonable than enlarging feet which breaks the realism entirely. Nor do I always mind shrink wrapping, the Invicta line in particular I feel has some real charm to it, and most of the dinosaurs in it are fairly shrink wrapped. But combining both in the way CollectA does, one half being well fed and the other starved, it just feels very alien and from an artistic and a realism perspective I don't like it.

I definitely prefer what CollectA does with the hips, even if it is a little speculative, I definitely prefer it over the horribly mangled feet of Schleich or the pose locking of tripods or bases. Still, in my book no-one has ever beat Favorite Kinto, the optional bases and figures that balance fairly well on their own, neither shrink wrapped nor speculatively thick.

[Concavenator]

@suspsy The Wild Safari Yutyrannus doesn't have enlarged feet.They're the correct size.Same goes for the Monolophosaurus and Suchomimus.I overall agree with you converning CollectA.Also,don't say 'clown feet'.Doug Watson said he doesn't like that.You'd better say 'enlarged feet'.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

My final response on this thread, regarding the matter and a few dozen rather obvious fishing type comments made.


  You did address the wide hips issue, seperately. As I have no responded repeatedly, it is in conjunction with the starved head sculpt that I am taking issue..which you insist on seperating despite the fact my entire point has been and continues to be the two in conjunction, thanks. As you taunted...did you not read what I write man?
  As to the factuality of the shrink wrapped vs not look, the jury has effectively weighed in at least on theropod skulls which is what we are discssuing here right. They would not have looked nearly as skeletal as for instance the acro or card sculpts we are disussing....and again, despite your insistence on seperating the two, the issue is...wide fat looking dinosaurs with shrink wrapped faces. That, you can bet the jury has also weighed in on, and it doesnt work sorry.It is not disdain or an odd juxtaposition..it is wrong, sorry.

  you would need to read through some of the other threads, there are many members that prefer wide feet over tripods, or tripods over wide hips, it is in fact to each person's tastes and again, my issue isnt with wide hips, it is..make note wide hips with shrink wrapped skulls.
   Alright so lets weigh in on your whole email to collecta thing since you put such stock in it . You alleged to send an email to an alleged person who sent an alleged response back claiming to come from Mr. Leung, with an electronic signature. That is all you have provided evidence for. Simple fact, and sorry you made this necessary but most corporations pay someone to handle public issues. You have no evidence who answered your email, or in fact that it was Mr. Leung. You have an electronic signature on an email. If you came to my home and used my computer, you could easily state you are me as well. That is the legal reality of what you have. For all you know , the janitor Karl was nosing around on the bosses desk while eating pizza and sent a response.Aside from the simple reality is that most corporate executives do pay someone that does handle just these type of things for them. It is far more likely you were given a standard corporation response from some mid level manager paid to do so. .....
  So responding directly to your questions..what proof do you have that the manager of a major company answered you, or that he has ever responded to anyone else, or that he is given to answering emails at all? In short, you know no more about Mr. Leung and his habbits and practices than I do and are speculating based on an electronic email.
  As to a major executive bending over backwards? Ugh....you asked him a simple question as I did. He just did not make a convincing or realistic effort. I have seen much better customer service from both smaller and larger companies, so yes, I find his reponse both ridiculous and very ....uninspiring.

  The photos do not lie, you are correct And most people who have purchased for instance the two large ceratopsians have commented how identical they are. I am glad you realize this. One further note on the topic, I again did not use the term mould recyling,this was your own invention, which you blamed me for and then attempted to discredit. I said the sculpts were heavily borrowed from one another, and they are. Anyone can see this immediately as the countless posts in this thread show. There have been a dozen other people all stating the models are entirely too similar. So I again ask you, refrain from accusing me of saying mould recycling, as I did not. There is no denial, I said ..borrowed heavily from one another. They are...this is what the pictures show clearly. Stop misquoting , thanks.

Since you tossed the same question at me, meaning you dodged it and chose not to answer, I will at least give you an answer. The first thing I ask that you show me is where I have heaped praise and love on Safari or Carnegie theropods at all. Most that read my threads and know me, will tell you. I straight up tell everyone, I know nothing about theropods and do not collect them. I own zero safari theropods, and I only have the carnegies for completeness sake. I have never lavished praise on carnegie theropods nor the safari. This means I cannot speak about the wild safari models you mentioned with large feet....why? because I do not collect them and never have. I purchase the carnegie theropods because I consider Forest rogers a personnal friend and choose to own as much of her work as I can, rather than because I find them accurate, or not accurate. She has been a friend to me and I respect that. I shouldnt have to justify it for you .

   Finally your taunt about throwing my entire collection in the garbage. Let me go straight to the point of it. You know little about what I do or do not collect or where the emphasis lies in my collection because I have not chosen to show you. I do agree that practically every model and every company makes some form of inaccurate dinosaur. However the difference is most at least admit their mistakes or will take some forms of information and try to improve.
  The heart of my collection as most people know, lies in basal ceratopsians, and more to the point psittacosaurus. To that end I chose to work with Aaron Doyle to have a model made that incorporated photos of my skeleton for reference. Aaron let me help choose the poses as well. Then he put the models up for sale and got all four and had them made into a large scene. Still not satisified I tracked down the science..the papers that show precisely what colors, the scales, and patterns were known for psittacosaurus. Then I went back to Aaron and asked him resculpt the integument of these animals, based on the new information. He has finished one of two poses, that will be offered at least to me if not others, in something around a six to eight inch model . I then sent the same paper to Martin Garratt so that I can send him these models and have them painted and based according to the information in the paper. So when you talk about what accuracy is, and that I should throw my collection in the garbage, I hope you get that i understand accuracy and for my own personnal models I follow a very stringent, almost obsessive line to the point of having models of the ONLY known non-theropod dinosaur (there is that word theropod again, notice I am working intentionally with a non theropod?)we have colors and actual fossil scales for and scale patterns as well.
  Aside from this, I was the person who went to Manuel Bejerano and asked him to sculpt Yinling and Pegomastax , two pre-cursors to the ceratopsian line. Why? Because I like having an ACCURATE and complete collection as I can. I worked my tail off for my collection and some of it is quite accurate, pain stakingly, expensively accurate. Tyrannt queen was kind enough to alter digital models from another site, so I could have them for my collection....just as another possible body type that might have existed for my dinosaur. So dont come to me with the word accuracy, I understand it and I work for it and my collection has a lot of it despite what the toy companies offer.
Aside from this I have nine carnegie psittacosaurus each professionaly repainted to match a different concept. I have one with tail quills sculpted in...I have the original Doyle model . I have two or three repaints of various poses of Aarons models....I strive for accuracy and I want my models to be correct. So, the garbage is one place my models will not and do not belong, despite your comments.
   It does come down to taste, wether you prefer accuracy or fluff. I for my own part, and collection like a resemblance of the animal that actually lived and not the one that someone just wishes me to pay for because they chose to make it that way.Thats all I have left to say on it.....and sorry to distract from the thread

[tanystropheus]

Without a doubt, shrink wrapping affects the accuracy of the overall head sculpt. I agree with Blade-of-the-Moon that it makes the animal appear malnourished.

Nobody wants a dinosaur that is acutely manifesting Kwashiorkor symptoms. It is improper and unethical to condone their nutritional status. Even worse is the notion of dinosaurs with rainbow shrink-wrapped skulls that happen to be oozing all sorts of extravagant colors (as well as nutrients of relevance). Such a paradoxically gaudy display is too much for my taste. However, strangely enough, plesiosaurs and pliosaurs seem to look rather pleasant in shrink-wrapped skulls. Go figure.

[suspsy]

  You did address the wide hips issue, seperately. As I have no responded repeatedly, it is in conjunction with the starved head sculpt that I am taking issue..which you insist on seperating despite the fact my entire point has been and continues to be the two in conjunction, thanks. As you taunted...did you not read what I write man?

Because they are separate issues. One was clearly not done deliberately in conjunction with the other. Same as how the pronated wrists on Papo theropods were not done deliberately in conjunction with their oversized feet.

 

As to the factuality of the shrink wrapped vs not look, the jury has effectively weighed in at least on theropod skulls which is what we are discssuing here right. They would not have looked nearly as skeletal as for instance the acro or card sculpts we are disussing....and again, despite your insistence on seperating the two, the issue is...wide fat looking dinosaurs with shrink wrapped faces. That, you can bet the jury has also weighed in on, and it doesnt work sorry.

Strictly your personal opinion, nothing more.

It is not disdain or an odd juxtaposition..it is wrong, sorry.

Strictly your personal opinion, nothing more.

And jury? What jury are you talking about? Surely you don't consider the stated opinions of a few fans on a random toy forum to be a jury. As awesome as the DTF is, it's not the nexus of dinosaur collecting where all final verdicts on toys are rendered, sorry.

And if you really insist on playing that card, I can again point to the fact that the CollectA Carcharodontosaurus was voted Best Toy of 2014 by the members of this forum. It won in spite of its shrink-wrapped skull and wide hips. So much for the jury being in your favour, eh?

you would need to read through some of the other threads, there are many members that prefer wide feet over tripods, or tripods over wide hips, it is in fact to each person's tastes and again

Indeed it is.

Alright so lets weigh in on your whole email to collecta thing since you put such stock in it . You alleged to send an email to an alleged person who sent an alleged response back claiming to come from Mr. Leung, with an electronic signature. That is all you have provided evidence for. Simple fact, and sorry you made this necessary but most corporations pay someone to handle public issues. You have no evidence who answered your email, or in fact that it was Mr. Leung. You have an electronic signature on an email. If you came to my home and used my computer, you could easily state you are me as well. That is the legal reality of what you have. For all you know , the janitor Karl was nosing around on the bosses desk while eating pizza and sent a response.Aside from the simple reality is that most corporate executives do pay someone that does handle just these type of things for them. It is far more likely you were given a standard corporation response from some mid level manager paid to do so. .....

Heh. As amusing as that scenario is, you have no proof for it, Amargasaurus. Nothing but random speculation on your part, I'm afraid. I could claim that you're actually a 13-year old kid with braces, acne, and a bad case of B.O., and there'd be no more or less proof for it than there is for your CollectA janitor claim. So let's both refrain from funny fantasies and stick to reality, OK? Peter Leung, GM of CollectA, stated in no uncertain terms that his company is not engaged in mould recycling. He didn't provide any comparison photos to back up his statement, and he wasn't under any obligation to do so. Probably because he assumed (reasonably) that his word would be enough. It was for me. It clearly wasn't for you, but that's quite irrelevant given that subsequent comparison photos have shown you to be mistaken. That's the reality of the situation right there and you cannot do a thing about it.

So responding directly to your questions..what proof do you have that the manager of a major company answered you, or that he has ever responded to anyone else, or that he is given to answering emails at all?

Pure and simple logic, of course, as I outlined above. I emailed the company directly, I received a response, and events proved the contents of that response to be correct.

What proof do you have that it wasn't the GM?

In short, you know no more about Mr. Leung and his habbits and practices than I do and are speculating based on an electronic email. As to a major executive bending over backwards? Ugh....you asked him a simple question as I did. He just did not make a convincing or realistic effort. I have seen much better customer service from both smaller and larger companies, so yes, I find his reponse both ridiculous and very ....uninspiring.

I know he was right and you were wrong.

The photos do not lie, you are correct And most people who have purchased for instance the two large ceratopsians have commented how identical they are.

Actually, the few people who have compared the toys to date have noted a number of differences as well as similarities between them. Aside from the heads and colour schemes, the limbs and tails are in different positions.

One further note on the topic, I again did not use the term mould recyling,this was your own invention, which you blamed me for and then attempted to discredit. I said the sculpts were heavily borrowed from one another, and they are. Anyone can see this immediately as the countless posts in this thread show. There have been a dozen other people all stating the models are entirely too similar. So I again ask you, refrain from accusing me of saying mould recycling, as I did not. There is no denial, I said ..borrowed heavily from one another. They are...this is what the pictures show clearly. Stop misquoting , thanks.

Selective memory problems, I see. No matter. Let's just look at what you wrote back on January 22. I'm not going to go through the entire post piece by piece, but I will highlight a couple of glaring instances where you made the very accusation you are now insisting you didn't.

http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=2718.msg85158#msg85158

Wait a minute, stop the press here for a minute. There is no "percieved Laziness" involved here...they are recycling dinosaur models from year to year with minor alterations and new paint and and reselling them...as different species.

Here you directly accused them of recycling moulds. You used the term "models" instead of "moulds," but it comes to the exact same thing.

And even worse, next year when we get another nine whopping brand newly recycled sculpts, I am sure you will see that as nothing to complain about again, since you are willing to accept it now. Of course we can always line them up on the shelf and use them for the power rangers to ride into battle !!!!

And there's a really nasty, baseless accusation. You made up a completely random fantasy about 2016 and assigned random behaviour to me. I'd have been offended had I not been so amused by it.

Since you tossed the same question at me, meaning you dodged it and chose not to answer, I will at least give you an answer.

I did answer it. Go back and re-read my previous post.

The first thing I ask that you show me is where I have heaped praise and love on Safari or Carnegie theropods at all. Most that read my threads and know me, will tell you. I straight up tell everyone, I know nothing about theropods and do not collect them. I own zero safari theropods, and I only have the carnegies for completeness sake. I have never lavished praise on carnegie theropods nor the safari.

But you have lavished praise on both companies regardless, in spite of the fact that certain of their models show glaring, albeit necessary inaccuracies. Indeed, the fact that you don't know anything about theropods and don't make a point of collecting them makes your attacks on CollectA even more inconsistent.

This means I cannot speak about the wild safari models you mentioned with large feet....why? because I do not collect them and never have. I purchase the carnegie theropods because I consider Forest rogers a personnal friend and choose to own as much of her work as I can, rather than because I find them accurate, or not accurate. She has been a friend to me and I respect that. I shouldnt have to justify it for you .

If you're going to question my judgment in supporting a particular toy company, you have no right to complain when I ask the same of you.

Finally your taunt about throwing my entire collection in the garbage. Let me go straight to the point of it. You know little about what I do or do not collect or where the emphasis lies in my collection because I have not chosen to show you. I do agree that practically every model and every company makes some form of inaccurate dinosaur.

Glad we can agree on that.

However the difference is most at least admit their mistakes or will take some forms of information and try to improve.

And CollectA is a shining example of that, as seen by how their products have steadily improved since the early days of Procon. They do still have a ways to go, as this thread demonstrates, but I have faith.

Your impassioned speech about the details of your hobby is always impressive, yet the fact remains that you still cannot lay claim to 100% accuracy in your collection. No one can. One of the frustrating and wonderful things about dinosaurs is that there is still much we will never know precisely about them. Shoot, who's to say that someday someone won't uncover a new Psittacosaurus fossil with preserved feathers all over its body? Or perhaps a particularly well preserved mummy proving that it was much fatter than previously thought? One little discovery would render your entire psittacosaur model collection null and void. Purely hypothetical, yes, but there was a time when most folks scoffed at the idea of a fully feathered Velociraptor.

Do you see what I'm getting at? You can strive for accuracy as much as you like, but in the end, it's still largely speculative. Any paleontologist will tell you the same. And that's why I'm willing to let certain inaccuracies slide when it comes to CollectA, Carnegie, WS, Papo, or any other maker of dinosaur toys. For me, it is first and foremost about fun.

It does come down to taste, wether you prefer accuracy or fluff.

Glad we can agree on that.