Great Dinosaur Figures Screwed Over By New Discoveries

[DinoLord]

Well, it does seem like several sauropods (mainly titanosaurs) had some sort of armour, there is even evidence of Alamosaurus having scutes.

Interesting - I had not heard of that before! Any links to more specific info?

Also to stay on topic, a common issue is with ceratopsian hands - they are often pronated too much and don't match up with what footprints show us. Even the old Battats suffer from this.

[Yutyrannus]

Well, it does seem like several sauropods (mainly titanosaurs) had some sort of armour, there is even evidence of Alamosaurus having scutes.

Interesting - I had not heard of that before! Any links to more specific info?

Also to stay on topic, a common issue is with ceratopsian hands - they are often pronated too much and don't match up with what footprints show us. Even the old Battats suffer from this.

Yes, from SVP 2014:

FIRST DEFINITIVE PRESENCE OF OSTEODERMS OF THE
TITANOSAURIAN SAUROPOD DINOSAUR ALAMOSAURUS SANJUANENSIS
CARRANO, Matthew, Smithsonian Institution National Museum of Natural History,
Washington, DC, United States of America, 20013-7012; D'EMIC, Michael, Stony Brook
University, Stony Brook, NY, United States of America
The titanosaurian sauropod dinosaur Alamosaurus sanjuanensis has long been
considered 'unarmored' given the absence of any associated osteoderms despite the
overall abundance of skeletal material. However, a recent re-discovery in the collections
of the National Museum of Natural History reveals that osteoderms were originally
collected with USNM 15660, a well-known articulated specimen of Alamosaurus. The
largest and best-preserved piece is ca. 24 x 13 x 10 cm and closely resembles the 'bulb'
portion of ellipsoid osteoderms from Europe, Brazil, and Madagascar. Two additional,
smaller fragments are also present.

A review of titanosaur- and osteoderm-bearing geological formations underscores the
difficulty in determining whether osteoderms were truly absent in any given titanosaur
species. Associated osteoderms occur with a minority of titanosaur specimens, even
though parsimoniously most taxa are likely to have had osteoderms. We recommend
enlisting two taphonomic criteria when assessing the armored/'unarmored' status of a
titanosaur taxon: (1) whether it is known from multiple individuals with bones
representing all major body regions; and (2) whether it is known from multiple facies
and/or geographic areas. Finally, the armored status of Alamosaurus calls into question
previous suggestions that 'unarmored' titanosaurs were significantly smaller than their
osteoderm-bearing relatives.

[suspsy]

Unsure your age Suspy, but I think generally what you are describing somewhat vanishes as you get older.

I'm 36 years old and I've been collecting dinosaurs since I was about four, so no.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Unsure your age Suspy, but I think generally what you are describing somewhat vanishes as you get older.

I'm 36 years old and I've been collecting dinosaurs since I was about four, so no.

Actually yes, you are quite young in dinosaur collecting terms..let another twenty years roll by and then visit the topic again. It is my bet your feelings will have changed..its a process that comes with time and understanding paleontology will always alter every idea and concept you have held about dinosaurs, and expecting it rather than being bothered by the figures that it makes incorrect.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Titanosaurus with scutes are hardly news, look for instance at Saltosaurus. Their are many specimens known for this ....

[Gwangi]

Well, I'm 30 years old and I'm in the same boat as Amarga, the changes that occur in our understanding of dinosaurs does little to influence my collection. Sure, I prefer accurate figures but as long as it's accurate for the time it was released I have no issues with it. I'm still in the process of collecting all the Invicta models and although I prefer feathers on my dromaeosaurs I have a lot of scaly models from a period where we didn't know they were feathered. I don't even own the Carnegie Tylosaurus or Spinosaurus but I intend to some day, regardless of their accuracy. They're beautiful models that represent what we knew at the time of their release. Plus nostalgia has a factor too, it's the main reason I collect Invicta, Tyco and JP dinosaurs. As a life long dinosaur fan it's nice to have them around as reminders of my younger days and the love I had for them at that time.

[Yutyrannus]

Well, I'm 30 years old and I'm in the same boat as Amarga, the changes that occur in our understanding of dinosaurs does little to influence my collection. Sure, I prefer accurate figures but as long as it's accurate for the time it was released I have no issues with it. I'm still in the process of collecting all the Invicta models and although I prefer feathers on my dromaeosaurs I have a lot of scaly models from a period where we didn't know they were feathered. I don't even own the Carnegie Tylosaurus or Spinosaurus but I intend to some day, regardless of their accuracy. They're beautiful models that represent what we knew at the time of their release. Plus nostalgia has a factor too, it's the main reason I collect Invicta, Tyco and JP dinosaurs. As a life long dinosaur fan it's nice to have them around as reminders of my younger days and the love I had for them at that time.

Same here.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Think it was Dinolord that said once....if we only collected figures that are entirely accurate we would have perhaps a dozen pieces in our collection, and I think that is quite correct and well said. Gwangi also told me once that nearly ever figure that comes out has some anatomical issue, but if the rest of the figure outweighs that, he gets it. I never purchase my figures with the idea of being some super Dino-snob and walking down the row turning my nose up at them. For me at least if I get an oviraptor it fits well with my egg display..if I get a psittacosaurus it fits well with my skeleton....and if I get an amargasaurus it fits well with my sauopods. For me it does not matter if it is quite perfect...each piece in my collection tells a story..wether because it was sculpted by Doug Watson, or Forest, or Dan Lorusso, and I just see more than many do when I look at mine.
       @ Dinolord...I was looking for a classic example of toys that come off the shelf, go to retro and return....so watch out when and if Brontosaurus returns !!Classic example that is quite possible......

[Gwangi]

Basically, if I like the model I buy it. I do prefer a certain level of accuracy, but that does not stop me from buying Papo for example. Collecting based on accuracy is futile and to do it right would require collecting a very limited number of models (keep in mind I mostly collect toys) as well as a constant culling of the existing collection.

[Pawnosuchus]

I constantly upgrade my collection while looking for the most accurate depictions but there has to be limits. I just couldn't afford to replace every figure that has changed. Consequently, I do keep many figures that could be considered outdated in my dinosaur world. Not being a paleontologist it's also difficult to keep up with all the changes which brings me to my question. What's wrong with the Carnegie Spinosaurs? I like that figure and will probably keep it in my collection. I've found that with my collection the overall impression of the diorama outweighs a few inaccuracies.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Recently there was a new paper released re-defining spinosaurus entirely. The animal was suggested by the paper to be somewhat of a semi aquatic dinosaur with a quadrapedal gait, and some serious specialiations for that lifestyle

[sauroid]

perhaps sculptors would start depicting Spinosaurus with webbed feet

[stargatedalek]

so long as it looks nice I feel a retro styled model can be just as interesting as an accurate one
accuracy is definitely a huge plus, but if a model's looks appeal to me I'll buy it regardless

[Patrx]

Collecting based on accuracy is futile and to do it right would require collecting a very limited number of models (keep in mind I mostly collect toys) as well as a constant culling of the existing collection.

In context with the rest of the discussion here, I understand what you mean, but I do think "futile" is a strong word. "Exhausting", perhaps  "Accuracy" is the driving factor in my collection, which works well for me financially. It keeps the display relatively small and tidy. Fortunately, I couldn't care less about what scale my models are in relative to one another - if I did care, I'd have very little to show for it! I have become somewhat less particular since I began my collection five years ago. As long as an observer stands to gain an appreciation for prehistoric animals as real creatures, the display is doing what it ought to be.

Amarga, I do like your suggestion of placing outdated models that're "retired" from the main display on a separate, secondary one. After all, outdated depictions still have educational merit, showing how quickly and drastically things can change in palaeontology.

[tyrantqueen]

Fortunately, I couldn't care less about what scale my models are in relative to one another - if I did care, I'd have very little to show for it!

Hey, it's not all about quantity. I collect in mostly one scale only (1/20, but sometimes I may go larger for tiny species) but I have a large-ish collection (three shelves full). I'm one of those people who is fussy about scale. I am currently building up a Transformers Masterpiece collection, not only because I really like the line, but because they will be in rough scale with each other.

This also might sound weird, but it's kind of fun and rewarding sticking to only one scale.

[laticauda]

Everyone is different in what they collect.  I agree with Gwangi, if I like it (and have the cash to burn) then I go for it.  If you only want accurate toys, thats ok!  For me, If it looks good to my eyes, has some history, or it is a good looking older toy, then I go for it.  I collect different types of toys, but the premise is the same, if I like, then go for it. 

[Meso-Cenozoic]

I find it fascinating to look back through my morphing figures. Each phase represents the knowledge of that particular time in the history of our discoveries and beliefs. So it's interesting to me to view upon my figures and be able to observe the representations from where we were to where we are.

I do try to collect figures that look more realistic than cute and cartoony. And I like the new ones to be as accurate as the current info we have. But, I also like the aesthetics of a piece, too. So I'm a huge fan of Papo as well, even though they can tend to be less accurate, but definitely the most realistic looking of the toy lines. I also try to stick to around a 1/35-1/40 scale. I like to view their comparative sizes to one another. But nowadays that's getting to be a tough goal to stick with. I miss Carnegie's 1/40ish scale they mostly had throughout their line.

[Patrx]

Fortunately, I couldn't care less about what scale my models are in relative to one another - if I did care, I'd have very little to show for it!

Hey, it's not all about quantity. I collect in mostly one scale only (1/20, but sometimes I may go larger for tiny species) but I have a large-ish collection (three shelves full). I'm one of those people who is fussy about scale. I am currently building up a Transformers Masterpiece collection, not only because I really like the line, but because they will be in rough scale with each other.

This also might sound weird, but it's kind of fun and rewarding sticking to only one scale.

Oh, I certainly can see the appeal of collecting based on scale! I only meant that for me to do so along with the other limitations I impose on my collection regarding accuracy would leave me pretty low on dinosaurs.

[stargatedalek]

I prefer to buy pieces in the 1:10 - 1:25 range, but I don't limit myself by scale

[Arul]

I'll take 1 example. I think papo oviraptor is a good figure, but the scientific evidences make a lot of people seem like "hate" it. A lot of harsh comment about this figure review especially on youtube or some blogs. Well if you cant love a figure from its scientific accuration, love it as an art or toy. Respect the artist, and your money because some people sometimes regret after buying something just because a trivial thinks