Papo New for 2017

[Shadowknight1]

Well, I'm definitely getting the Acro.

Which one do you prefer, Rebor or Papo?

That's a hard choice.  I'd prefer to have it in hand first before making that judgement call.

[Saurox]

'Awesomebro' possibly the most contemptible expression on this forum 

[BlueKrono]

Phrase used intentionally.

[Reptilia]

'Awesomebro' possibly the most contemptible expression on this forum 

I don't know if people use it with any derogatory intent, but I'm not touched in any way by this sort of dualism that seem to going on in the dino community, since I don't identify myself neither with the "awesomebro" crowd nor the "paloenerds". I collect figures that I like aesthetically, so they can be blatant  JP replicas or accurate depictions and it doesn't make any difference for me. I think people is entitled to have a preference but I generally don't like radicalism, in one way or the other.

[Victoria's Cantina]

'Awesomebro' possibly the most contemptible expression on this forum 

I don't know if people use it with any derogatory intent, but I'm not touched in any way by this sort of dualism that seem to going on in the dino community, since I don't identify myself neither with the "awesomebro" crowd nor the "paloenerds". I collect figures that I like aesthetically, so they can be blatant  JP replicas or accurate depictions and it doesn't make any difference for me. I think people is entitled to have a preference but I generally don't like radicalism, in one way or the other.

Well said.

[The Atroxious]

It really is a pretty figure. I'm not sure about the tail either. I just looked it up and evidently recent systematic work has found it to be a tetanuran--that surprised me, since I thought it was outside that clade. The holotype includes quite a lot of caudal vertebrae, and they bear substantial neural and hemal spines, as well as inflexible-looking zygapophyses and lateral processes. It seems to me that at least the proximal half of the tail would have been relatively resistant to bending, but I could be wrong.

Interesting information. I know Cryolophosaurus has been shuffled around a lot between clades, since for quite a while its position among any of them was indeterminate, but I wasn't aware that there was that much skeletal material known, much less described. Even so, the figure manages to look impressive enough to make up for some questionable anatomy here and there, in my eyes at least.

I don't know if people use it with any derogatory intent, but I'm not touched in any way by this sort of dualism that seem to going on in the dino community, since I don't identify myself neither with the "awesomebro" crowd nor the "paloenerds". I collect figures that I like aesthetically, so they can be blatant  JP replicas or accurate depictions and it doesn't make any difference for me. I think people is entitled to have a preference but I generally don't like radicalism, in one way or the other.

Eh, on the one hand, I can understand the dislike for the term because the majority of the time it's used, it's used in a complaint about peoples' ignorance. On the other hand, I don't personally find anything wrong with the term, or that being an "awesomebro" makes anyone's opinion less valid. I certainly have an awesomebro streak, and my aesthetic preference leans toward the "elegant and imposing" end of the spectrum, but I don't feel my awesomebro streak conflicts with the scientific data since I know and accept that I'm not going to like how every genus looked or acted, just like I'm not going to like every genus of modern bird, even though I like birds in general. The way I see it, if there's scientific evidence that conflicts with how I previously liked to imagine any given dinosaur, I don't have to collect models of it, simple as that. Thankfully, I've never experienced this to any great degree, though I experienced a minor version with the change in depicting plateosaurs as bipedal instead of quadrupedal. I always had a slight preference for the quad stance, even though it's outdated.

[Takama]

To me. Awsomebro is the definition of a dinosaur fan who Cannot accept what the animals truly looked like, regardless off rather or not they actually like them.   I find it shameful when i read about people saying Science Ruined Dinosaurs, just because of new discovery's(such as Feathers). Thats where my signature comes in, if they really like dinosaurs, then they should like them for what they are no matter what science dictates, Otherwise there just a Science Fiction monster fan wh. However, to accept what they really looked like does not mean you cant like outdated interpretations.  as long as someone respects what the real animals looked like, then I see  him/her as a Dinosaur fan.   

Im sorry if I sound like a Self entitled Idiot. But this is how i grew up with dinosaurs.

[BlueKrono]

Takama - No, it's fine to have that opinion, if that's what appeals to you. Personally I like both scientifically accurate dinosaurs, modern-day reptiles and ridiculous sci-fi monsters all at once. If an "awesomebro" figure has huge spikes, blows fire and fights aliens that doesn't take away any appeal to me. I just like scaly things. A glimpse at any of my collections will reveal the gamut of models from the most painstaking and well-researched paleoartists to classic 50's kaiju to cartoony monsters like characters from Ice Age and Nessies in tartan caps.

[japfeif]

'Awesomebro' possibly the most contemptible expression on this forum 

I don't know if people use it with any derogatory intent, but I'm not touched in any way by this sort of dualism that seem to going on in the dino community, since I don't identify myself neither with the "awesomebro" crowd nor the "paloenerds". I collect figures that I like aesthetically, so they can be blatant  JP replicas or accurate depictions and it doesn't make any difference for me. I think people is entitled to have a preference but I generally don't like radicalism, in one way or the other.

Totally agree. I said something similar in an earlier post. I tend to prefer figures that are well-made and nicely & realistically painted, even if they are not totally accurate scientifically. That doesn't mean I only grab the pretty ones over the scientifically accurate ones (I'm a bit of a completist!), I just don't disregard those that are more fanciful. As I stated earlier, I buy Papo dinos for their out & out awesomeness in design and "realism" (meaning looks like a live animal...IMO nothing looks better on a shelf) and CollectA & Safari for their paleontological correctness!

[Derek.McManus]

'Awesomebro' possibly the most contemptible expression on this forum 

I don't know if people use it with any derogatory intent, but I'm not touched in any way by this sort of dualism that seem to going on in the dino community, since I don't identify myself neither with the "awesomebro" crowd nor the "paloenerds". I collect figures that I like aesthetically, so they can be blatant  JP replicas or accurate depictions and it doesn't make any difference for me. I think people is entitled to have a preference but I generally don't like radicalism, in one way or the other.

Well said.

I also second this...I try to keep abreast of scentific developments but often buy a toy dinosaur model because either I like it or my son wants it and I'm certainly not going to tell him he can't have the toy of his choice because it is not 100% scentific accurate particularly  from a company like Papo or Schleich who market themselves as toy companies. I can help him find out more about dinosaurs if he is interested.

Another point is that I suspect these companies are looking to make a profit so they will tend to push models that will sell thereby helping to ensure their survival in the economic marketplace.

[Reptilia]

I experienced a minor version with the change in depicting plateosaurs as bipedal instead of quadrupedal.

Didn't know that Plateosaurus had been defined as a bipedal, thought it was quadrupedal with the ability of rearing up on its hindlimbs, to reach food on higher plants, for example. You never stop learning.

[Shonisaurus]

I sincerely like dinosaurs and prehistoric animals in general that are well made from the scientific point of view I do not consider myself "Paloenerds" but I like dinosaurs very faithful copies of drawings or paleoartísticas sculptures, for a simple reason the dinosaurs are to educate Especially to the little ones and the children, but it does not mean that I also collect dinosaurs or prehistoric animals that are far from being scientific animals and that many of them are from my humble perspective and from my total scientific ignorance fantasy figures, such as Baryonyx de Papo. I do not do disgust precisely as far as I am concerned with Papo figures because they are very detailed and have a texture and a resistance to abrasions by accidental falls on my case from the shelves, exceptional apart from they are resistant to breaks and blows In general and we could go through other companies like Rebor and even Schleich (pentaceratops, kentrosaurus, stegosaurus latest version and dunkleosteus).

From my point of view, it does not seem to me ethical and moral to disqualify any follower of Jurassic Park creatures with that insulting term "awesomebro" first because all people have the right to respect as I say ("respect to be respected" ) And secondly because it is necessary to accept and at the same time respect the validity of redundancy the likes of other people and more the tastes of other members of the forum whose philosophy of dinosaur collecting is quite different from mine, without it that we both like The different companies, both scientific and copied replicas of films and Jurassic Park.

Papo is a company that makes very detailed and well-finished figures except unfortunately the marine reptiles and for that reason alone it is worth buying their figures year after year. As I say I am a simple collector but concluding in my monologue I like more scientific figures because I like especially that they are the closest to the figures of dinosaurs and extinct animals to what is presumed to have been in reality.

[Saurox]

Phrase used intentionally.

To be petty and segregative? Yeah those lot can keep their yolos, swags and awesomebros 

[BlueKrono]

Phrase used intentionally.

To be petty and segregative? Yeah those lot can keep their yolos, swags and awesomebros 

No, neither. I didn't use it to offend anyone, it was just the phrase which was most evocative of the idea I wanted to express regarding the figure. I do think its spiky spikes are kinda "awesomebro". Just a personal observation. And as I stated above, I have no problem with anyone that aesthetic appeals to.

[Derek.McManus]

Phrase used intentionally.

To be petty and segregative? Yeah those lot can keep their yolos, swags and awesomebros 

No, neither. I didn't use it to offend anyone, it was just the phrase which was most evocative of the idea I wanted to express regarding the figure. I do think its spiky spikes are kinda "awesomebro". Just a personal observation. And as I stated above, I have no problem with anyone that aesthetic appeals to.

I am sure you did not mean to offend anyone and I believe you used the term as an attempt to identify a type of dinosaur toy. However in the recent past I believe that there has been a trend on the forum to use it as a derogatory put down when certain dinosaur toys or styles of toys are mentioned. I personally think this is not a pleasant thing to do and that the hobby should be inclusive. Sadly the nature of this medium with only the written word and lack of visual clues / ques can lead to confusion and misunderstanding.

[tanystropheus]

I personally place a lot of weight on aesthetics. It doesn't really matter if the product is aimed at the awesomebro or the paleobro crowd if the presentation is lacking. There are folks here that are critical of products that get stuck halfway between awesomebro and paleobro, but I am okay with an awkward piece as long is it appeals to me at a visual level.

[Reptilia]

Papo site seems to be down, maybe they are updating it with the new figures and we'll eventually have better quality pictures in place of those crappy low-res leaks. Meanwhile Polacanthus is already available from Urzeitshop. Given the price tag the size might be that of the smaller figures, like Tupuxuara and baby Triceratops?

http://www.urzeitshop.de/de/papo/2918-polacanthus-dinosaurier-figur-von-papo-3465000550608.html

[tanystropheus]

If the Polacanthus is a smaller model, it makes sense (as it should be smaller than the Papo Ankylosaurus)
It looks good for the most part; the colors are richer on the final model.
The helmeted head looks strange to me.

[Nanuqsaurus]

If the Polacanthus is a smaller model, it makes sense (as it should be smaller than the Papo Ankylosaurus)
It looks good for the most part; the colors are richer on the final model.
The helmeted head looks strange to me.

Yep, the head is weird. But I like the color on these pictures much more than the previous one, it looks much more natural. The skin folds under the neck and tail also seem less noticeable.

[Shonisaurus]

However photos of the Polacanthus Papo in urzeitshop.de are blurred. I just in case I do not order it yet and I hope to see more news coming. I would cost more shipping than the figure if I did not do so.