CollectA-New for 2015

[Sim]

I've come across bipedal animals as tripod figures (Carnegie), figures attached to bases (CollectA), figures on a detachable base (Favorite series 2) and figures with oversized feet (Wild Safari) which have all ended up falling over.  I get the feeling using a harder plastic would be more helpful.

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.

The Favorite soft model series 2 Allosaurus, both Tyrannosauruses, Spinosaurus, Stegosaurus and Plesiosaurus are shrink wrapped.

[stargatedalek]

The tyrannosaurus skull is a bit shrink wrapped (every line has its hits and misses), but I don't see any shrink wrapping on the spinosaurus. I was also referring specifically to the hips.

To be honest I feel like this has just gone so far off topic at this point, but I just want to finish with saying that I really don't like that CollectA shrink wraps only certain parts of the animal, it just feels incredibly unnatural and unbalanced.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Nope, said I was done. The misquotes, lies and attempts to alter my comments end here. Any further posting from you towards me will be viewed as goading and attempting to cause a problem. Please move on. I responded to each of your comments multiple times,and debunked the obvious lies, distortions and misquotes. Enough is enough. Stop. Allow the thread to follow its purpose, thanks

[ItsTwentyBelow]

Just to address the Collecta reusing sculpts thing once more.

After studying more photos I am happy that only the Acro and Medusaceratops appear to suffer from this. Every other figure this year is original. But for those two, it is obvious to many that they are based off of the Carchar and Xenoceratops sculpts from last year. Heavily based on them.

I've said it before, those figures are what they are. It is still quite obvious to me.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Nope, said I was done. The misquotes, lies and attempts to alter my comments end here. Any further posting from you towards me will be viewed as goading and attempting to cause a problem. Please move on. I responded to each of your comments multiple times,and debunked the obvious lies, distortions and misquotes. Enough is enough. Stop. Allow the thread to follow its purpose, thanks

I assume this was directed at Suspy.

This is just my advisement after watching interactions between the two of you, perhaps it would be a good idea if you both didn't post replies to each other.  Now I'm not saying don't have fun and discuss things on the forum but it seems we have a bit of a Cope and Marsh situation here and it never gets anywhere. The discussions almost always turn to arguments and subtle insults.  It takes two to start these argu-scussions. Just my 2 cents as a member and a moderator.  Feel free to PM me any replies.

Continue with the CollectA-centric discussion.

[Shonisaurus]

First of all apologize for my bad English.

I read all the claims of Collecta, and what I've noticed is that forum (logically have the right to do), put many drawbacks to the figures of each factory.

In Collecta the deluxe theropods say no clown feet, but nevertheless affirm that have wide hips. But if made with narrow hips, I'm not one hundred percent sure that the animal would remain standing examples for my Deinocheirus and Neovenator Unfortunately, figures from my humble point of view good, but hold very badly.
In Carnegie critiqued the tripod position they held their figures. But if it were not so obviously realistic legs that had needed a base as standard figures of Collecta, and follow the reviews.
Figures Schleich have all reviews deserved on all theropods, regardless that this company is aimed at young children rather than collectors but if you did the clown feet neither such figures would remain, the same goes for the figures exceptions Safari regarding terópodos.

I know this is a harsh statement, but all companies dinosaur toys, they are still nothing ... nothing but toys, would also have to conclude in this case that Collecta has improved its figures in an overwhelming manner and form staged every year.
or other figures.

Moreover right and truth that if we collectible figures then we would go resin figures such as Sideshow. I think anyway rather than the figures critique to improve the expectations not only collectors, but also to educate future generations, but we are always getting hit on figures that no longer toys for children and obviously not are aimed at a more adult audience.

I believe, and the first that we are not righteous often with some figures designed to educate children.

[stargatedalek]

If they are designed/marketed to educate children that that is all the more reason to be harsh! Scleich doesn't simply make kids toys, they makes kids toys and market them as teaching implement's! Personally I find it disgusting that they would do such marketing and yet still make those cartoony figures. I speak from experience when I say more than half the things taught in school curriculum's regarding zoology are flat out wrong, and I blame lazy school boards and sneaky companies like Scleich for it.

A lot of people can't afford sideshow pieces anyway.

[suspsy]

Also, I call dibs on Marsh.

[Shonisaurus]

If they are designed/marketed to educate children that that is all the more reason to be harsh! Scleich doesn't simply make kids toys, they makes kids toys and market them as teaching implement's! Personally I find it disgusting that they would do such marketing and yet still make those cartoony figures. I speak from experience when I say more than half the things taught in school curriculum's regarding zoology are flat out wrong, and I blame lazy school boards and sneaky companies like Scleich for it.

A lot of people can't afford sideshow pieces anyway.

I give a hundred percent reason, children will have a misperception of what the dinosaurs and that is very sad, should be educational from an absolute point of view.

But we must also admit that the millimeter perfect recreations of animals and if they are extinguished and in most cases we have very little information is almost impossible.

It's like wanting to recreate such a humble and simple animal like the current common pigeon, if you should do in the material they are made dinosaurs we speak and we wanted to make it a realistic position without being had to maintain artificially would be very difficult to recreate. Just look at the recreations of any company mentioned and see who needs a foothold in the best and realistically feet are comparatively clown. Another example, the doubly extinct dodo Papo or Safari.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

If they are designed/marketed to educate children that that is all the more reason to be harsh! Scleich doesn't simply make kids toys, they makes kids toys and market them as teaching implement's! Personally I find it disgusting that they would do such marketing and yet still make those cartoony figures. I speak from experience when I say more than half the things taught in school curriculum's regarding zoology are flat out wrong, and I blame lazy school boards and sneaky companies like Scleich for it.

A lot of people can't afford sideshow pieces anyway.

I give a hundred percent reason, children will have a misperception of what the dinosaurs and that is very sad, should be educational from an absolute point of view.

But we must also admit that the millimeter perfect recreations of animals and if they are extinguished and in most cases we have very little information is almost impossible.

It's like wanting to recreate such a humble and simple animal like the current common pigeon, if you should do in the material they are made dinosaurs we speak and we wanted to make it a realistic position without being had to maintain artificially would be very difficult to recreate. Just look at the recreations of any company mentioned and see who needs a foothold in the best and realistically feet are comparatively clown. Another example, the doubly extinct dodo Papo or Safari.

Just a thought to add to your comments if I might Shoni, but I respectively offer that with some dinosaurs we do have pretty solid information of theie general appearance, shape and even body size and color. Sciopnyx for instance, from Italy one of the better preserved  dinosaurs ever recovered. We have extraordinary finds Like Dakota and so many stunning dinosaurs from China that give complete or nearly complete information. We have a psittacosaurus preserved three dimensionally in a slab, that allows us to view the skin, and how it folded around the body and gives the general shape and outline of the animal, as well as having preserved cells, colors and cell patterns.  It makes psittacosaurus a dinosaur we have very solid information for.There is the "roadkill " specimen of Stegosaurus, Big Al, Sue, Lane....The last 25 years in particular have produced so many spectacular dinosaur finds and so much evidence that there really is no valid excuse for producing inaccurate figures of the animals we do have this level of information for.
  Animals like pegomastax or Aquilops, both known from only jaw and skull fragments are another matter and call for some serious scientific guesswork to reconstruct.

[John]

We have a psittacosaurus preserved three dimensionally in a slab, that allows us to view the skin, and how it folded around the body and gives the general shape and outline of the animal, as well as having preserved cells, colors and cell patterns.  It makes psittacosaurus a dinosaur we have very solid information for.

I wasn't aware of that.What colors were found on it?

[sauroid]

We have a psittacosaurus preserved three dimensionally in a slab, that allows us to view the skin, and how it folded around the body and gives the general shape and outline of the animal, as well as having preserved cells, colors and cell patterns.  It makes psittacosaurus a dinosaur we have very solid information for.

I wasn't aware of that.What colors were found on it?

that's amazing.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

We have a psittacosaurus preserved three dimensionally in a slab, that allows us to view the skin, and how it folded around the body and gives the general shape and outline of the animal, as well as having preserved cells, colors and cell patterns.  It makes psittacosaurus a dinosaur we have very solid information for.

I wasn't aware of that.What colors were found on it?

John, in the thread for Patrx fauna collection he has a psittacosaurus he painted to match this paper. I also have a model of psittacosaurs that Martin painted for me, emerging from its den , that is painted to match the colors in the paper.You can view the model here

http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=2574.0



The colors were tans, darker browns, to chocolate mostly, with various shades between. If you would like I can email you the paper that describes the specimen and how it was colored and so forth. In fact, in fairness, anyone who would like this paper can ask and I will email it for you. The entire thing centers around the specimen of psittacosaurus found with quills. In the first paper released on the specimen , the quills were studied and described. The second paper released discusses the scales, coloration, patterning of the skin envelope, and even the stains the colors left where the skin was stretched over the bones as it dried out. I have both papers on the topic and will freely share them if asked.

[Shonisaurus]

Amargasaurus what you say is true but we must point out a few things from my full humble opinion and from my total ignorance about the world of dinosaurs, but that does not mean it's amateur and fascinate me.

[Shonisaurus]

If they are designed/marketed to educate children that that is all the more reason to be harsh! Scleich doesn't simply make kids toys, they makes kids toys and market them as teaching implement's! Personally I find it disgusting that they would do such marketing and yet still make those cartoony figures. I speak from experience when I say more than half the things taught in school curriculum's regarding zoology are flat out wrong, and I blame lazy school boards and sneaky companies like Scleich for it.

A lot of people can't afford sideshow pieces anyway.

I give a hundred percent reason, children will have a misperception of what the dinosaurs and that is very sad, should be educational from an absolute point of view.

But we must also admit that the millimeter perfect recreations of animals and if they are extinguished and in most cases we have very little information is almost impossible.

It's like wanting to recreate such a humble and simple animal like the current common pigeon, if you should do in the material they are made dinosaurs we speak and we wanted to make it a realistic position without being had to maintain artificially would be very difficult to recreate. Just look at the recreations of any company mentioned and see who needs a foothold in the best and realistically feet are comparatively clown. Another example, the doubly extinct dodo Papo or Safari.

Just a thought to add to your comments if I might Shoni, but I respectively offer that with some dinosaurs we do have pretty solid information of theie general appearance, shape and even body size and color. Sciopnyx for instance, from Italy one of the better preserved  dinosaurs ever recovered. We have extraordinary finds Like Dakota and so many stunning dinosaurs from China that give complete or nearly complete information. We have a psittacosaurus preserved three dimensionally in a slab, that allows us to view the skin, and how it folded around the body and gives the general shape and outline of the animal, as well as having preserved cells, colors and cell patterns.  It makes psittacosaurus a dinosaur we have very solid information for.There is the "roadkill " specimen of Stegosaurus, Big Al, Sue, Lane....The last 25 years in particular have produced so many spectacular dinosaur finds and so much evidence that there really is no valid excuse for producing inaccurate figures of the animals we do have this level of information for.
  Animals like pegomastax or Aquilops, both known from only jaw and skull fragments are another matter and call for some serious scientific guesswork to reconstruct.

It's true what they say Amargasaurus and I apologize, but such animals as successful as:
the therizinosaurus of, Daxiatitan information here leave what is known is known for 10 cervical, 10 thoracic, 2 rates, a vertebral arch, right scapula, coracoid and hamstrings rights (wikipedia) ,;
mercurioceratops represented by only two bones collected scaly temporarily equivalent sections of the area above (same source cited),
No argentinosaurus has recovered much of argentinosaurus, just some vertebrae, a tibia, fragmentary ribs, and sacrum. (Wikipedia cited source); or argentinosaurus "has not been recovered much of argentinosaurus, just some vertebrae, a tibia, fragmentary ribs, and sacrum." (Wikipedia cited source); or
Pachycephalosaurus "is known only from a single skull and some pieces of the dome of extremely thick this." (prehistoric wiki), to give some striking examples are not much aware of them, but we can relate with others of their species.
Moreover only would know as you say the dinosaur and especially know the dinosaurs cited as Scipionyx example or archeopteryx, or dakota by mummified remains but if you had not found dakota (the famous hadrosaurus mummified) would think that hadrosaurs were not animals as massive and bulky but fortunately know all his skeleton. His real appearance, skin texture and especially their customs are not from my humble point of view totally easy to know, because obviously millions of years ago disappeared, making it possible exception of the cases I have cited their exact recreation.
Moreover it is my humble opinion, even body parts of a dinosaur know the material they perform different toy factories, vinyl plastic, hard rubber (Rebor), rubber, Nothing more and it is only possible to true recreations more noble material, but yes very fragile as is the high quality polyresin, and they are overpriced figures for their craftsmanship as is the case and I know I repeat myself Sideshow, although other rare plants.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Definitely agree, there are plenty of animals known by only a few fragments, and these might well someday be validated as another known species . Just a note to your last comments, Pachycephalosaurus has had much better remains recovered the past few years, than were previously known. Of your examples, it at least, did seem to leave more diagnostic materials to work with.

[John]

Thanks for that link,amargasaurus cazaui,very interesting things there.
It's fitting that the subject of a species of Psittacosaurus should pop up in a thread about the line I could see most likely to come out with one sooner or later:CollectA.

[stargatedalek]

The problem is not that CollectA shrink wraps. The problem is that they do this strange chimera of half shrink wrapped and half not.

[suspsy]

But aside from the wide hips, which is a trade-off for greater stability, are CollectA's theropods really any bulkier than the those depicted by Walters or Rey?

[Shadowknight1]

After a little closer look at pics of the Carcharodontosaurus compared to the upcoming Acrocanthosaurus, I retract my statement that they're pretty much exactly the same.  It just appeared that way.  Still...the Acrocanthosaurus isn't quite accurate, mainly in the one area that should be done right on any figure of the species: the high spine.  "But Shadowknight1," you say, "he does have a high spine!"  True, yet false at the same time.  The CollectA Acro's spine IS tall and slightly Spinosaurid...but on close inspection, it starts at the base of the neck, just above the shoulders and goes just a little past the base of the tail.  "So what?" you say again?  Acro's high vertebrae start at the base of the skull, going all the way down the neck, back, and sloping down a bit past the base of the tail.  Honestly, I wish I hadn't noticed it, but I did.  The lack of detail to the high  neck vertebrate, the angle the head points(why would a dino roar at the sky anyways?), and the rather dull paint scheme honestly have made this a pass unless REBOR totally screws their's up.  Which, if their skeletal preview is anything to go by, they at least have the basic look correct.