The best figure of every species, according to Halichoeres

[Halichoeres]

So happy to see you adding to this thread again...

Thanks, me too! Finishing the dissertation was not conducive to acquiring toys, let alone measuring and photographing them.

hey cool addition to your nice thread Halichoeres.

Thanks!

Some excellent catches.  It's a wonder to me that any firm will make Silurian/Devonian fishes!  I loved your "He's YOUR kid" photo - it made me smile on a grim snowy morning.

As for the issue with the Safari paint applications, couldn't agree more.  Lovely sculpts a bit disguised by their mass market production.  I'm seriously considering sending a couple to Martin to paint properly when the next batch is available.  I was thrilled by his work for me on the Battat Pachyrhinosaurus and impressed by the Anzu that our own Paintingdinos repainted and showed recently.  A different paint job can work wonders.

I envy your ability to be ruthless!  I want the new Safari Triceratops but that doesn't stop me lusting desperately after an old Battat as well.

Ruthlessness is the only way I can afford this hobby, honestly. And it certainly saves on space. Maybe one day when I have a real (permanent) job I'll be no less ruthless but I'll get some of my favorite sculpts with sloppy paint jobs repainted (or do it myself?).

As for Paleozoic fish, it's a wonder to me that companies don't make more of them, as weird as they are! But I suppose kids (or more importantly, their parents) will tend to gravitate to the tried-and-true Tyrannosaurus/Triceratops/Velociraptor/insert-stock-dinosaur-here.

[ceratopsian]

.........As for Paleozoic fish, it's a wonder to me that companies don't make more of them, as weird as they are! But I suppose kids (or more importantly, their parents) will tend to gravitate to the tried-and-true Tyrannosaurus/Triceratops/Velociraptor/insert-stock-dinosaur-here.

I fear so.  I didn't mean the firms shouldn't be making them, only that the Palaeozoic fish would seem a less safe option in sales terms.

[Sim]

I happened across this awful little dinosaur and was surprised to observe Yaverlandia inscribed on the belly. Yaverlandia was initially described as a pachycephalosaur, which would've been odd since it's 1) from western Eurasia and 2) from the Lower Cretaceous. The extremely fragmentary specimen (most of a frontal and some attached slivers of other bones) has since been re-examined and might instead represent a maniraptoran. So this toy managed to be prescient, although I'm sure it was entirely accidental, and anyway it ought to have feathers if they're going to make it a theropod. Probably about 1:10.

It seems the theropod identity of Yaverlandia comes from quite a number of years ago, from a 2008 paper it seems?  If so, that the figure represents it as a maniraptoran might not be prescient or accidental, it might just have been based on the conclusion from that paper.  What I find surprising is that a figure representing Yaverlandia has even been made.

I envy your ability to be ruthless!  I want the new Safari Triceratops but that doesn't stop me lusting desperately after an old Battat as well.

Ruthlessness is the only way I can afford this hobby, honestly. And it certainly saves on space. Maybe one day when I have a real (permanent) job I'll be no less ruthless but I'll get some of my favorite sculpts with sloppy paint jobs repainted (or do it myself?).

I wonder if Halichoeres's ruthlessness might be affected by how much he likes certain animals, though?  For example, he might only need one Triceratops figure, but what about for a type of fish...    There seems to be at least three Dunkleosteus figures in Halichoeres's collection, according to Reply #744: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=3390.msg178271#msg178271

Am I remembering right, Halichoeres, that you're getting the 2018 CollectA Dunkleosteus too?  If so, will that be four Dunkleosteus figures in your collection?

[Halichoeres]

It seems the theropod identity of Yaverlandia comes from quite a number of years ago, from a 2008 paper it seems?  If so, that the figure represents it as a maniraptoran might not be prescient or accidental, it might just have been based on the conclusion from that paper.  What I find surprising is that a figure representing Yaverlandia has even been made.

Yeah, it was a surprise to me too. I have no idea when this was produced, but I suppose it's possible that the makers knew about Yaverlandia's reassignment. I would also be completely unsurprised if somebody has a figure that is identical in every respect except that it's stamped "Velociraptor" or "Deinonychus."

I envy your ability to be ruthless!  I want the new Safari Triceratops but that doesn't stop me lusting desperately after an old Battat as well.

Ruthlessness is the only way I can afford this hobby, honestly. And it certainly saves on space. Maybe one day when I have a real (permanent) job I'll be no less ruthless but I'll get some of my favorite sculpts with sloppy paint jobs repainted (or do it myself?).

I wonder if Halichoeres's ruthlessness might be affected by how much he likes certain animals, though?  For example, he might only need one Triceratops figure, but what about for a type of fish...    There seems to be at least three Dunkleosteus figures in Halichoeres's collection, according to Reply #744: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=3390.msg178271#msg178271

Am I remembering right, Halichoeres, that you're getting the 2018 CollectA Dunkleosteus too?  If so, will that be four Dunkleosteus figures in your collection?

I'll bend a bit for fish, it's true, although some of that is just because I want to reward companies for making fish. I wish they would make something other than Dunkleosteus, because I think it's going to be hard to top the Favorite version, but at least it isn't a megalodon, the only prehistoric fish so boring that I won't buy one. I keep the Safari because I love the color scheme, very atypical for a placoderm reconstruction. I'll buy the CollectA mostly to help send CollectA the message that Paleozoic stuff sells, but I honestly don't think it adds much to the toy world. It does look like it does a decent job of giving the critter skin, so it has that going for it. I'll probably ditch the Schleich when it shows up because three really ought to be my limit, even for a fish.

Another reason to have multiple Dunks is conflicting hypotheses of appearance (same reason I have both a feathered and unfeathered Tyrannosaurus). If I may toot my own horn briefly: The recent paper suspsy posted argued for a tuna- or shark-like tail, which is a more quantified, rigorous version of the same reasoning I used in my review of the Favorite Dunk. Still, phylogenetic inertia could theoretically have constrained the morphology of Dunkleosteus to be more like that of Coccosteus, so I'm okay with having one or two eel-like tails on my shelf to represent that uncertainty.

[Sim]

Another reason to have multiple Dunks is conflicting hypotheses of appearance (same reason I have both a feathered and unfeathered Tyrannosaurus). If I may toot my own horn briefly: The recent paper suspsy posted argued for a tuna- or shark-like tail, which is a more quantified, rigorous version of the same reasoning I used in my review of the Favorite Dunk. Still, phylogenetic inertia could theoretically have constrained the morphology of Dunkleosteus to be more like that of Coccosteus, so I'm okay with having one or two eel-like tails on my shelf to represent that uncertainty.

I did think this probably played a part in why you have both the Favorite and Safari Dunkleosteus in your collection.  I don't see how this would cover the Schleich Dunkleosteus though.  So the Schleich is one thing that made me think you might be not so ruthless with figures of animals you prefer.   I'm curious why you keep more than one Eusthenopteron, Cladoselache and Bothriolepis in your collection, based on Reply #742: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=3390.msg178155#msg178155

[Halichoeres]

Another reason to have multiple Dunks is conflicting hypotheses of appearance (same reason I have both a feathered and unfeathered Tyrannosaurus). If I may toot my own horn briefly: The recent paper suspsy posted argued for a tuna- or shark-like tail, which is a more quantified, rigorous version of the same reasoning I used in my review of the Favorite Dunk. Still, phylogenetic inertia could theoretically have constrained the morphology of Dunkleosteus to be more like that of Coccosteus, so I'm okay with having one or two eel-like tails on my shelf to represent that uncertainty.

I did think this probably played a part in why you have both the Favorite and Safari Dunkleosteus in your collection.  I don't see how this would cover the Schleich Dunkleosteus though.  So the Schleich is one thing that made me think you might be not so ruthless with figures of animals you prefer.   I'm curious why you keep more than one Eusthenopteron, Cladoselache and Bothriolepis in your collection, based on Reply #742: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=3390.msg178155#msg178155

It doesn't really cover the Schleich, true. The Schleich version actively contradicts things we know about arthrodires. I bought it mostly because I want Schleich to get the idea that they should keep making fish (in retrospect, the same impulse might also have contributed to my being a little too kind in my review of the figure for the blog). I also bought it to review; I like reviewing fish for the blog.

To be honest, though, the company I really want to make more fish isn't Schleich, it's Favorite. Mr. Tokugawa has an evident facility for sculpting aquatic creatures in naturalistic poses, and in my opinion Favorite gives too much work to Araki and not enough to Tokugawa. Still, I'd rather have a wildly inaccurate Rhizodus, say, from Schleich than the current situation, which is no Rhizodus at all.

As for other duplicates, sometimes I have more than one version of an animal just because I can't decide between two figures. Sometimes it's because they're equally bad (e.g., until recently, the Safari and Invicta Mamenchisaurus), and sometimes it's because they're both gorgeous. I definitely experience this dilemma more often with fish, and more often with Kaiyodo, which to my mind is the only company that makes paint variants worth having both copies of. I also have both of their Axelrodichthys, for example. The third Cladoselache is the Safari, which is a different enough scale to group with a different bunch of figures. I frequently have two versions of a small or mid-sized animal if it's been made in multiple scales (even Velociraptor!).

[BlueKrono]

Doesn't Yowies have a purple Rhizodus?

[SBell]

Doesn't Yowies have a purple Rhizodus?

I think that one is a Strepsodus (Duckabrook Rhizodont). So far there is no particular Rhizodus figure.

[Halichoeres]

Doesn't Yowies have a purple Rhizodus?

I think that one is a Strepsodus (Duckabrook Rhizodont). So far there is no particular Rhizodus figure.

Yup, the remains its paperwork refers to are definitely of Strepsodus. Rhizodus was a much bigger animal and deserves an imposing, detailed figure.

[Chad]

Your Yaverlandia find got me curious so a quick google search uncovered this: http://www.kmart.com/just-kidz-6-pack-dinosaur-tube-style-2/p-004W001685421002P?plpSellerId=Kmart&prdNo=1&blockNo=1&blockType=G1

So I guess it depends on if you prefer the original interpretation of a pachy or the maniraptoran interpretation! This set has the bonus of having a not completely awful Ultrasaurus which is better than the version of Ultrasaurus I have now.

[Halichoeres]

Your Yaverlandia find got me curious so a quick google search uncovered this: http://www.kmart.com/just-kidz-6-pack-dinosaur-tube-style-2/p-004W001685421002P?plpSellerId=Kmart&prdNo=1&blockNo=1&blockType=G1

So I guess it depends on if you prefer the original interpretation of a pachy or the maniraptoran interpretation! This set has the bonus of having a not completely awful Ultrasaurus which is better than the version of Ultrasaurus I have now.

That's wild, thanks for sharing! Hilarious that there would be two different Yaverlandia toys. I wonder if it's one of those figures from a mold that's been re-used by different companies, and labeled as a few different species.

Is your Ultrasaurus the Definitely Dinosaurs one? I have that one and I had despaired that anyone would ever make another.

[Chad]

Naw, mine is the even worse Dinoz one. I'll be glad to have a replacement.

[Halichoeres]

By historical standards, 2017 was a good year for dinosaur figures. In particular, it was a really amazing year for CollectA and Safari, which together made more than half of the new figures I bought in 2017. But most other companies had weaker or fewer offerings in 2017 than in 2016, so for me 2016 was better on balance. Favorite and PNSO, after an incredible array of strong releases in 2016, only had a few good figures in 2017, and Kaiyodo didn't bother to release anything, even an Expo figure. Thankfully, Colorata came through in the last couple of weeks of 2017 with a great new set. Mine's on the way and I'll add photos here as soon as I have it in my hot little hands.



2018 might be more interesting, especially if Vitae meets with success. We're about to get the Creative Beast dromaeosaurids. And maybe Favorite or Kaiyodo will put out something cool. Here's to another year of great prehistoric models.

[Halichoeres]

I finally got my Creative Beast Beasts of the Mesozoic accessory packs yesterday. I was up much too late taking photos. I believe this Kickstarter ended in May 2016 with an expected fulfillment date of May 2017. January 2018 partial fulfillment is not particularly unusual for a Kickstarter, but what was unusual was how well Mr. Silva kept us apprised of the sundry reasons for delay. I'm looking forward to the rest of them.

On another note, I recently moved and these are the first pics I've taken in my new place. I didn't keep the green backdrop I'd been using, and when I went looking for new ones I couldn't find that color. So for now I'm using black (which shows up dark gray with the right exposure). It has its trade-offs.

Anyway, on to the figures. All of these are sculpted by David Silva, and made to be 1:6 scale. I haven't measured them, but they mostly look close enough.


Stenonychosaurus inequalis (=Troodon formosus) juvenile. Late Cretaceous, North America. Normally I don't buy juvenile/baby creatures unless that's all that's known of a taxon. But I wanted the tree it came with, and it is indisputably better than the Geoworld Troodon, so I'm happy to have the former replace the latter.


Mononykus olecranus. Late Cretaceous Asia. First plastic alvarezsaurid, so that's pretty cool. The maxilla/premaxilla are a bit warped, as others' are, but I'm trying to set it right with hot water. We'll see how it goes. This is probably my favorite of the little theropods regardless.


Buitreraptor gonzalezorum. Late Cretaceous South America. Weird looking dromaeosaurid, and known from good remains, glad to see it done.


I also got the Microraptor gui, although I'm not sure I'll keep it. I usually prefer static to action figures, so unless someone convinces me it's a significant improvement in terms of accuracy, I'll stick with the Safari and PNSO versions.

Some of these I bought for the dinosaurs, especially the desert pack. It's fine, and the Protoceratops skull is a nice touch, but I would have liked to see some plants, and I wouldn't have bought it without the Mononykus.

If this is a 1:6 Proto skull, the ceratopsian series is gonna be huge. Yikes, time for some new display cases.

The reason I bought the mountain set, on the other hand, is the Araucaria:

I like the snow-dusted look. It's nowhere near to scale, so I may end up using it with my sauropods instead. It could be 1:40, but a 1:6 Araucaria of this height would be a spindly little sapling and its leaves would not all be bunched up at the top.

Likewise, I bought the forest set for the other Araucaria:


They make a good pair:



I like the fallen trunk, but the Microraptor looks really weird and out of place on it.


The fern looks good. You could put lots of different dinosaurs on this--well, any dinosaur that might conceivably have encountered snow.

The wetland set gave me several reasons to buy it. The Buitreraptor is great, but so are the plants.



This one comes with two little clumps of ferns. I don't know ferns well, and I imagine David Silva didn't model these on any particular fossil taxon.


The only realistic horsetail (cf. Equisetum) toys I know, although Playmobil has made some in their distinctive style, to their credit.

Great set of figures. I'm very glad the theropods all come with their own small bases, because that means they aren't married to their environments and I can use them for other figures that are more in-scale.

[Ravonium]

And he comes to the rescue with several amazing pictures 


I was originally considering hunting for just the Buiteraptor set (and part of that was due to the amazing selection of plants, so glad to see I'm not the only one excited by them), but I might just have to get another, if not all of the sets 

[Jose S.M.]

Great shots! I love these little ones, I think I'm going to have to spend some money, I'm losing the battle against my impulses here, I really like the wetlands base.

[Lanthanotus]

Nice additons to your collection Halichoeres, especially the overview of 2017. What's that weird green fish with the grey noooooose? I am not a great fan of raptors, but I also want to go for the forest pack, cause of the tree and base

[ceratopsian]

I really like that wetland base. Food for thought! Thanks for the excellent photos.

[Faelrin]

Thanks for sharing all those high res pics of the sets. They are very, very nice. Those Wetlands and Forest packs are so tempting, but that's like $80 for both of them. The inclusion of plants in these accessory packs is part of the reason I really like these (aside from how nice they look with everything, and the unique theropods included with them). Plant figures are few and far between. It's a good thing I at least got the Mountain pack for the regular and FC Dromaeosaurus I ordered. Actually come to think of it, I am really glad David took the fern suggestion I gave him for that set, and went through with it. I really do enjoy the addition of it, aside from the other things included with it of course.

I never did consider what the scale of the tree would be before either. Then again I don't really know how big those get either. All I can recall is him mentioning in one of the kickstarter updates that it was the only thing in the series not to scale. I wonder if the 1/18th scale ceratopsians (and possible 1/18th scale versions of the 1/6 raptors) would be a closer fit. Although it's still a cool addition for the Forest and Mountain packs.

[Neosodon]

I like those Araucaria. We need more prehistoric plant figures in general.