Carnegie Collection Discontinued

[Shadowknight1]

I used to have an old Carnegie Brachiosaurus that I got at a museum.  That sucker was huge!  I wonder if I still have it in storage somewhere...

If anyone has it yet, is Carnegie's 2015 Velociraptor worth getting?

[DinoLord]

If anyone has it yet, is Carnegie's 2015 Velociraptor worth getting?

There are some accuracy issues, but overall it's an aesthetically pleasing model that many people seem to enjoy.

[suspsy]

Getting back to Carnegie, I'm thinking I should try and add the Diplodocus to my collection. What are people's thoughts on it?

The old one or newer one? Not that it matters, the answer is yes either way. Like I said in the top 10 poll, the newer Diplodocus is among my favorite dinosaurs models. Ever in fact. I dare say it is only bested by the Battat model where models of Diplodocus are concerned. As for the old one, it's good for it's time (and has a cameo in JP!). Any large sauropod in 1:40 scale is worth getting IMO.

I meant the newer one. My Carnegie assortment consists entirely of newer models and I prefer to keep it that way. I suppose I should get the Cryolophosaurus and the Concavenator too while I'm at it. And the Velociraptor, of course.

Again, I do wish that we'd gotten at least one new ceratopsid before this development. Any species would have been wonderful.

[Shadowknight1]

If anyone has it yet, is Carnegie's 2015 Velociraptor worth getting?

There are some accuracy issues, but overall it's an aesthetically pleasing model that many people seem to enjoy.

Biggest issues I think I'd have with the figure, just from the reviews and pictures are: 1) It's a tripod...really?  WHY?!  2) The teeth!  They look like white gums from a distance.   3) I might be wrong, but aren't Velociraptors supposed to have primary feathers at least past the second finger?

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Carnegie diplo...nuff said....

[amargasaurus cazaui]

CollectA could have done a much better looking Acrocanthosaurus and not made it from the Carcharodontosaurus mold.

The Acrocanthosaurus is not made from the Carcharodontosaurus mold. That was never anything more than a unsubstantiated rumour started by fans, and CollectA debunked it awhile back.

I think even Suspy and I agree they were not mold copied from one another, even if various efforts by Collecta seem to borrow heavily from one another for pose, inspiration and style. While some of their models do appear almost cookie cutter identical other than for a few alterations, they are not mold copied. They may lack creativity or originality, but they are apparently seperate albeit similar sculpts.

Yes, we've seen comparison photos of the Nasuto, Medusa, and Xeno, and of the Daxiatitan and the Argentinosaurus, and while there are similarities (which you would expect to see with ceratopsids and titanosaurs), it is readily apparent that they are all unique molds. It'll certainly be interesting to see the Acro compared alongside the Carchar.

It is my earnest hope that CollectA, having been made aware of this controversy, will work on coming up with a wider variety of poses for their 2016 assortment.

Getting back to Carnegie, I'm thinking I should try and add the Diplodocus to my collection. What are people's thoughts on it?

And to answer this...no, they are not models made from the same mold however, they are heavily copied one from another as side by side comparison demonstrate. The Medusa and Xenoceratops are almost identical....and no these are not similarities that should be expected with ceratopsids, titanosaurs or any other type of dinosaur. It is rather a weak excuse for heavily copying from one model to the next....in the theropods the effect is all the more pronounced because they tend to shrink wrap the skulls and then widen the hips giving a the starved at one end and gorged at the other look, which is quite awkward. This aside from the bunches of accuracy issues that plague the models, as well as the heavily documented problems with weak materials and falling over. As this is a topic that constantly keeps coming up, perhaps Collecta model issues should have its own thread.

[John]

If anyone has it yet, is Carnegie's 2015 Velociraptor worth getting?

There are some accuracy issues, but overall it's an aesthetically pleasing model that many people seem to enjoy.

Biggest issues I think I'd have with the figure, just from the reviews and pictures are: 1) It's a tripod...really?  WHY?!  2) The teeth!  They look like white gums from a distance.   3) I might be wrong, but aren't Velociraptors supposed to have primary feathers at least past the second finger?

No one knows for sure what the feathers on Velociraptor mongoliensis were really like in life,but based on quill knobs found preserved on one specimen it would hardly surprise me if it did.

I have that new Velociraptor model in person and it looks like they gave it similar wings to this Sinornithosaurus model on display at the Carnegie Museum
https://archosaurmusings.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/img_6912.jpg



And as an aside,while it's wings are still very small,the feathers of the new Velociraptor's wings actually do start at the second finger.This is especially clear on it's right wing,unlike what is seen in the prototype pic. 

[Concavenator]

I have the Velociraptor,and it's really good.Not as accurate as could have been,but the colors are nice and it's been very well crafted.Better in hand than any pics could show,mainly because in photos it appears to be glossy,but it really isn't.

[sauroid]

the possibility of Safari making 1:40 "deluxe" figures is just too exciting. does this also mean that Safari would also start making prehistoric mammals/etc in the future?

[John]

the possibility of Safari making 1:40 "deluxe" figures is just too exciting. does this also mean that Safari would also start making prehistoric mammals/etc in the future?

I thought that it was Safari that decided not to do more mammals rather than the Carnegie Museum.Not that it would hurt my feelings is Safari did suddenly come out with some like a Uintatherium or something.If not Safari,then I'm sure somebody will (the Moropus coming up this year from CollectA actually does look good to me,so I take back a little of what I said about that brand...)

And yes,it would be exiting to see Safari come up with a "deluxe" line to replace the departed Carnegie Museum line,especially if done by a sculptor like Doug Watson.The sky would be the limit as to what could turn up,even things already in the Wild Safari line.Just the excuse I need to hope for another Ceratosaurus for instance to turn up.

[Tyto_Theropod]

If anyone has it yet, is Carnegie's 2015 Velociraptor worth getting?

There are some accuracy issues, but overall it's an aesthetically pleasing model that many people seem to enjoy.

Biggest issues I think I'd have with the figure, just from the reviews and pictures are: 1) It's a tripod...really?  WHY?!  2) The teeth!  They look like white gums from a distance.   3) I might be wrong, but aren't Velociraptors supposed to have primary feathers at least past the second finger?

No one knows for sure what the feathers on Velociraptor mongoliensis were really like in life,but based on quill knobs found preserved on one specimen it would hardly surprise me if it did.

I have that new Velociraptor model in person and it looks like they gave it similar wings to this Sinornithosaurus model on display at the Carnegie Museum
https://archosaurmusings.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/img_6912.jpg



And as an aside,while it's wings are still very small,the feathers of the new Velociraptor's wings actually do start at the second finger.This is especially clear on it's right wing,unlike what is seen in the prototype pic. 

Just putting in my penny's worth, as I've read up quite a lot about Velociraptor (it being one of my favourite dinosaurs and all...). As soon as I saw the stock photo, I knew I was going to own that model. I'm still waiting for mine to arrive in the post, but from the photos I'd say yes, there are accuracy issues, but honestly, who's complaining when you compare it to something like the Schleich one? Frankly, any Velociraptor with feathers is a godsend right now, and ATM the Carnegie one is probably the best one on the market. So I'd say, grab one while you can. I'll update when I'm able to see it in person

[stargatedalek]

Dromaeosaur wings are actually very well known in structure, at this point velociraptor having "full" wings is no longer a matter of most likely, but rather of near certainly.
Accuracy aside its still an aesthetically pleasing model, but its one I can live without (having the Favorite Kinto one on my bucket list doesn't help that much as one might imagine ).

[Dobber]

Dromaeosaur wings are actually very well known in structure, at this point velociraptor having "full" wings is no longer a matter of most likely, but rather of near certainly.
Accuracy aside its still an aesthetically pleasing model, but its one I can live without (having the Favorite Kinto one on my bucket list doesn't help that much as one might imagine ).

Is this the one you are wanting?
http://www.hlj.com/product/FAV73311/Fig
If so, Hobby Link Japan is a very reputable online store. I ordered this very item a few weeks ago and they where able to get it for me very quickly. It arrived last week along with the Trcic Triceratops.

Chris

[stargatedalek]

Well it seems my memory has indeed failed me, its wings are also incomplete. Both are however very pleasing models regardless. Thanks so much for the link!

[Patrx]

This article at DinoGoss addresses the accuracy issues of the Carnegie Velociraptor, and some of the other Carnegies. That's the blog of Matt Martyniuk, definitely the go-to guy for reconstructing extinct maniraptorans. It's an interesting read, and our forum even gets a mention!

[John]

This article at DinoGoss addresses the accuracy issues of the Carnegie Velociraptor, and some of the other Carnegies. That's the blog of Matt Martyniuk, definitely the go-to guy for reconstructing extinct maniraptorans. It's an interesting read, and our forum even gets a mention!

Patrx is right about that.Matt Martyniuk so far has done the most believable feathered dinosaur reconstructions I've seen.He's not blinded by nostalgia,so he actually makes then look appropriately bird-like in their appearance.
Here's a link to more of his work:

http://mpm.panaves.com/index.htm

With luck,maybe he can be consulted with should any other feathered dinosaurs turn up,like maybe another Velociraptor.Safari is going to need one now that the Carnegie line is out of production.

[tanystropheus]

This article at DinoGoss addresses the accuracy issues of the Carnegie Velociraptor, and some of the other Carnegies. That's the blog of Matt Martyniuk, definitely the go-to guy for reconstructing extinct maniraptorans. It's an interesting read, and our forum even gets a mention!

Woah, he seemed really critical of the Carnegie Velociraptor and Caudipteryx, stating that the application of feathers necessitates "a mobile exoskeleton that re-defines the entire body". It is an interesting conceptual evidence-based framework that makes me wonder if there any bold toy companies out there that will ever attempt it, especially with regards to medium and large sized dinosaurs.

[Concavenator]

While he points out the errors very accurately,I think my 'to go' person when dromaeosaurs are concerned would definetely be Emily Willoughby.

[Patrx]

While he points out the errors very accurately,I think my 'to go' person when dromaeosaurs are concerned would definetely be Emily Willoughby.

Good point! Her work is excellent, and she always seems to be the first one to illustrate cutting-edge ideas and information on the subject.

[suspsy]

And to answer this...no, they are not models made from the same mold however, they are heavily copied one from another as side by side comparison demonstrate. The Medusa and Xenoceratops are almost identical....and no these are not similarities that should be expected with ceratopsids,

I respectfully disagree. As I have pointed out in the past, these are closely related animals that share near-identical bodies, after all. It's perfectly reasonable for them to have strong similarities. As well, there are only so many poses you can put heavy-set quadrupedal animals in without the need of a base.

Wild Safari and Papo's ceratopsids also look very similar in body design and pose when placed together in a line. Heck, the Papo Pachyrhinosaurus and Styracosaurus actually ARE copies of one another. Similarly, almost all of Carnegie's large theropods are in virtually the same tripod pose with their heads turned to one side and their mouths open. It's been that way for years now.

I think the reason CollectA is receiving so much of this criticism is not because their ceratopsids are inherently inferior, but rather because they've made far more than any other company and thus are more noticeable.

.in the theropods the effect is all the more pronounced because they tend to shrink wrap the skulls and then widen the hips giving a the starved at one end and gorged at the other look, which is quite awkward.

The wide hips on the CollectA Carcharodontosaurus are the price of crafting a large theropod figure that doesn't have inaccurate giant feet like the Papo Running T. Rex and doesn't stand in an inaccurate tripod stance like the Carnegie Spinosaurus. It's an unfortunate trade-off, but that's how it is. In all cases, such flaws only ruin the figure if you let them. Wide hips certainly didn't stop the Carcharodontosaurus from being voted Best Toy of 2014 by the members of this forum.

This aside from the bunches of accuracy issues that plague the models

Accuracy is hardly an issue that is exclusive to CollectA, as pointed out previously.

as well as the heavily documented problems with weak materials and falling over.

I honestly haven't had either of those problems yet, although my CollectA collection is admittedly small at present. I can say that I have seen severe warping in both my Carnegie Giganotosaurus and Spinosaurus though. I can actually knock either of them over simply by blowing on them.

As this is a topic that constantly keeps coming up, perhaps Collecta model issues should have its own thread.

I don't believe a thread devoted to perceived issues in CollectA, Papo, Safari, Schleich, Rebor, or any other company is a constructive idea. We've already seen one individual in this thread behave inappropriately towards another poster simply because the latter expressed his personal fondness for CollectA. Speaking for myself, the main reason I like to come to this forum is to celebrate dinosaur toys, not to point out all the problems with them.

That's not to say that such topics shouldn't ever be discussed, but I don't think they should be overly encouraged. It won't solve anything and it could lead to more animosity between people. I think the most constructive thing to do if you're perpetually annoyed by inaccuracies in a dinosaur toy line is to contact the manufacturer and politely express those grievances. At best, you could be contributing towards improved products and at worst you can say you were proactive.