Safari 2020

[Sauropelta]

I'm honestly disappointed. Only ones I like are the Pachy & Deinonychus. Rest look very low quality, like something schleich would make.

[Doug Watson]

Well, this is some nice news. Just as I and others predicted, there's a slightly reduced lineup this year...Now for my opinions:

Shringasaurus: While I'm excited to see this genus finally be represented in toy form, it does have the misfortune of being based on a now-inaccurate skeletal (although that was only a recent discovery, so I can forgive them for that). I'll wait until CollectA's reveals before deciding whether to get this one, just incase they make a more accurate one next year as well.

@Ravonium  Could you point me to that "recent discovery" I can't find anything in the scientific literature but that doesn't mean it isn't out there. I have seen that very different skeletal that @AcroSauroTaurus posted earlier in the thread but when I originally saw it all I could find was that it was by an artist on her twitter account. She didn't mention that she worked with the fossil material or with the author's of the original paper that I used. She did say she rescaled the material but those cervical vertebrae look a lot different from the specimens in the paper. I haven't seen anywhere that this new skeletal has been accepted by the scientific community or that the original skeletal was no longer valid but if I missed that please let me know.

[Doug Watson]

Do we know who sculpted these. Because from just looking they all feel like our very own Doug Watson work.

I did all nine.

[Takama]

A lot of People have showed disapoinment over this years crop on Facebook. And some have gone as far as saying There going the way of Schleich .

Personally, i feel that compareing these toys to schleich is an Insult to the fine folks at Safari ltd. For one, Schleich disrespects there fans, while Safari is more open to them. Hell they ASKED US for ideas for 2021. 

Plus,  Safari Puts a lot more reserch into there models, then Schleich ever did. Yes,  Schleich has been improving, But they still have VERY Flawed figures come out the same year as some of there gems, and if anyone does not beleive me,  Look up Schleichs 2018 Psitaccosaurus and compare it to there 2018 Carnotarus.   

Do we know who sculpted these. Because from just looking they all feel like our very own Doug Watson work.

I did all nine.

They all look Fantastic to me.   I love the pose of the new Dilophosaurus.  It remeinds me of there previous version, only more relistic.

And of Course i have a qustion regaurding which species a certain model is.

The Edmontosaurus clearly has a Cocks Comb as many people were asking for.   But is it really E.regelis?   Or did you make a Hypothetical Male version of E. Annectens?

[Dinoguy2]

A lot of People have showed disapoinment over this years crop on Facebook. And some have gone as far as saying There going the way of Schleich .

Personally, i feel that compareing these toys to schleich is an Insult to the fine folks at Safari ltd. For one, Schleich disrespects there fans, while Safari is more open to them. Hell they ASKED US for ideas for 2021. 

Plus,  Safari Puts a lot more reserch into there models, then Schleich ever did. Yes,  Schleich has been improving, But they still have VERY Flawed figures come out the same year as some of there gems, and if anyone does not beleive me,  Look up Schleichs 2018 Psitaccosaurus and compare it to there 2018 Carnotarus.   

I haven't seen a single "big" criticism of these (aside from stuff that comes down to personal preference) that is backed up by anything. Just people who say they look somehow cheap.

What that means is that the over-detailed Papo and Rebor style has taken a strong hold on people, I think. Detail for its own sake = quality, naturalistic looking sculpt and color patterns that make the figures look like actual animals instead of video game characters= cheap.

The Wild Safari models from the past couple years absolutely blow away the competition, at least domestic wise (PNSO is more of a niche import brand). Not just the sculpt, but the feel and quality of the models too. Just the style of paint used makes these feel like good replicas compared to CollectaA, which I've found to be nice technically but rather cheap feeling. And Schleich's animals are on par with Safari but their dinosaurs... Nah, any comparison is a joke.

But this is like the Carnotaurus all over again. There seems to be a popular opinion that it's bad. I thought that was weird because to me it seemed like one of the best WS dinosaurs yet and finally brought them on par with the mammals. I've asked several people what they think is bad about it and literally nobody could name a single thing wrong with it!

[Fembrogon]

I think the photos we have right now are just low-res, so finer details are being obscured.

Having said that, this looks like an exciting lineup! Dilophosaurus is one of my favorite dinosaurs, and this figure looks to be one of the nicest versions of it yet. The Deinonychus is to DIE for. Shringasaurus is an inspired choice, and Edmontosaurus is an impressive upgrade! The other figures are all welcome additions/upgrades to the Safari line as well.

I have to agree with criticisms of the color schemes, though - it's not just that we get a lot of yellow/brown/gray/orange figures, but that so many of them seem to be the SAME yellows/browns/etc, in somewhat repetitive patterns. Of this lineup, the Deinonychus easily stands out just for the high contrast of its dark brown & white pattern. I don't know if cool colors were possible for dinosaur skin, but some more blues and greens wouldn't hurt from time to time, with some more light/dark patterns too. That's my opinion, anyway.

[CityRaptor]

Yep, those pics look kinda blurry.

A lot of People have showed disapoinment over this years crop on Facebook. And some have gone as far as saying There going the way of Schleich .

Well, a lot of people who use Facebook and other Social media also generally post stuff they should not post.

I'm honestly disappointed. Only ones I like are the Pachy & Deinonychus. Rest look very low quality, like something schleich would make.

Well, apparently not just on Facebook.

Seriously?I mean: Look at those Theropods, then look at Schleich Theropods, then back to those. Very different. 

[Mattyonyx]

As an admin of the Paleo-Nerd page, I'm facing a lot of criticism on the 2020 Line-Up. It's kinda sad, some of the comments are pretty harsh and I had to paint out the pictures are to blurry to make real judgements.

[Brocc21]

Yeah. I mean the only ones that don't Interest me are the Dilophosaurus, Shringasaurus, and Sarchosuchus. The first two is only because the photos are a bit low quality and are at awkward angles. And I just don't have a need for a giant crocodile. By no means are any of these bad or low quality.

[PhilSauria]

If anybody wants a better look at these they are up on the Safari Ltd web site in clearer walk-around views. Just keep scrolling down until you find them all.

https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world

[Renecito]

If anybody wants a better look at these they are up on the Safari Ltd web site in clearer walk-around views. Just keep scrolling down until you find them all.

https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world

Thank you!!!

Deinonychus
https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world/deinonychus-100354

Shringasaurus
https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world/shringasaurus-100357

Concavenator
https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world/concavenator-100355

Dilophosaurus
https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world/dilophosaurus-100508

Pachycephalosaurus
https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world/pachycephalosaurus-100350

Edmontosaurus
https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world/edmontosaurus-100358

Qianzhousaurus
https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world/qianzhousaurus-100352

Sarcosuchus
https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world/sarcosuchus-100356

Ichthyosaurus
https://partners.safariltd.com/safari-ltd/wild-safari-prehistoric-world/ichthyosaurus-100359

[Faelrin]

@PhilSauria Wow thanks for that link. I'm really glad to get a better look at these.

Safe to say that the Deinonychus certainly does use the more accurate skull, and not the outdated one. It was likely just the angle of the initial image that gave off that look.

@Doug Watson For the Edmontosaurus was there integument you referenced (assuming there was any to use)? I'm at least aware that hadrosaurids typically had polygonal scales, which certainly shows in those close ups of the sculpt. Were there any animals that served as inspiration for the color schemes? In particular something about that Deinonychus reminds me of a hawk or something, and the Ichthyosaurus certainly reminds me of an Orca, though still different.

And safe to say the lower quality images really didn't do these justice enough. I'm sure once we get in hand pics of these and video reviews, the criticism's about these looking poor should probably fade.

[Flaffy]

I'm honestly disappointed. Only ones I like are the Pachy & Deinonychus. Rest look very low quality, like something schleich would make.

These images beg to differ. Comparing Safari figures to Schleich figures is pretty insulting. Quite a few of this year's figures (namely the ones pictured below) are on par, or even better than Safari's best offerings from previous years imo. 

[Brocc21]

Semi resembles a Golden eagle.
(sorry the pictures really small)

[SidB]

Once again, top quality sculpts available for the general public at a very affordable price.

[TaranUlas]

Yeah, Seeing these much more highly detailed and up close pics has made me even more excited for this (As if that were possible.)

I did all nine.

Glad to hear the confirmation and I would like to personally say that I'm going to buy all nine of these and use them to teach about prehistoric animals. Thank you for such well done and well researched sculpts. Out of curiosity, what scale were these done in? I tried to do some eyeball scaling earlier in the thread, but I suspect I was way off for several of these (Especially the Qianzhousaurus. The pose is one that would throw off any attempt at scaling without being in person. Same with Deinonychus.)

[Jose S.M.]

I think people hating on safari is kind of people hating on some popular movies or shows. Because they are the more widespread brand at least in America people want perfection or something. Safari in my opinion offer products according to what they advertise, they have never attempted to sell themselves as high end figures or something. To me the quality of the sculpts is better than most toy companies.

[Doug Watson]

@Doug Watson For the Edmontosaurus was there integument you referenced (assuming there was any to use)? I'm at least aware that hadrosaurids typically had polygonal scales, which certainly shows in those close ups of the sculpt. Were there any animals that served as inspiration for the color schemes? In particular something about that Deinonychus reminds me of a hawk or something, and the Ichthyosaurus certainly reminds me of an Orca, though still different.

Yes @Faelrin the integument for the Edmontosaurus comes from the 2014 paper "A Mummified Duck-Billed Dinosaur with a Soft-Tissue Cock's Comb" by Dr Phil Bell et al. A large amount of skin from the neck was mummified as well as the comb and is described in the paper. I also contacted Dr Bell and he helped me with the interpretation of the paper and added further details. It is really quite fascinating, what looks like large individual scales on the close up of my Edmontosaurus are actually raised clusters of smaller polygonal scales. If you get one take a close look with magnifier, I put them in there. Here is how Dr Bell described them to me "the individual polygonal scales are arranged into clusters, rather similar to that described by Osborn except that the oval/circular clusters of scales are raised. In each of those clusters, the largest scales (8 mm) are at the centre and become slightly smaller toward the periphery. Individual clusters are up to 8 centimetres in diameter but are smaller (5-6 cm) where the neck meets the back of the head but also further posteriorly along the back. Our mummy only preserves the dorsal part of the neck and back but based on other hadrosaurs, including E. annectens, I'd imagine that those raised clusters are found along the entire back, flanks and tail."
For the colours I usually go with earth tones similar to what is seen on many medium to large extant animals today.
For the Deinonychus I was definitely inspired by modern day raptors for the colours and patterns but no specific bird.
For the Icthyosaurus I used modern dolphins for inspiration also armed with some unpublished information concerning research on ichthyosaur colouration provided by Dr Adam Smith aka Dr Admin. Adam also helped with with reference and his personal critique of my sculpt.

[ItsTwentyBelow]

There is no disputing the high level of scientific accuracy shown by every one of these new figures. Awesome.

Qianzhousaurus is easily the best (I want it NOW), Deinonychus is great, and that Concavenator is a must-have. I really like the Sarcosuchus. It will look awesome in dioramas and displayed next to the Carnegie Deinosuchus, but probably won't be popular overall because typical people will pass it by simply because it isn't in a "gaping maw of death" pose.

What species of Ichthyosaurus did you base your new model on, Mr. Watson?

Cool stuff. I just acquired the awesome Safari Triceratops, and still need to catch up on last year.

[Doug Watson]

What species of Ichthyosaurus did you base your new model on, Mr. Watson?

Icthyosaurus communis