Leyster's Collection (updated 13/09/24)

[Leyster]

This Edaphosaurus really is a fine figure; I'm a bit surprised at myself for not having acquired one yet. I can't use the 1/35 scale excuse, since I do have several excellent Dimetrodons.

Now that I own it, I'm sightly displeased at how it's not in scale with the Carnegie Dimetrodon. Oh well, a fine model anyway

Binomial name: Dilophosaurus wetherilli Welles 1970
Classification: Dinosauria->Theropoda->Neotheropoda->Dilophosauridae
Time: Sinemurian-Pliensbachian (Early Jurassic)
Formation: Kayenta Formation (present day USA)
Manifacturer and date of release: Safari LTD, 2020
Sculptor: Doug Watson
Scale: 1:35 for UCMP 37302

A cute little figure sadly victim of the progress: not too after it's release, a new study showed that Dilophosaurus was more robustly built and differently proportioned than the Coelophysis-like animal we imagined. Oh well, at least it's a reasonable Dilophosaurus in 1/35, I was afraid the old Carngies would remain forever alone. Still I can't wait for some company (other than Collecta's so and so version) to tackle the new Dilophosaurus!

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

I love that little figure. Its a shame about that, same thing happened to the Edmontosaurus from the same year.

The Edaphosaurus is also stunning, would be nice to see more Permian animals depicted. Its normally just an endless sea of Dimetrodon. Though since there were a lot of species of Dimetrodon, I suppose having more than one isn't too bad, even if they almost always depict the same species.

[Leyster]

The Edaphosaurus is also stunning, would be nice to see more Permian animals depicted. Its normally just an endless sea of Dimetrodon. Though since there were a lot of species of Dimetrodon, I suppose having more than one isn't too bad, even if they almost always depict the same species.

The Favorite one is D.limbatus, I think

Binomial name: Neovenator salerii Hutt et al. 1996
Classification: Dinosauria->Theropoda->Neotheropoda->Averostra->Tetanurae->Carnosauria->Allosauroidea->Allosauria->Carcharodontosauria->Carcharodontosauridae->Neovenatoridae (?)*
Time: Barremian (Early Cretaceous)
Formation: Wessex Formation (present day UK)
Manifacturer and date of release: Collecta, 2021
Sculptor: Matt Geiger
Scale: 1:35 based on MIWG 6348

*not sure if the "Neovenatoridae" clade is still a necessity

You can read my review of this model here (in italian, but a translator will do the work)

[SidB]

The Edaphosaurus is also stunning, would be nice to see more Permian animals depicted. Its normally just an endless sea of Dimetrodon. Though since there were a lot of species of Dimetrodon, I suppose having more than one isn't too bad, even if they almost always depict the same species.

The Favorite one is D.limbatus, I think

Binomial name: Neovenator salerii Hutt et al. 1996
Classification: Dinosauria->Theropoda->Neotheropoda->Averostra->Tetanurae->Carnosauria->Allosauroidea->Allosauria->Carcharodontosauria->Carcharodontosauridae->Neovenatoridae (?)*
Time: Barremian (Early Cretaceous)
Formation: Wessex Formation (present day UK)
Manifacturer and date of release: Collecta, 2021
Sculptor: Matt Geiger
Scale: 1:35 based on MIWG 6348

*not sure if the "Neovenatoridae" clade is still a necessity

You can read my review of this model here (in italian, but a translator will do the work)

There are several ways to balance a theropod, with varying degrees of success, as we all know through long experience. Personally, all of are acceptable within limits, except one - I can't abide "clown feet", ruins the figure for me. This was a retrogressive move on CollectA's part IMO. Perhaps they are shifting their marketing focus to a different demographic: perhaps models with bases simply didn't sell? Shame, though.

[Shonisaurus]

The Edaphosaurus is also stunning, would be nice to see more Permian animals depicted. Its normally just an endless sea of Dimetrodon. Though since there were a lot of species of Dimetrodon, I suppose having more than one isn't too bad, even if they almost always depict the same species.

The Favorite one is D.limbatus, I think

Binomial name: Neovenator salerii Hutt et al. 1996
Classification: Dinosauria->Theropoda->Neotheropoda->Averostra->Tetanurae->Carnosauria->Allosauroidea->Allosauria->Carcharodontosauria->Carcharodontosauridae->Neovenatoridae (?)*
Time: Barremian (Early Cretaceous)
Formation: Wessex Formation (present day UK)
Manifacturer and date of release: Collecta, 2021
Sculptor: Matt Geiger
Scale: 1:35 based on MIWG 6348

*not sure if the "Neovenatoridae" clade is still a necessity

You can read my review of this model here (in italian, but a translator will do the work)

There are several ways to balance a theropod, with varying degrees of success, as we all know through long experience. Personally, all of are acceptable within limits, except one - I can't abide "clown feet", ruins the figure for me. This was a retrogressive move on CollectA's part IMO. Perhaps they are shifting their marketing focus to a different demographic: perhaps models with bases simply didn't sell? Shame, though.

I totally agree with you regarding the neovenator, it is regressive in terms of quality, although I have it commissioned sincerely, I would have liked Collecta to have made an effort when sculpting that European theropod figure.

[Leyster]

There are several ways to balance a theropod, with varying degrees of success, as we all know through long experience. Personally, all of are acceptable within limits, except one - I can't abide "clown feet", ruins the figure for me. This was a retrogressive move on CollectA's part IMO. Perhaps they are shifting their marketing focus to a different demographic: perhaps models with bases simply didn't sell? Shame, though.

I totally agree. Enlarging the feet is the wrost solution, since the result is an alteration of the animal anatomy. And, quoting Holtz's First Law of Paleoart, "if the skeleton doesn't fit in your restoration, then your restoration is wrong". Simple.

Binomial name: Coelophysis bauri Cope, 1889
Classification: Dinosauria->Theropoda->Neotheropoda->Coelophysoidea
Time: Rhaetian-Hettagian? (Late Triassic-Early Jurassic)
Formation: Siltstone Member and Petrified Forest Member of the Chinle Formation (present day USA)
Manifacturer and date of release: Safari LTD; 2017
Sculptor: Doug Watson
Scale: 1:14 based on AMNH 7223

It was time to made an updated Coelophysis for the western market! And it's feathered, which agrees with Lovelace et al. 2020!

[Leyster]

Binomial name: Elasmosaurus platyurus Cope, 1868
Classification: Sauropterygia->Eosauropterygia->Pistosauria->Plesiosauria->Plesiosauroidea->Cryptoclidia->Xenopsaria->Elasmosauridae->Styxosaurinae
Time: Campanian (Late Cretaceous)
Formation: Sharon Springs Member of Pierre Shale Formation (present day USA)
Manifacturer and date of release: Collecta, 2021
Sculptor: Matt Geiger
Scale: 1:40, based on a restored skull lenght (dunno how reliable it is, given what we have of Elasmosaurus skull)

[Shonisaurus]

It is masterful that elasmosaurus is a mixture of marine reptile and seal. The sculpture and colors have been made by Collecta in a totally masterful way. Thanks for sharing the photos.

[Leyster]

It is masterful that elasmosaurus is a mixture of marine reptile and seal. The sculpture and colors have been made by Collecta in a totally masterful way. Thanks for sharing the photos.

Yes, the colouration is nicer than the Safari version. I'm not sure about the anatomy.

Binomial name: Deinonychus antirrhopus Ostrom, 1969
Classification: Dinosauria->Theropoda->Neotheropoda->Averostra->Tetanurae->Coelurosauria->Tyrannoraptora->Maniraptoromorpha->Neocoelurosauria->Maniraptoriformes->Maniraptora->Pennaraptora->Paraves->Eumaniraptora->Deinonychosauria->Dromaeosauridae->Eudromaeosauria->
Time: Aptian-Albian (Early Cretaceous)
Formation: Himes Member, Little Sheep Mudstone Member of the Cloverly Formation, Trinity Group, Antlers Formation (present day USA)
Manifacturer and date of release: Safari, 2020
Sculptor: Doug Watson
Scale: 1:13 based on YPM 5205 (holotype), 1:18 based on MCZ 4371 (largest specimen)

Best Dromaeosaurid out there for anatomy and feathering. Period.

It looks straight outta a Jed Taylor artwork:

[Halichoeres]

Yeah, this Sauropelta is perfect. I think the posture is much more plausible; the PNSO reminds me a bit of a cat arching its back.

Yeah, the only problem I have with it is the five-clawed hand, as far as I know derived Archosaurs have only three or less clawed fingers. Still better than the PNSO, I'm not sure how doable that pose is in life considering the stiff back of dinosaurs compared to mammals.

Hm, I guess it depends what's meant by a derived archosaur, but there are both croc- and bird-line archosaurs with manual unguals on more than three digits, like Postosuchus and Sarahsaurus.


Digging the new additions, especially the Edaphosaurus and Coelophysis. It's a slight bummer that the Edaphosaurus doesn't scale well with most Dimetrodon figures, but it works pretty well with the Favorite Co. version!

[Leyster]

Yeah, this Sauropelta is perfect. I think the posture is much more plausible; the PNSO reminds me a bit of a cat arching its back.

Yeah, the only problem I have with it is the five-clawed hand, as far as I know derived Archosaurs have only three or less clawed fingers. Still better than the PNSO, I'm not sure how doable that pose is in life considering the stiff back of dinosaurs compared to mammals.

Hm, I guess it depends what's meant by a derived archosaur, but there are both croc- and bird-line archosaurs with manual unguals on more than three digits, like Postosuchus and Sarahsaurus.

As far as I can tell, it's true that the Sarahasaurus osteology mentions unguals, but it also mentions that "the distal phalanges of digits IV and V are difficult to interpret", so I'm not too sure about them being unguals. About Ankylosaurids, I don't remeber unguals on digit IV-V mentioned in Carpenter et a. 2016, even if they might be represented in GAT's skeletal. Idk, I must research more the matter.

[Leyster]

Binomial name: Pteranodon longiceps Marsh 1876
Classification: Pterosauria->Macronychoptera->Novialoidea->Breviquartossa->Pterodactylomorpha->Caelidracones->Pterodactyloidea->Lophocratia->Eupterodactyloidea->Ornithocheiroidea-> Pteranodontoidea->Pteranodontia->Pteranodontidae
Time: Santonian/Campanian (Late Cretaceous)
Formation: Smoky Hill Chalk Member of the Niobrara Formation, Sharon Springs Deposits of the Pierre Shale Formation (present day USA)
Manifacturer and date of release: Collecta, 2021
Sculptor: Matt Geiger
Scale: 1:6,5 for USNM 50130


And my review. As usual, in italian, but a translator will do.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

That Pteranodon is beautiful, it's a shame it's enormous in my opinion. Because if it were a similar size to the Safari Ltd one od probably swap. Unlike the Elasmosaurus, which I believe admin says the Safari is more accurate than the CollectA.

[Shonisaurus]

That pteranodon must be huge. I have mine pre-ordered in Alcaiceira. Thank you for sharing this photograph and for all the extensive information (toy file and scientific explanations) with which you have used us in this truly attractive thread.

[Leyster]

That Pteranodon is beautiful, it's a shame it's enormous in my opinion. Because if it were a similar size to the Safari Ltd one od probably swap. Unlike the Elasmosaurus, which I believe admin says the Safari is more accurate than the CollectA.

I still think that, in accuracy, the Safari Pteranodon beats the Collecta.

Here my review of the PNSO Allosaurus, with my two cents on the fragilis/jimmadseni question. I updated my previous post accordigly.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

So, you're saying it does represent A. jimmadseni then?
It's still only a maybe for me anyway.

[Leyster]

So, you're saying it does represent A. jimmadseni then?
It's still only a maybe for me anyway.

After I compared its skull with MOR 693, I think yes.

[SidB]

That Pteranodon is beautiful, it's a shame it's enormous in my opinion. Because if it were a similar size to the Safari Ltd one od probably swap. Unlike the Elasmosaurus, which I believe admin says the Safari is more accurate than the CollectA.

I still think that, in accuracy, the Safari Pteranodon beats the Collecta.

Here my review of the PNSO Allosaurus, with my two cents on the fragilis/jimmadseni question. I updated my previous post accordigly.

I noted that the thumb claw in PNSO's A. jimmadseni doesn't seem particularly enlarged compared with that of the Safari A. fragilis (even accounting for the latter's drastic abbreviation for 'safety purposes'). Why is this? Is this an error on PNSO's part or is there a difference in this respect between the two Allosaurus species, with the fragilis having a proportionately larger thumb claw?

[Leyster]

That Pteranodon is beautiful, it's a shame it's enormous in my opinion. Because if it were a similar size to the Safari Ltd one od probably swap. Unlike the Elasmosaurus, which I believe admin says the Safari is more accurate than the CollectA.

I still think that, in accuracy, the Safari Pteranodon beats the Collecta.

Here my review of the PNSO Allosaurus, with my two cents on the fragilis/jimmadseni question. I updated my previous post accordigly.

I noted that the thumb claw in PNSO's A. jimmadseni doesn't seem particularly enlarged compared with that of the Safari A. fragilis (even accounting for the latter's drastic abbreviation for 'safety purposes'). Why is this? Is this an error on PNSO's part or is there a difference in this respect between the two Allosaurus species, with the fragilis having a proportionately larger thumb claw?

The postcrania of A.jimmadseni is not yet described. Until then, all we have are the mounts of MOR 693 and SMA 0005 and the skeletal by Scott Hartman, where the thumb claw dowsn't look reduced. IMHO they forgot to add the keratin cover, which lenghtens the claw in the Safari Allosaurus.

MOR 693 ("Big Al")

SMA 0005 ("Big Al 2")

Hartman's A.jimmadseni

[SidB]

Thanks, L @Leyster ; it always amazes me when paleoartists forget to take the large thumbclaw into account, one way or another, and this is no exception, since it seems likely enough that this was a feature of A. jimmadseni too (though not an absolute certainty, of course).