Eofauna general discussion

[ITdactyl]

wow, tough crowd.

Another figures sneaks into my non-pterosaur want list. Love the sculpt and the character, as well as the color choice. Sure, it's inspired by a drned mammal - I'm just happy it's not blue... or green... or red (personal choice; not dissing Favorite or similar brands. I know simplified color schemes are a cost cutting choice).

[croco_105]

Just a thought, for those saying it is yet another triceratops.  Eofauna posted this note with their announcement.

It is based on the material recovered from the Hell Creek middle third Formation; mainly on MOR 3027 (partly using photogrammetry), and UCMP 128561.

Photogrammetry is basically 3D digitization of a physical object, similar to a 3D scan.  So this figure was built up using a 3D model of the actual skeletal material. 
This is significant because it may very well be the most accurate triceratops available to market.  Not based on flat 2D skeleton drawings or photos alone but on the actual three dimensional fossils.  A bit like police forensic artists sculpting clay on a skull. 

I don't think Safari, PNSO or anyone else builds upon the actual digitized fossil material.  I know Eofauna does a thorough understudy of the musculature first before applying the skin. 

Despite triceratops being over represented in the marketplace, a new, more accurate interpretation is always welcome.  If this more common species sells well that will allow the company to expand and create more rare figures we love as well.  They are a young company which is still establishing themselves.

[Loon]

The fact that this is an unnamed species has already been mentioned, several times. Like, go back one page, this isn't exactly news.

As someone who likes this figure, I can see how this still wouldn't interest some people. Just because it's an unnamed species, doesn't mean it's not another Triceratops figure. Besides, as far as I've seen, no one has outright called this thing bad, they just are saying they don't have any interest. I don't see the need for the continuous complaining that some people aren't interested or scolding them for that opinion.

[croco_105]

The fact that this is an unnamed species has already been mentioned, several times. Like, go back one page, this isn't exactly news.

As someone who likes this figure, I can see how this still wouldn't interest some people. Just because it's an unnamed species, doesn't mean it's not another Triceratops figure. Besides, as far as I've seen, no one has outright called this thing bad, they just are saying they don't have any interest. I don't see the need for the continuous complaining that some people aren't interested or scolding them for that opinion.

Didn't intend to scold or offend anyone.  Just pointing out the methods they used in producing the figure for those who don't know what photogrammetry is.

[Dinoguy2]

This point is a minor nitpick, but people keep saying this is an unnamed species. Which is only partly correct. It's an unassigned specimen. It could be a late T. horridus, or an early T. prorsus. It's probably transitional between the two species, so whether or not it receives a new species name at some point is somewhat arbitrary (and if it does, odds are it will be the resurrection of an old species name, since dozens of Triceratops species have been named in the past).

Anyway, my take on this figure is that it's like the new PNSO Borealopelta. There's not much you can do to make a drastically new Triceratops. So obviously, this isn't drastically new. But it's got enough minor tweaks that add up for me. The skin texture is spot on, the limb posture is up to date with modern ideas (though those ideas are still the subject of a minor debate, last I checked - the limbs here are sprawling but it's as much because of the bellowing pose, so they're hedging their bets). The horns are long - way longer than they'd be just copying Yoshi's Trike, which means they're following Mark Witton's ideas about the extent of the keratin sheath. The head is small compared to the body, unlike many mounts but in line with the few mounts that don't have a composite body with an unrelated head (Yoshi, Kelsey).

I would previously have listed Safari's Triceratops as the best available. But this one is better. Like I said elsewhere, day 1 purchase. Yes, there are lots of Triceratops figures, but I didn't buy most of them because why would I need another Triceratops that wasn't demonstrably better than the one I had? In terms of accurate dinosaur figures, I started out with the Carnegie. I replaced it with Battat in 1996. I never bought another Triceratops, because nothing that came out was ever better than the Battat. Until the Safari 2018 version finally replaced my Battat in my "accuracy" display. This will now replace my Safari. I doubt anything will replace this for another 20 years unless some major discovery is made.

[Kaustav Bhattacharyya]

Resurrection of the lost world(Hell Creek middle)indeed! I am immensely happy to see such an uncommon species of Triceratops. Every dinosaur enthusiasts must have this figure. They have really dug out the unfamiliar from the familiar. Splendid job Eofauna indeed! I am really pushed back to the last days of dinosaurs by seeing this figure.

In case of mammalian figures, I want to see mega carnivores such as Homotherium, Smilodon, Hyanodon, Dire Wolf, Short Faced Bear etc. rather than a Paraceratherium.

I also want to see a prehistoric crocodilian series from this exceptionally intelligent company in future.

[Over9K]

The lack of jowls/cheeks seems to be a sticking point for a few people discussing this elsewhere, and I have to admit, I am used to ceratopsians having them, so this one looks a bit odd, but I'm down, instant buy...

[GojiraGuy1954]

The lack of jowls/cheeks seems to be a sticking point for a few people discussing this elsewhere, and I have to admit, I am used to ceratopsians having them, so this one looks a bit odd, but I'm down, instant buy...

I'd rather it had cheeks too, but I don't care since thee rest looks so good

[Mattyonyx]

What do you think of this color variant?
https://www.paleo-nerd.com/news/eofauna-il-nuovo-dinosauro/


EDIT: I posted the image, but it's not visible on my browser. Dose it happen to someone else too?

[Shonisaurus]

I honestly like its initial color better but that will not be an impediment for me to buy its two versions of paint. I love the Eofauna brand.

That painting does not seem natural to me. It is as if you are wearing a sweater on your body. I honestly don't like green legs with a beige body.

[PrimevalRaptor]

I'm mostly in the cheek camp too but this one still looks pretty plausible imo
And that other color scheme is neat too, like the head a lot but the green on the limbs is a bit too abrupt for my taste, prefer the base version there.

[Flaffy]

What do you think of this color variant?
https://www.paleo-nerd.com/news/eofauna-il-nuovo-dinosauro/

EDIT: I posted the image, but it's not visible on my browser. Dose it happen to someone else too?

If it didn't have those silly teal legs, then I would've easily preferred this colour scheme over the first one.
Though I do wonder why they went for colours that are so similar to the previous paintjob, kinda defeats the purpose of having an alternate paint variant, no?

The previous angle really didn't do justice to the figure. The Triceratops looks far better in this image than the previous one, especially the head sculpt. As for the oral tissue, it's not really the lack of cheeks that bother me. It's more so the incredibly distinct outline of the jaw that makes it look weird.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

The second version has a much nicer more appealing frill colour but is let down by the legs of a different colour, shame, makes it harder to lick between the two.

[ceratopsian]

Generally I prefer the second colour scheme. But not the abrupt colour change of the legs.

[Over9K]

Love the alternate color... little dry brushing on those legs and that'll suit me right down to the ground!

[Justin_]

Generally I prefer the second colour scheme. But not the abrupt colour change of the legs.

I think they could be explained with a base where it has just emerged from swampy water.

[Faelrin]

Not really a fan of this color scheme either (the green legs clash with the orange honestly, but I guess the face's colors are alright). Oh well. I'm not going to like all of them put out there, and that's okay. I also think it is far too similar to the first one, that I'm not really sure what the point of it is in that case? I guess it works for a sexually dimorphic pair though.

[Shonisaurus]

What I see in both Eofauna triceratops is that the rear left part (the one that looks further away) is slightly raised, it seems that it is a dynamic position of the sculpture of the sculpture. Has no one noticed until now?

[Duna]

Wow, a new triceratops? Interesting! With its thin legs, love the LONG horns and less cheeks. I didn't know about this new species, it has such long horns!  It's so impressive.
I'm just disappointed because I wanted a paraceratherium and a hadrosaur, but I can't complaint with the figure. It's superb. So accurate, it's just like the skeleton it is based on. I love the "oryx" look.
I'll break my rule of only getting one figure per genera, as I'll also be purchasing the PNSO borealopelta though I already have the Collecta because they are two masterpieces.

Eofauna, please ... we need also a CONCAVENATOR from you. Our most famous Spanish dinosaur needs your special "touch"!

[Duna]

By the way, in ED there is a nice comparison between the new triceratops and the other more known species. You can apreciate the long horns and the differences in the skull:






More info here: https://blog.everythingdinosaur.co.uk/blog/_archives/2020/10/27/eofauna-announce-a-triceratops-species.html