Nasutoceratops vs.Nasutoceratops vs.Nasutoceratops

[Sim]

When I saw the title of this thread I thought there would be photos of the Battat Nasutoceratops, so I quickly went to the Battat - New for 2015 thread and there weren't any.  Then I clicked on this thread and there weren't any.  I was a bit disappointed.  I also felt that way when the CollectA-New for 2015 thread was started when there was no information on the 2015 releases.  I think it would've been better if this thread had been made after all 3 Nasutoceratops are released - as Roselaar pointed out stock photos aren't always reliable, often the actual figure looks a bit different from stock photos.  Sometimes the figure ends up looking quite unexpected (e.g. Papo Dilophosaurus), and rarely (thankfully) a figure can end up like the CollectA Mapusaurus.  At the very least I think this thread should've waited until there was a photo of a painted Battat Nasutoceratops.  Concavenator, I think it would be good if you put more thought into whether you might be doing something too early.  Sometimes if you wait a little bit more before doing something, you get better results.

Wild Safari. There is no way that the Battat version will be better.

There is no way for you to know that.  With lines which are coming out with excellent figures like Wild Safari and Battat, which version is better will often be entirely subjective.  Also, perhaps there can be more than one best version?

To me both the Wild Safari and the CollectA Nasutoceratops look good, I have no doubt the Battat one will look good too!

[Concavenator]

Not sure why everyone is so positive about the Safari version being superior to CollectA's.Doug's for sure a great sculpt,but I just think the colors and the pose of the CollectA model are more original.It's pretty striking.

[Gwangi]

Not sure why everyone is so positive about the Safari version being superior to CollectA's.Doug's for sure a great sculpt,but I just think the colors and the pose of the CollectA model are more original.It's pretty striking.

The colors and patterns on the CollectA model are far less realistic and when you consider how many CollectA models have a very similar "tribal warpaint" motif. It's actually getting a bit tiresome. The Safari model not only has a more realistic color palate but a higher level of fine detail and a greater degree of accuracy. Taking all that into account, the Safari is the superior model here. It looks like a real animal, the CollectA model is great but ultimately still looks like a toy. Some people prefer models that look like toys, that's fine, but some like myself prefer a more realistic, well detailed and accurate model.

And I don't know if it is just me but the pattern on the frill reminds me of the Ubisoft logo.




Also, I fail the see how the pose of the CollectA is anymore dynamic than that of the Safari. If anything I would say the Safari has a more dynamic pose.

[stargatedalek]

I don't actually see anything to say one is any more accurate than the other
both a have a degree of speculation to them (CollectA has quills, whereas WS has large scutes in a row along the back/face)

the WS definitely has a lot more fine texture detail, but I don't personally consider this to be a particularly important factor, the comparatively minimal (but by no means minimalistic!) texture of the CollectA version is actually more to my preference, its more of an "art style thing"

I actually do think the CollectA is posed more dynamically, its looking sharply to the right while hunching its back in an almost cat like pose, whereas the WS seems to be walking relatively straight forward, not that I think its significantly more dynamic (or that generally speaking I prefer more dynamic poses, to the contrary I generally prefer relatively static poses), but I do prefer it, again this boils down to personal preference

and then that just leaves the colourscheme, I prefer the CollectA in this regard also (which again is entirely personal preference), and with the case of Nasutoceratops I really don't think that the colourscheme has any effect on the pieces accuracy, to the contrary I would think that pretty much anything would be relatively accurate as far as large ceratopsians colour is concerned

[Gwangi]

I don't actually see anything to say one is any more accurate than the other
both a have a degree of speculation to them (CollectA has quills, whereas WS has large scutes in a row along the back/face)

Personally I find the scutes far less speculative but that's just me. I believe we have scutes for advanced ceratopsians, no quills. Accuracy issues seem to lie mostly with the head. The head on the Safari model seems to match the actual skull more closely. Particularly where the beak is concerned. The nose on the CollectA also look far less pronounced. Remember that this animal is named after its nose. It's easy to get distracted from that by its awesome bull horns!

the WS definitely has a lot more fine texture detail, but I don't personally consider this to be a particularly important factor, the comparatively minimal (but by no means minimalistic!) texture of the CollectA version is actually more to my preference, its more of an "art style thing"

I actually do think the CollectA is posed more dynamically, its looking sharply to the right while hunching its back in an almost cat like pose, whereas the WS seems to be walking relatively straight forward, not that I think its significantly more dynamic (or that generally speaking I prefer more dynamic poses, to the contrary I generally prefer relatively static poses), but I do prefer it, again this boils down to personal preference

Meh, looks like it's just standing there with its head turned to me! This is all personal preference and I'm aware of that. I was pointing facets like detail out in an attempt to explain why the majority of forum members prefer the Safari model (because that was his question).

and then that just leaves the colourscheme, I prefer the CollectA in this regard also (which again is entirely personal preference), and with the case of Nasutoceratops I really don't think that the colourscheme has any effect on the pieces accuracy, to the contrary I would think that pretty much anything would be relatively accurate as far as large ceratopsians colour is concerned

Didn't say the paint job and patterns were more accurate on the Safari, only more realistic. There is a difference. Papo is often inaccurate but you can't say they're not realistic. That said, anything can go but I don't find tribal warpaint patterns very likely on any animal.

[stargatedalek]

I can definitely see how the snout looks less pronounced on the CollectA, I was attributing this to the head being on an angle but whos to say for sure until we get more pictures to go off of
the bill is also much larger but I figured there was some room for liberty there (fell free to correct me)

I hadn't meant that as a direct response to you, I just felt like going into greater depth and I copied your formula

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

I prefer the Safari one, also. The more crisp details and more natural-looking paint scheme make it a more realistic figure to me. IMO the CollectA looks woolly like a sheep.

[Gwangi]

I can definitely see how the snout looks less pronounced on the CollectA, I was attributing this to the head being on an angle but whos to say for sure until we get more pictures to go off of
the bill is also much larger but I figured there was some room for liberty there (fell free to correct me)

I hadn't meant that as a direct response to you, I just felt like going into greater depth and I copied your formula

The issue with the CollectA could very well be just from the angle, I hope it is. The beak portion is off though, that's certainly seems apparent. I still ultimately like it though. Like I've said before, it's the best ceratopsian model from CollectA thus far.

EDIT: Yeah, it really does kind of look like a sheep.  I had not made that connection before, good eye there Pachy. 

[Daspletodave]

Personally, I like the Wild Safari version better. But I'm sure that the Battat version will be awesome too.

[Patrx]

The hands on the Safari version are what really have me sold on it - they're oriented neutrally, feature separated digits, and are accurately proportioned.

[Meso-Cenozoic]

I'm totally agreeing with everything Gwangi has been saying. Very good descriptive comments! So, it's obviously WS for me too.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

I really dont have a dog in this fight, but I do find it rather stunning that Dan's Battat model was not incorporated into the discussion before placing it in the forum, especially since he does spend the time and effort to come, discuss his ideas, plans and models with us all. Considering the health problems he is also juggling I find that very thoughtful and snubbing his model here does bug me.
  By the same vein of thought, I always give the Safari dinosaurs extra consideration simply because their sculpter cares enough to come here to the forum and interact, accept input and ideas, and to listen .
   However if you do it by the models themselves, I find many of Gwangi's thoughts here quite accurate. ( I will be checking my vitamin supply in a bit , because i seldom agree with Gwangi twice in the same day, but there it is) I refuse anymore to even purchase a quilled ceratopsian of a more derived type simply because I find no real evidence to support it. I can get behind the scutes, as they do not seem directly unlikely and are at least possible. I too find myself tiring quickly of the entire "war tribe of the heart of glamazon" painting apps. Finally the rostral thing.....it hurts my head looking at it honestly because its such a paintfully obvious thing.
  Evaluating Doug's piece...I did just what Patrx did and went for the hands...and what do you know? Doug got it right. I also personnaly prefer the texture and coloring of Doug's model far more, but this is simply preference and nothing I can put a solid finger on. I generally buy two of any model I get anymore, and I will get two of the Safari, but the collecta will either get snubbed or only one copy .

[DinoLord]

Yeah the CollectA doesn't really do it for me either. The WS version seems to me much more refined. I look forward to seeing Battat's version - Dan's Triceratops has always been my favorite toy depiction of that genus.

[loru1588]

Yeah the CollectA doesn't really do it for me either. The WS version seems to me much more refined. I look forward to seeing Battat's version - Dan's Triceratops has always been my favorite toy depiction of that genus.

Thanks DinoLord, but Greg Wenzel sculpted the Triceratops.

[DinoLord]

Ah my bad. I am also rather fond of the Terra ceratopsians we have already seen (and I know for sure those are your sculpts!). The Pachyrhinosaurus has a real sense of girth to it that I feel is often lacking from ceratopsian figures. The Safari Nasutoceratops also captures well this I think, while the CollectA not so much. They're all nice sculpts but I am not enough of a ceratopsian fanatic to feel compelled to pick up the CollectA one (two figures of a newly described genus is plenty!).

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Personally, I like the Wild Safari version better. But I'm sure that the Battat version will be awesome too.

Doug certainly does his research..of course so does Dan...it will be an epic showdown to be sure..lol

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

Personally, I like the Wild Safari version better. But I'm sure that the Battat version will be awesome too.

Doug certainly does his research..of course so does Dan...it will be an epic showdown to be sure..lol

Maybe once both are released we can customize them to be fighting one another.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Personally, I like the Wild Safari version better. But I'm sure that the Battat version will be awesome too.

Doug certainly does his research..of course so does Dan...it will be an epic showdown to be sure..lol

Maybe once both are released we can customize them to be fighting one another.

Could work. Also all these pieces in relatively the same scale if painted to match would make a nice herd.

[Meso-Cenozoic]

Well I certainly don't want to come across as snubbing Dan. I was just putting in my opinion of the ones posted so far since they're here and while waiting for Dan's. But when Dan's does come out, I'm pretty sure it will also then come down to two to compare, at least for me -- WS and Terra. Dan's just as anatomically conscious as Doug, IMO. Then, it will simply be a beauty pageant; pure aesthetics.

(BTW, amargasaurus cazaui, the vitamin supply bit and agreeing with Gwangi twice in one day, gave me a good chuckle! )

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Well I certainly don't want to come across as snubbing Dan. I was just putting in my opinion of the ones posted so far since they're here and while waiting for Dan's. But when Dan's does come out, I'm pretty sure it will also then come down to two to compare, at least for me -- WS and Terra. Dan's just as anatomically conscious as Doug, IMO. Then, it will simply be a beauty pageant; pure aesthetics.

(BTW, amargasaurus cazaui, the vitamin supply bit and agreeing with Gwangi twice in one day, gave me a good chuckle! )

Glad I could bring a smile....I sometimes buck heads with Gwangi, however mostly in Jurassic part settings. I consider him one of the more well informed and thought out dinosaur fans here, in reality. We just disagree now and then cause its in the script !!!