dinotoycollector.com

[Faelrin]

S @stoneage I'll take a look at that later tonight unless someone beats me to it.

[Halichoeres]

Thanks for flagging these. There are many, many entries, most of which were put in manually, so there are bound to be oversights and typos.

Some trivia: Currently, there are 4826 entries, and for some a period designation isn't relevant, but of the 4485 that have a period designation, 2582 are from the Cretaceous, and only 1903 are from every other period combined. And that's after we entered all the miniatures from Oammararak's game.

[Faelrin]

I wonder how many of those belong to Ankylosaurus, Carnotaurus, Pteranodon, Spinosaurus, Tyrannosaurus, Triceratops, Velociraptor, and whatever other immensely popular and excessively produced animals, assuming they have all the Cretaceous period tag.

Currently Tyrannosaurus has 389 total entries (16 without the Cretaceous period tag), Triceratops has 213 total entries (3 without the Cretaceous period tag), Velociraptor has 212 total entries (9 without the Cretaceous period tag), Spinosaurus has 125 total entries (1 without the Cretaceous period tag), Pteranodon has 101 total entries (1 tagged as Jurassic, 3 without the Cretaceous period tag), Ankylosaurus has 78 total entries (only 1 missing the Cretaceous period tag), and Carnotaurus has 73 total entries (with only 2 currently missing the Cretaceous period tag).

So it seems currently there are 77 for Ankylosaurus, 71 for Carnotaurus, 97 for Pteranodon, 124 for Spinosaurus, 210 for Triceratops, 374 for Tyrannosaurus, and 203 for Velociraptor. Removing those from the total of 2582 entries with the Cretaceous period tag currently, leaves us with 1426 entries total, which puts it closer (though still far above), what is currently tagged (853) as from the Jurassic period. Removing just the top three (Tyrannosaurus, Triceratops, and Velociraptor), leaves 1795 entries. It really shows how much of a bias there is towards this particular period's fauna, even with removing the some of the most popular/most produced animals from it.

[DinoToyCollector]

You are such Dino Nerds - and I love it  (Really, this is purely meant in a positive way)

I'm still not sure, how to improve this time period information on future updates (I had a solution for this a while back) but I think the reason why there are so many Creataceous creatures is summed up by you two very good.

What I wanted to say: I think I have finally sorted everything in my life and am slowly doing some more updates to the database. There are some missing pictures, figures I want to add

[Fembrogon]

I just sent a contact form with some Marx photos attached, but I don't know if it went through. Does the form accept zip files?

[DinoToyCollector]

@Fembrogon
The Form should accept zip files but I did not receive anything.
You can try sending it directly to me - [email protected]

[Faelrin]

@DinoToyCollector Great to hear things have improved and you can return to work on the website for the meantime.

I'll still be doing things on my end. In fact I will probably continue to add and manage more stuff for the Mattel Jurassic World lines in the meantime (such as entries, fixes, and adding images). I would like to add the Snap Squads next for example. I have managed to track down the codes for most of them as of now. Just missing a few at this point.

Before I go and add all these though it is worth mentioning that there is two separate assortments (Asst: GGN26 with tall style packaging, and Asst: GKX72 with wide style packaging), where the product codes of the figures actually differs for which assortment they belong too. This is rather unique among the Mattel figures from what I have noticed so far. Should I add entries for each of those for the two different assortment numbers or should I try to consolidate them and add that information to the info box? An example is the 2020 Camp Cretaceous metallic Parasaurolophus which has the code of GNW96 in the tall packaging/Asst: GGN26, or GPB12 in the wide packaging/Asst: GKX72.

Edit: What is also your thoughts on adding the Playmates Primal Rage toyline? They technically are not real dinosaurs, with perhaps the exception of Diablo, and Sauron clearly being based on Tyrannosaurus, and perhaps Talon, which may have been based on Velociraptor perhaps, if not another dromaeosaurid. Slashfang is probably an anthropomorphic Smildon, or another prehistoric cat. I have bought some of these (incomplete however) recently so I can obtain and supply images if needed.

Here is a really good resource for these:

https://www.figurerealm.com/actionfigure?action=seriesitemlist&id=521&figures=primalrage

Another site:

http://www.actiontoys.com/category/PRAGE.html

[Crackington]

Glad to hear things are less crazy for you too @DinoToyCollector!

Just wondering if anyone has any views on a potential new category? A while ago it was proposed to add an "Unbranded" category for those figures and toys where the manufacturer was unknown.

I've been thinking about this and have a further suggestion. Could we extend this idea and call this "Unbranded & Others"? We could then add figures where we do know the make, but perhaps don't know the other toys made or wish to track them all down.

I'm thinking of Nayab's marvellous Placerias and Jaru's decent Uintatherium and Macrauchenia figures. Most of these companies other offerings are dreadful or knock-offs so we wouldn't have to add them all on the site 🤭.

We could also call it "Miscellaneous". What do people think?

[Fembrogon]

That sounds like it could be a good idea. It might prove a useful archive for those out there trying to identify the more obscure items in their collection, much like our own Identification thread.

[DinoToyCollector]

Hm... since I will not doing any updates this year, I can well imagine making this category for such figures. There are some known figures which can't be archives easily.
I have so good ideas for this website, but not the time, ability or money to make them real anytime soon :/

[Halichoeres]

Hm... since I will not doing any updates this year, I can well imagine making this category for such figures. There are some known figures which can't be archives easily.
I have so good ideas for this website, but not the time, ability or money to make them real anytime soon :/

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but if there's an endeavor that I'd prefer you prioritize over the DTC site, it's the Wild Past line

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

Hi, if its not too much trouble I've noticed a couple of things.

1. The Eofauna Triceratops are listed as 2020 releases when they were officially and actually released in 2021.

2. Could someone change the Balaur bondoc from Beasts of The Mesozoic into Aves category as it was actually a bird  not a Dromaeosaurid, and I thought the idea of categories was to go off what the animal was not what the figure depicts?

3. Could someone please change the scale of the PNSO Machairoceratops, it is much much larger than 1:40 scale. 1:25 at best.

I have to say I'm surprised the PNSO Helicoprion hasn't been  added yet as they tended to be put on seconds after preview but there's no rush.

Also I am very much looking forward to your Wild Past especially the Tethyshadros, so I don't want to bother you.

[Faelrin]

I'll try to look into these things as soon as I am able, unless someone gets to them before me. I imagine it could be another week before I can as I am still recovering from my sinus surgery.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

Take your time to recover @Faelrin I wish yiu a speedy recovery I hope all goes well

[Concavenator]

It would be nice if the site included a stat in which it was told how many families are represented in a collection. Currently it says which family is most represented in my collection, but it would be nice if it also said how many families there are.

[DinoToyCollector]

It would be nice if the site included a stat in which it was told how many families are represented in a collection. Currently it says which family is most represented in my collection, but it would be nice if it also said how many families there are.

@Concavenator
Can be done more easily... I'll let you know when I did this. Just to understand you: the final result should state something like "Most of your prehistoric figures... ...are members of X families" ?

1. The Eofauna Triceratops are listed as 2020 releases when they were officially and actually released in 2021.

2. Could someone change the Balaur bondoc from Beasts of The Mesozoic into Aves category as it was actually a bird  not a Dromaeosaurid, and I thought the idea of categories was to go off what the animal was not what the figure depicts?

I have to say I'm surprised the PNSO Helicoprion hasn't been  added yet as they tended to be put on seconds after preview but there's no rush.

Also I am very much looking forward to your Wild Past especially the Tethyshadros, so I don't want to bother you.

They should arrive soon ;-)

3. Could someone please change the scale of the PNSO Machairoceratops, it is much much larger than 1:40 scale. 1:25 at best.

I can't confirm neither deny it. Anyone else?

[Concavenator]

It would be nice if the site included a stat in which it was told how many families are represented in a collection. Currently it says which family is most represented in my collection, but it would be nice if it also said how many families there are.

@Concavenator
Can be done more easily... I'll let you know when I did this. Just to understand you: the final result should state something like "Most of your prehistoric figures... ...are members of X families" ?

I'm not sure I totally understand what you mean... But right now a stat is included in the "Most of your prehistoric figures..." section that says which family is better represented in your collection. I would say what I am suggesting would fit better in the "Overview" part, that is on top of the "Most of your prehistoric figures..." section. Currently this is what appears: Your Collection contains X items of X different Companies! You have X unique species in your collection. I would include something like: Your Collection contains X items of X different Companies! You have X unique species in your collection. X families are represented in your collection. It would also be cool to see how many families of the different groups, i.e. , families of dinosaurs, families of pterosaurs, families of mammals...and so on.

But actually, I don't have the slightest idea on how difficult it is to edit the page or how difficult it is to add new features, these are just suggestions. 

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

@DinoToyCollector

I decided to scale the Machairoceratops myself using this paper:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0154403

And measurer the brow horn of the model, ignoring the kerretenous growth and it came up as roughly 1:30 scale if I have measured correctly.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

@DinoToyCollector also a huge thank you to you again

[Faelrin]

@Gothmog the Baryonyx Thanks.

Also since I was unaware earlier that I technically can lift and therefore use my laptop, I will probably get back on doing volunteer work for the database soon. Particularly I'm going to hunt down some retailer pics to use for figures I have not bought (or currently have no interest in buying for the meantime). I also plan to get the Snap Squads all added to the database. I have managed to catch up on most, and have quite a number of images for them already, plus plan to take more as soon as either the figures arrive (plus when I am able to return to physical activities such as bending down, etc).

Edit: Added some of the new Nanmu and Rebor figures that are up for pre-order now. I added the PNSO Stegosaurus pair yesterday. I'll probably get an image up there soon for it, once there's one to my liking available. I've been trying to keep the images used for those consistent so far.