Wild Safari vs Carnegie Collection

[suspsy]

A GM is not the same as a PR person. Far, far more responsibilities for the former. Also far, far riskier for a GM to make a false public statement about his company's products. Especially when he has no reason to do so. Hence why I accept Peter Leung's word. But again, the debate is settled as far as I'm concerned. And the quill issue is separate from the debunked recycling accusation, so one could still make the effort to help CollectA improve the look if not do away with them. As we agreed, it's better than simply complaining about it.

Me, my spare time is devoted to my fiancée first and foremost. Going with her to Costco or selecting the design for wedding invitations or even just watching Castle together on the couch takes priority over dinosaurs. Which is how it should be. If it weren't for smartphones, I'd be online here far less. It'd be easier if she was into dinosaurs as well, but I couldn't change her even if I wanted to. Indeed, her disinterest probably helps keep my hobby in check.

Totally planning on indoctrinating our future children though.

[Sim]

I've noticed under "Account Settings", there's an option which from what I understand allows you to change your name on the forum.  I get the feeling it means the original username would still be required for login though?  I don't know if that's of any help to you amargasaurus, it might be worthwhile to ask dinotoyforum if it's possible to have your name changed?

I appreciate Suspsy sharing what CollectA said regarding the figures we thought could have had recycled sculpts (which isn't a bad thing in everyone's view, so it wasn't an accusation but an observation), even though I was expecting CollectA to neutrally confirm sculpts were reused like Papo's sculptor did regarding the Styracosaurus.  I'm not completely convinced by CollectA's response as they are so much like previous sculpts, and after having looked at all of CollectA's prehistoric figures, I couldn't find any other ones that match others in pose and other details to suggest a recycled sculpt.  Another possiblity is the CollectA Carch/Argentino/Xeno were used as visual references for sculpting the CollectA Acro/Daxia/Medusa/Nasuto.  These are just observations and I'm not looking to get into another debate on this, I definitely don't want another hostile one.

Regarding the topic of this thread, I find the prehistoric animals from Wild Safari and the Carnegie Collection can have slightly different styles, mostly its the skin detail.  However in terms of attention to accuracy and detail I think they blend together well.  I think if there are WS figures you want, you should go for it, some of the WS figures are very good!

[suspsy]

Sim makes a good point. The new CollectA figures in question probably were directly inspired by previous ones. Mr. Leung admitted in his emails to me that his company could probably afford to be a but more creative with their ceratopsid poses. Guess we'll have to wait another year to see what happens. And the term "accusation" does carry quite the negative connotation, so I think I'll use "opinion" from now on whenever this divisive topic comes up. I'm sure it will again once the Nasuto and Medusa are released. Or maybe it'll finally die.

The difference in skin detail between Carnegie and WS is something that I've noticed. WS is all about individual scales and osteoderms whereas Carnegie seems to prefer folds and wrinkles.

Bottom line, I definitely plan on getting the Yutyrannus, the Sauropelta, and the Vagaceratops.

[stargatedalek]

I've noticed under "Account Settings", there's an option which from what I understand allows you to change your name on the forum.  I get the feeling it means the original username would still be required for login though?  I don't know if that's of any help to you amargasaurus, it might be worthwhile to ask dinotoyforum if it's possible to have your name changed?

I've used other sites on the same hosting form and they had the option to change your display name, but your username (for logging in) remains the same. I'm not certain if that's how its been set up in the board settings but I know this format has it as an option.

I also notice a general variance in skin detail between Carnegie and Wild Safari. However I think this could also largely boil down to the species chosen. The Carnegie line of late has been producing a lot of theropods and sauropods, which (in my opinion) feel more natural to represent with the smoother skin folded style. Whereas Wild Safari has been doing a fair bit of ceratopsians and generally smaller sized animals in comparison to Carnegie's sauropods (the scale detail would be invisible at such a scale as the Carnegie sauropods, since sauropods had very fine scales to begin with).

[amargasaurus cazaui]

I've noticed under "Account Settings", there's an option which from what I understand allows you to change your name on the forum.  I get the feeling it means the original username would still be required for login though?  I don't know if that's of any help to you amargasaurus, it might be worthwhile to ask dinotoyforum if it's possible to have your name changed?

I've used other sites on the same hosting form and they had the option to change your display name, but your username (for logging in) remains the same. I'm not certain if that's how its been set up in the board settings but I know this format has it as an option.

I also notice a general variance in skin detail between Carnegie and Wild Safari. However I think this could also largely boil down to the species chosen. The Carnegie line of late has been producing a lot of theropods and sauropods, which (in my opinion) feel more natural to represent with the smoother skin folded style. Whereas Wild Safari has been doing a fair bit of ceratopsians and generally smaller sized animals in comparison to Carnegie's sauropods (the scale detail would be invisible at such a scale as the Carnegie sauropods, since sauropods had very fine scales to begin with).

I think Doug covered this himself at one point regarding his ceratopsians, but if you use the various patches of preserved scales for the various ceratopsians that are being done, thats what he seems to be following. That is how he decides the scale size at least regarding ceratopsians. Another thing about the sculpters themselves...Forest Rogers seems at home most sculpting what she calls her people of the forest type characters.....waifs , and fairies and magical beings . Much of her sculpting centers around things which would tend to have a more "organic" or skin like texure as opposed to scaly reptiles and such, so perhaps that translates a bit into her dinosaur sculpts.

[suspsy]

What is the scale of WS figures compared to Carnegie? Are they about the same?

[stargatedalek]

What is the scale of WS figures compared to Carnegie? Are they about the same?

Neither lines follows a constant scale, so some pieces from each will be to scale with each other, but even within each respective line not every piece is going to match up in scale.

I think Doug covered this himself at one point regarding his ceratopsians, but if you use the various patches of preserved scales for the various ceratopsians that are being done, thats what he seems to be following. That is how he decides the scale size at least regarding ceratopsians. Another thing about the sculpters themselves...Forest Rogers seems at home most sculpting what she calls her people of the forest type characters.....waifs , and fairies and magical beings . Much of her sculpting centers around things which would tend to have a more "organic" or skin like texure as opposed to scaly reptiles and such, so perhaps that translates a bit into her dinosaur sculpts.

Well than I feel her style of sculpting translates very well into dinosaurs, particularly sauropods and large theropods.

[Dinoguy2]

What is the scale of WS figures compared to Carnegie? Are they about the same?

Neither lines follows a constant scale, so some pieces from each will be to scale with each other, but even within each respective line not every piece is going to match up in scale.

I think Doug covered this himself at one point regarding his ceratopsians, but if you use the various patches of preserved scales for the various ceratopsians that are being done, thats what he seems to be following. That is how he decides the scale size at least regarding ceratopsians. Another thing about the sculpters themselves...Forest Rogers seems at home most sculpting what she calls her people of the forest type characters.....waifs , and fairies and magical beings . Much of her sculpting centers around things which would tend to have a more "organic" or skin like texure as opposed to scaly reptiles and such, so perhaps that translates a bit into her dinosaur sculpts.

Well than I feel her style of sculpting translates very well into dinosaurs, particularly sauropods and large theropods.

Most Carnegies used to be very consistent in having 1:40 scale right? I started collecting them back around '89 and all of mine are 1:40 though I know more recent ones have been different. Which is kind of a shame since I'm both a big fan of the newer, larger ones like Carnotaurus and Miragaia and also slightly ocd when it comes to collecting a consistent scale

[SBell]

What is the scale of WS figures compared to Carnegie? Are they about the same?

WS dinos are not in a particular scale (like CollectA), instead being made at mostly similar sizes. Sometimes they are close, like the Edmontosaurus and newest T.rex.

And as people have mentioned, Carnegie has stopped being in specific scales.

[Concavenator]

I'm disappointed with Carnegie too.The new Velociraptor is a good figure,but that's it.Why can't they release something more daring?It looks like they only care for theropods.I'm okay if their labour is diferent to Wild Safari (releasing accurate models of well known dinosaurs/prehistoric animals)but theropods are not the only popular things in paleontology.They've recetnly introduced 4 theropods and two sauropods.Why not doing,say, a Quetzalcoatlus,Edmontosaurus,or Triceratops?Just saying...

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I'm disappointed with Carnegie too.The new Velociraptor is a good figure,but that's it.Why can't they release something more daring?It looks like they only care for theropods.I'm okay if their labour is diferent to Wild Safari (releasing accurate models of well known dinosaurs/prehistoric animals)but theropods are not the only popular things in paleontology.They've recetnly introduced 4 theropods and two sauropods.Why not doing,say, a Quetzalcoatlus,Edmontosaurus,or Triceratops?Just saying...

They have done a Quetz and a couple Trikes...but new versions could work.

[suspsy]

I'm disappointed with Carnegie too.The new Velociraptor is a good figure,but that's it.Why can't they release something more daring?It looks like they only care for theropods.I'm okay if their labour is diferent to Wild Safari (releasing accurate models of well known dinosaurs/prehistoric animals)but theropods are not the only popular things in paleontology.They've recetnly introduced 4 theropods and two sauropods.Why not doing,say, a Quetzalcoatlus,Edmontosaurus,or Triceratops?Just saying...

Indeed. Theropods are by far my favourite dinosaurs, but enough is enough. I've been saying that a Carnegie Protoceratops would have been a perfect companion to the Velociraptor.

[John]

There is still one more theropod that I would want to see from the Carnegie,my childhood favorite Ceratosaurus nasicornis. The Carnegie Museum's line is the one that would most likely do it best in my opinion. (I am not in the least bit bothered by the typical Carnegie bipedal dinosaur pose,as I much prefer that to enlarging the feet or any other modifications that would alter proportions).Of course it will probably never happen in a million years now since one has turned up so recently for the Wild Safari line.
That being said,I agree that a new Carnegie Protoceratops andrewsi would come out extremely well.

[triceratops83]

One of the appealing aspects of the original Carnegie line was the 1:40 scale for all of the dinos. A set scale really ties the toys together into a kind of collectable family, and is a great feature also of the Invicta and Battat figures. I think they lost something by not keeping the set scale.

[Everything_Dinosaur]

As we understand the situation, having had a number of conversations with Safari Ltd personnel on this subject with the Wild Safari model range the company has much more scope and freedom to develop their models.  With the Carnegie Collectibles scale model series there is a much more protracted approvals process due to the need to work with the museum staff.  This limits the number of new model releases, the Wild Safari Dinos range does not have such restrictions and as a result some excellent, top quality replicas have been produced in recent years.  Personal favourites amongst my own collection are the Dunkleosteus, the Ceolacanth, Postosuchus and the newly released Yutyrannus.

We put up blog articles, pictures and reviews quite often on this model range (posted to our own blog site), we also made some short video reviews and we will produce a video review for some of the newest replicas shortly.

You can find pics, reviews and videos on our blog site here: Everything Dinosaur Blog  just search in blog for the model(s) you are interested in.

For the models themselves, try here: Range of Safari Ltd replicas

[suspsy]

Thank you for that helpful information. It's a pity Carnegie is restrained that way.

[Daspletodave]

I still like the Carnegies, but the constant parade of tripod theropods is getting a little stale and repetitive. The Mirigaia and Carnotaurus were stunning. Hopefully they'll do Apatosaurus soon, and a few other herbivores for a change.
The latest Wild Safari dinos are stunning - especially the Sauropelta and the Nasutoceratops. IMO the Wild Safari series has overtaken the Carnegie Museum series.

[Concavenator]

I still like the Carnegies, but the constant parade of tripod theropods is getting a little stale and repetitive. The Mirigaia and Carnotaurus were stunning. Hopefully they'll do Apatosaurus soon, and a few other herbivores for a change.
The latest Wild Safari dinos are stunning - especially the Sauropelta and the Nasutoceratops. IMO the Wild Safari series has overtaken the Carnegie Museum series.

Sad but true.