Archaeopteryx vs Archaeopteryx

[suspsy]

Hello. Thought I'd post some comparison pics of Papo's 2014 version and Wild Safari's 2015 version, and give a few personal thoughts on them.






In terms of colour, it's a tie. The Papo version is by far the most colourful creature in the line whereas the  black and white (and a dash of purple) of the WS is beautiful in its own way. Not all extant birds are a rainbow of colours, after all. And we have evidence that at least some of Archaeopteryx's feathers were indeed black.

As far as sculpting goes, I have to give it to the Papo, but only just barely. The plumage is slightly more detailed and I like how the edges of the tail are fluffy instead of smooth. Also, the claws and teeth are better defined.

And as far as scientific accuracy is concerned, the WS easily triumphs. It looks like a graceful, agile aerial predator. The Papo is more like a movie monster.

What are your thoughts?

[Halichoeres]

The WS version is recognizably an Archaeopteryx. The Papo looks more than anything like a JP raptor if you subtracted the modified second toe and added an extremely elaborate bird costume. But it does look pretty damn cool for all that.

[Shonisaurus]

I remain by far the archeopteryx of Wild Safari is the most realistic.

The Papo although it is detailed reminds me more of the South American harpy bird does not match my anatomical and paleontological parameters.

[Shonisaurus]

I remain by far the archeopteryx of Wild Safari is the most realistic.

The Papo although it is detailed reminds me more of the South American harpy bird does not match my anatomical and paleontological parameters.

[joossa]

Great pictures, suspsy.

A poll should be attached to this thread. It would be interesting to see the consensus similar to the Nasutoceratops thread.

Overall, I like the WS one better. The color is done wonderfully. It's weakest feature are the feet, IMO.
The Papo one has killer detail, but as mentioned, doesn't really represent the animal all that well when compared to the WS model.

[sauroid]

they dont look like the same species lol

[Arul]

I chose Papo its so beauiful, but im pretty sure based on scientific accuracy carnegie is on the lead.

[Megalosaurus]

I vote for the Wild Safari one. But I would prefer another colour scheme.

[suspsy]

Great pictures, suspsy.

Thanks!

A poll should be attached to this thread. It would be interesting to see the consensus similar to the Nasutoceratops thread.

Done!

[ItsTwentyBelow]

I've seen them both in person, and I was very happy to add the Wild Safari Archaeopteryx to my collection. I will not likely be adding the Papo...

[Halichoeres]

It might be a little apples and oranges, but I also am very fond of the Kaiyodo Archaeopteryx.

[postsaurischian]

....... and the Colorata .

[tyrantqueen]

I chose Papo its so beauiful, but im pretty sure based on scientific accuracy carnegie is on the lead.

Carnegie didn't make an Archaeopteryx. I wish they had.

Since everyone else is mentioning their favourites, I also choose the Kaiyodo Archaeopteryx. These two didn't really do much for me.

[Dinoguy2]

I like the Papo as a sort of cool retro style figure, but WS actually looks like a real animal. My only nitpick is the shallow chest, it should be deeper and more rounded to account for the feathers. Also, ironically, Papo is more scuentifically accurate on one pretty significant point - the hallux is not reversed. A reversed hallux in Archie is only supported by BANDits afaik.

[Takama]

I picked safari.   Papo is cool but it looks too much like a monster

[tanystropheus]

The Papo version is recognizable as an Archeopteryx, but barely...the hues on the underbelly and the surface of the wings are gorgeous and blend incredibly well - so much wasted effort when the actual Archaeo (and, Microraptor) was dark in color. The neon punk quills on its head looks ridiculous, though. Papo has proven that they are talented with feather application - I hope that Papo considers making a feathered Therizinosaurus or Yutyrannus in the future.

Overall, the WS version is the best Archaeo. It is a great balance between science and art. I appreciate the strong black borders that separate/demarcate the feathers on the dorsal aspect of the wings. It would have been a standout figure for Wild Safari's 2015 line, but was overshadowed by the flawless Sauropelta and Nasutoceratops.

[Arul]

I chose Papo its so beauiful, but im pretty sure based on scientific accuracy carnegie is on the lead.

Carnegie didn't make an Archaeopteryx. I wish they had.

Since everyone else is mentioning their favourites, I also choose the Kaiyodo Archaeopteryx. These two didn't really do much for me.

Sorry i mean safari ltd

[Concavenator]

I wouldn't even call what Papo did as an Archaeopteryx.Because it doesn't look like one.It has so many inaccuracies.The Wild Safari one is by far of the two.Everything from it is far superior to the Papo version,including. detail and everything.Doug's Archie is perfect.

[Libraraptor]

They´re both great, the WS version being a little more realistic.

[Shonisaurus]

You have been forgotten by Bullyland archaeopteryx, now sadly depleted, it is also a good figure.

I have the blue archaeopteryx and I can say that is a pretty good reconstruction, and also should be mentioned though that, well ... better not to mention the archeopteryx of schleich which is aimed at a young audience.