CollectA New for 2017

[CityRaptor]

Well, if the number on his name is any indication, he is not that young. His problem ( and that of other people like him ) is that he is stuck in the past and clearly has no interest in real Dinosaurs, nor actual science. "Bigger", "Scarier"... "Cooler". He does not want realism, he wants more teeth.

[Patrx]

Okay, everyone, we're all passionate about science, but let's do keep things polite please.

[Derek.McManus]

There is nothing wrong with preferring outdated or science fiction reconstructions of dinosaurs, so long as one accepts that they are just that.

I agree...I really like the potrayal of dinosaurs from when I grew up in the 70's but I would never try to deny the way that our knowledge of these wonderful creatures has changed since then...In fact I find it fascinating.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Agreeing with Patrx here folks, keep it civil, no personal attacks are permitted, it's rule #1 here.

[BlueKrono]

There is nothing wrong with preferring outdated or science fiction reconstructions of dinosaurs, so long as one accepts that they are just that.

I second Stargatedalek. Dino toy fans are free to have personal preferences on what their figures look like. Since dinosaur toys have been around for so many decades we now have a plethora of different types of depictions, from lithe and feathered to clunky, draconic kaiju. There's nothing wrong with liking the latter type of figures better.

[suspsy]

Here's a couple more angles of the Supreme Dimorphodon. I can't wait to own this sucker!

https://www.facebook.com/CollectA.biz/posts/10154742898707481:0

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Here's a couple more angles of the Supreme Dimorphodon. I can't wait to own this sucker!

https://www.facebook.com/CollectA.biz/posts/10154742898707481:0

awesome! i hope it's released in the first wave this year.

[Shonisaurus]

Here's a couple more angles of the Supreme Dimorphodon. I can't wait to own this sucker!

https://www.facebook.com/CollectA.biz/posts/10154742898707481:0

awesome! i hope it's released in the first wave this year.

The said dimorphodon far surpasses the guidraco at first sight. I think the Supreme Deluxe line has even improved. Of course the colors are less realistic from my point of view.

The bad thing that Collecta releases its novelties in the market with several months of delay. The release of figures is very slow this mark.

[RobinGoodfellow]

Collecta 2017 Catalogue is on-line now:

http://www.collecta.biz/en/e-catalogue

p.s As you can see, now a lot of old figures (Proceratosaurus, Irritator , Lourinhanosaurus etc..) have a base...

[MLMjp]

Collecta 2017 Catalogue is on-line now:

http://www.collecta.biz/en/e-catalogue

p.s As you can see, now a lot of old figures (Proceratosaurus, Irritator , Lourinhanosaurus etc..) have a base...

Seriously Collecta, you have such beautiful figures next to al those horrible things from your earliest years.....
They should really think of retiring some of those figures, but they are still producing them. They are nothing more than dead load.

Pd: I just noticed. They have retired something! The older versions of Spinosaurus are not in the catalog!

[suspsy]

I'm annoyed that they still haven't given the Rajasaurus a base. That one needs it the most.

[Shonisaurus]

I'm annoyed that they still haven't given the Rajasaurus a base. That one needs it the most.

The concavenator has been given a base. On the other hand there is another sculptor in Collecta in relation to dinosaurs and prehistoric animals Matthias Geiger of German nationality.

I also dislike that the rajasaurus has no basis. He is one of the figures who needs it most. In fact I still have it with the plastic base on which came packaged. It does not hold well.

[Roselaar]

Seems like their most anticipated figures will be released mid-2017. Patience, folks...

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Seems like their most anticipated figures will be released mid-2017. Patience, folks...

I guess it will be something to add to the Park mid-season.. :/

I did notice Reeves is just listed as another distributor on page 128...and CollectA has far more horse figures than I thought!

[CityRaptor]

Hence the brand not being in jeopardy.

As for horses: Every western company has tons of those beasts. Although I think Hasbro's have been spliced with some other things.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Yep, just affirming there is no real issue there.

I guess I've never really looked into all the CollectA offers, it's a very Safari-like company with a lot of different lines.  No fantasy themed line though.

[CityRaptor]

Yes. I also never did look into their other offers before, but every company that offers horses usually has tons of them. Them not having a fantasy line is odd, given that everyone else has one.

[Neosodon]

I'm annoyed that they still haven't given the Rajasaurus a base. That one needs it the most.

That is the one dinosaur I have that I thought needed a base so bad I made one for it.

[Sim]

Probably getting too far from the topic here, but I will respond once more, to some of the comments here regarding psittacosaurus and its notorious quills. The fossil used to establish those structures first appeared in 2005 in a Tucson mineral show, so we have no ideal method of determining its precise origin. Best guess, somewhere in the Jehol Biota. Due to the posture of the fossil most of the identificational traits to suggest species are hidden...so species is suggested by dating the piece, which is in turn done by establishing a date for the predator that chewed the specimen. We know the fossil surfaced in 2005 at a mineral show and has then had a grand adventure through Italy, to Germany its current home. Point being, we have one (1) fossil that shows quills, from the most prolific and widespread dinosaur perhaps of China. The fossils are so plentiful in some areas of China, that they serve as boundary markers for time periods. I have seen mortality slabs with as many as sixty infants, and as many as forty adults ....these dinosaurs held a massive amount of territory to range and were there for a long time . Yet for all of it we have one...specimen that is quilled. this could be argued as a preservational bias and could well be....or it may have a simpler solution. the quills might well have been a sexual indicator present only in males for instance....or perhaps a species marker unique to that one region or perhaps the quills were a response to something within one particular species environment. My feeling is so far we have one..not enough to argue for all psittacosaurs to have them, and far from a strong indicator that any species that was ancestral to them or other ceratopsians HAD to have them.....possible of course, yes. We simply do not have enough evidence to say they all had quills, or that all areas they appeared had quills, or that both sexes were quilled....etc.
  My comment about stegosaurus was the concept of another animal with known back integument with unknown purpose.....heat regulation? Sexual differences? protection? Much like psittacosaurus we do not know the reason for the plates, or the quills.
  As for quills and sauropods, look closely at the new Safari Diplodocus. We can understand the spines it has are elongated processes, but then the psittacosaurus quills project directly from well within the verts as well .......quite different families, with different types of spines , but if one can confuse quills from a psittacosaurus with modified scales from a triceratops, then speculation should be allowed .
   Quills on various basal ceratopsians is valid speculation and someday we may find an ancestor to little Yinlong there, with a nice swath of filaments as well. I personally hope we do, and are able to resolve the ceratopsian family tree. As it stands we have no record of that ancestor,unless you care to suggest Kulindrdromeus which emerged very close to this family as well.
   I do completely agree, that wether with quills or without , following the evidence we have is best. I do like the concept of what seems most likely...I just disagree that derived ceratopsians would have retained such a primitive feature , while no evidence can be brought to the table for any of them to have it. None in all the more derived species....again that preservational bias perhaps but still. I do agree some forms of fuzzy integument look more appealing than others in ceratopsians, I just find the Mohawk central butt fuzz thing ......a personal dislike for me. just my two cents sorry

No need to apologise, amargasaurus!

Regarding that only one of the many Psittacosaurus specimens has the tail filaments preserved...  How many of the specimens preserve any integument at all?  I think any Psittacosaurus specimen that doesn't preserve any integument has no use in considering how widespread the tail filaments are, since no integument whatsoever is preserved.  Similarly, how many specimens of Psittacosaurus preserve any other integument (e.g. scales) on that part of the tail?  Specimens that don't preserve any integument on that part of the tail also seem like they wouldn't give an idea of how common the tail filaments were, because again no integument is preserved.

In the thread I linked to earlier, Dinoguy2 said this:

The Jehol biota is not a single depositional environment. Almost all the known psittacosaurid specimens come from the Lujiatun member. This is the famous "Pompeii" like terrestrial deposit that preserves 3D skeletons in life postures, like Mei long. It does not preserve a single trace of fur or feathers in any known specimen, just excellently preserved bones in life posture.

The other major deposit is the lakebed sediments of the Jianshangou bed. This is slightly older chronologically and is a lagerstatten. It preserves fossils as flattened slabs in 2D, often with various amounts of integument preserved, but the bones are crushed, flattened, and sometimes split between two slabs. There is only one Psittacosaurus specimen preserved this way, and it also happens to be the only one that preserves scales, skin, and feathers. Preservation matters more than anything else.

So it looks like there is preservational bias affecting the preservation of integument in Psittacosaurus specimens.

I agree that one specimen preserving filaments isn't enough to know the extent the filaments were present among different genders and species of Psittacosaurus, and among ceratopsians, let alone other ornithischian groups (I've seen pachycephalosaur restorations with Psittacosaurus-like dorsal filaments!).  However, I think generally the closer an animal is related to that specimen of Psittacosaurus with filaments, the more likely it is to have filaments too.  I would be surprised if the only ceratopsian with filaments was one species of Psittacosaurus.  How would it have got them then, would the filaments suddenly appear as that species evolved?

[stargatedalek]

The problem is that derived ceratopsians already have large dermal scales covering the area where Psittacosaurus had quills. Genetics need not even play a part when we know it's physically impossible.