Nasutoceratops vs.Nasutoceratops vs.Nasutoceratops

[joossa]

It's a nice sculpt and nice pose as Patrx mentioned, but the paint job, as with most Battat Terra dino models, kills it for me. I'll be sticking with the WS one.

Also, maybe it's the photos, but does anyone think the beak on the CollectA one is too large/exaggerated?

[amargasaurus cazaui]

It's a nice sculpt and nice pose as Patrx mentioned, but the paint job, as with most Battat Terra dino models, kills it for me. I'll be sticking with the WS one.

Also, maybe it's the photos, but does anyone think the beak on the CollectA one is too large/exaggerated?

Joel, I think with the collecta you are referring to the rostral, which is distorted or not quite correctly formed, rather than the beak itself.

[Kayakasaurus]

The Nasutoceratops looks awesome Dan! Great job! I can't wait to examine it in the store!

Here is a thing I did to compare these two Nasutoceratops. They have been scaled so that the body is the same size. The Battat head is considerably bigger while the Safari tail is longer. That is however in ratio... In real life the figures may be different sizes.

[Manatee]

Wow! I love the Battat Nasutoceratops! Fantastic work as always, Dan. The proportions look to be spot-on, and the paint job is very colorful, but not in excess. Looks like two more Nasutoceratops will be joining my Safari in the future...

[joossa]

It's a nice sculpt and nice pose as Patrx mentioned, but the paint job, as with most Battat Terra dino models, kills it for me. I'll be sticking with the WS one.

Also, maybe it's the photos, but does anyone think the beak on the CollectA one is too large/exaggerated?

Joel, I think with the collecta you are referring to the rostral, which is distorted or not quite correctly formed, rather than the beak itself.

Thanks for the correction. Makes sense. It's always looked a bit off/out of proportion ever since I saw it for the first time...

[tanystropheus]

This is a very well made Nasutoceratops. I guess I was wrong earlier when I stated that the Safari version will blow it out of the water. They are roughly on par. The Nasutoceratops has that Battat charm, and the proportions are believable. Excellent head sculpt!

I also like the pose- not over-the-top, not-so-neutral either, but distinctive enough in its own right; the slight head tilt gives off a rather naturalistic demeanor.

[Yutyrannus]

Awesome Nasutuceratops! It will definitely be a part of my collection once it is released, and I can hardly wait to see the Yutyrannus, Majungasaurus, and Plateosaurus .

[amargasaurus cazaui]

It's a nice sculpt and nice pose as Patrx mentioned, but the paint job, as with most Battat Terra dino models, kills it for me. I'll be sticking with the WS one.

Also, maybe it's the photos, but does anyone think the beak on the CollectA one is too large/exaggerated?

Joel, I think with the collecta you are referring to the rostral, which is distorted or not quite correctly formed, rather than the beak itself.

Thanks for the correction. Makes sense. It's always looked a bit off/out of proportion ever since I saw it for the first time...

The sculpter for collecta seems to sculpt his ceratopsids, in this fashion. Not sure the thinking, but it is distorted and looks.....distended or something

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Dan had asked my thoughts about the Nasutoceratops and I had suggested I felt the hands, feet, rostral, frill and so forth looked correct to me....my only comment/suggestion was perhaps to add another color into the frill to give it more display potential. Going by my own personnal tastes, I felt it was nice to see another nicely done sculpt, and again according to my own preference, without the mohawk of quills.

[DinoLord]

I've added the Battat option to the poll and reset all the votes, let the voting begin! 

[Takama]

Finally, i can relly vote.       And what do you know, Battat Is my choice.  It just looks more natural to me then the other two

[Dinoguy2]

Ah, ok. I thought the Nasutoceratops was for Terra, and I remember Dan mentioning that they wanted all of those in roughly the same size class (hence a dwarf sauropod).

It is for Terra. Battat's size limits for the Terra series are only on the actual figure, not the species or scale. The 1:40 scale was Dan's decision. He could've sculpted any species in whatever scale necessary for the figure to meet Battat's figure size requirements, but he decided to make them all 1:40 (so that they fit in with the Boston MOS set), which limited his species choices to a certain size class in order for the figure to meet the size requirements set by Battat.

Right... thats' exactly what I mean. A 1:40 scale Nasutoceratops would be about 11-12cm long with a 3.5-4cm head. That's about three quarters the size of the Terra Pachyrhino. (Remember that Pachyrhinosaurus is one of the largest-ever ceratopsids). Maybe that's not so big a difference, just seems on the small side compared to the other Terras. But I don't know what the Terra size range for specific figures is, maybe it is within range and I'm over thinking it

And yeah, it looks awesome, I think I'll be getting this one over Collecta (the head seems a bit too big on that one too).

[Daspletodave]

The Battat Nasutoceratops is awesome. Another triumph for Dan LoRusso!

[loru1588]

Just to clarify, The Terra Series/Dan LoRusso Collection is roughly 1:40th scale all around. My size guidelines are 5.5" - 7" ( the actual linear length can be up to 9": tail curled, head turned, etc. ). In life not every animal/dinosaur was a carbon copy of the holotype. Sexual dimorphism, region, species variations & age are major factors. Look a the variations in size and shape of known Triceratops skulls. Maybe my versions head is a little on the larger size. Maybe it's a dominant male or older female making it a larger example. I think too much attention is spent on trivial discrepancies not only with my work but the great work of Doug & some of the other sculptors here. These are representations of living animals not scale model airplanes that have absolute measurements. Enjoy the look and the feel of the critter and spend less time with a set of calipers!! LOL!! On a secondary note, I  really like Doug's piece and thought it would be nice to have the 2 pieces roughly the same size so you guys can customize them as a pair & such. See, always thinking!! LOL!

[DinoLord]

Yeah modern animals do tend to show variation as to body size, proportions, etc. I think the Battat and Safari pieces go very well together, with complimentary sizes and color schemes.

[Dinoguy2]

Just to clarify, The Terra Series/Dan LoRusso Collection is roughly 1:40th scale all around. My size guidelines are 5.5" - 7" ( the actual linear length can be up to 9": tail curled, head turned, etc. ). In life not every animal/dinosaur was a carbon copy of the holotype. Sexual dimorphism, region, species variations & age are major factors. Look a the variations in size and shape of known Triceratops skulls. Maybe my versions head is a little on the larger size. Maybe it's a dominant male or older female making it a larger example. I think too much attention is spent on trivial discrepancies not only with my work but the great work of Doug & some of the other sculptors here. These are representations of living animals not scale model airplanes that have absolute measurements. Enjoy the look and the feel of the critter and spend less time with a set of calipers!! LOL!! On a secondary note, I  really like Doug's piece and thought it would be nice to have the 2 pieces roughly the same size so you guys can customize them as a pair & such. See, always thinking!! LOL!

Yes, overall look and feel are the most important thing. But, as an admitted scale need and paleo nerd, I like my scale collection to be, well, exactly scaled. Yes variation exists, but the ideal, for me, would be for a figure not just to represent a species but a particular specimen. I'm still waiting for somebody to make a modern figure of the AMNH Anatotitan specimens! (Did I mention I'm a stickler when it comes to me scale collection?) that's why, while the Carnegie and Papo Dimetrodon are excellently made, I have the tiny little original Carnegie one out on display. Obviously that's not representative of what should be made, that's just what I'm looking for personally when I add a limited number of figures to my set. Another example is the Battar Triceratops, my favorite version of all time. While correctly scaled, it has very large epiossifications which are a subadult trait seen only in mid sized specimens. So, I have it, of course, there's no way I could pass up such a great figure, it's just not next to my main display collection. Long story short, it's not you, it's me. I have 1:40 ocd.and for me the calipers are half the fun of collecting

And by the way, Dan, not sure if the above was directed in reply to me, but yours and Doug's sculpts seem to be just about right in terms of head and body proportions. The Collecta one has a big giant head that kinda makes it look more like a chasmosaurine.

[loru1588]

Dinoguy, my post was a general post and not directed to anyone in particular. I've received private messages and emails about the Nasutoceratops as well as other sculpts in the Terra Series and even form the MOS Series. Some people don't realize the MOS Series is over 20 years old, so the science that guided us then has changed with the times. That is why at some point in the future I hope I can update the models that need tweaking as well as some major changes!

[Arul]

The vote is restart i still vote the wild safari

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Beautiful work Dan! Man I can't decide which I prefer over Dan and Doug's work..both look superb. Not to bash CollectA either but I do like Dan and Doug's better than it..so at I know who is 2nd right? lol

[joossa]

Beautiful work Dan! Man I can't decide which I prefer over Dan and Doug's work..both look superb. Not to bash CollectA either but I do like Dan and Doug's better than it..so at I know who is 2nd right? lol

I wish the Battat one was out. It and the WS one would make a nice pair on the shelf for those who like both.