|
Post by therizinosaurus on Dec 13, 2008 23:29:24 GMT
/\ Metal's harder to cast than plastic, so I'm not sure that would be an option.
|
|
|
Post by dinonikes on Dec 14, 2008 0:15:21 GMT
Although I like metal toys-I have a bronze pliosaur (forget what the name was of the company that made that line of bronze dinos and prehistoric critters)and it is real cool, I wouldn't be able to cast metal ones unless i were to go to some kind of foundry and have them run off some, which would make them expensive. I want these toys to be affordable to an average collector.
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Dec 14, 2008 5:41:48 GMT
here is 15 dinos T-rex Triceratops Stegosaurus Parasaurolophus Ankylosaurus Alamosaurus Stygimoloch Struthiomimus Utahraptor Tsintaosaurus Suchomimus Therizinosaurus Chasmosaurus Kentrosaurus Agustinia You forgot Irritator. Inexcusable!
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Dec 14, 2008 5:54:17 GMT
Also, not enough predators.
The list needs an abelisaurid (rugops, perhaps?) and a werid one like masakiosaurus.
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Dec 14, 2008 7:01:04 GMT
It needs Acrocanthosaurus
|
|
|
Post by wheezy on Dec 14, 2008 10:03:26 GMT
sorry guys I left the carnivores out in favor of a more diverse herbivore group. Other groups such as carnegie always make a ton of different carnivores to meet the masses and the herbivores lack diversity. As far as the irratator it is only known from a partial skull so how would you know what the rest of the animal looked like. the acro has been done by carnegie and battat and i felt that the suchomimus has not been done but by wild safari and that one is a bit strange so there is a lot of room for improvement. As far as the masiakosaurus from what i read is still based on an incomplete jaw and partial skeleton and there is no way of knowing what it actually looked like so you could run into the same proplem as carnegies spinosaurus with the wrong head so i would wait until more evidence is found .my top twenty would have also included these Majungatholus Giganotosaurus Lambeosaurus Sauropelta dilophosaurus
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Dec 14, 2008 16:28:51 GMT
Bah, herbivores. I do love dilophosaurus, though. Also, who cares if Irritator is only a skull? It's a really cool skull, and it gives the sculptor a little freedom when coming up with a spinosaurid body for it. Besides, your herbivore diversity is more like "generic always-made species from group, then another one from that group". My list: T-Rex(only concession to tradition) Irritator Dilophosaurus Masiakasaurus Eotyrannus Acrocanthosaurus Rugops Dacentrurus Segnosaurus Rebbachisaurus Monoclonius (back to the classics!) Gargoyleosaurus Tsintaosaurus Quetzalcoatlus in stork pose (not a dinosaur I know, but it still belongs here) Thescelosaurus
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 14, 2008 16:33:54 GMT
Also, who cares if Irritator is only a skull? It's a really cool skull, and it gives the sculptor a little freedom when coming up with a spinosaurid body for it. That could be said for most dinos whose skeletons are incomplete.
|
|
|
Post by kuni on Dec 14, 2008 17:00:57 GMT
Indeed!
There is a difference between incomplete skeletons and well-known relatives versus incomplete skeletons with few known relatives, though.
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 14, 2008 17:51:17 GMT
It still wouldn't kill them to try it out though.
|
|
|
Post by dinonikes on Dec 14, 2008 18:31:13 GMT
i will more than likely have a dilophosaurus in the dino set. I will put it in even if it doesn't win the most requests- I figure i get to add one of my favorites since I will be the guy having to sculpt all of these critters. I have a special fondness for dilophosaurus. I have made a few of the full size Rush models over the years. The last cast to be made was done a few years back when I was still at Artists Inc. We were asked to cast one of these guys to go outside the new Dinosaur museum up in Kenosha, WI. They had a paleontologist from Carthage University come in as a consultant. It was interesting that he had me alter the cast- he didn't like that it had 'lips' as he called them. He disagreed with Gregory Paul i guess, who had been the consultant on the opriginal sculpting of this model. He wanted me to grind away these lips- to make the mouth more like a croc or alligator. Otherwise he said that this was the best dino sculpted reconstruction he had seen- as far as the pose, saying it had such a dynamic running pose.He also criticized the Rush T-Rex for having these same lips, and my Yangchuanosaur head that I had hanging in the studio. I haven't really seen any good versions of dilophosaurus in any of the toy lines. The pose is always akward, and they never look to me like the Rush one, which I imagine should be fairly accurate, being developed by a paleontologist, and having had it endorsed for the most part by another. This brings up another question for you guys- What about cast in bases for runing carnivores? Do toys with bases offend? I know that most plastic soldiers have bases- but i don't see bases on dino toys as a rule. Are they taboo? I notice that in some of the dino toys they don't seem to stand up unless the tail or the arms touch down. I could make some pretty cool dynamic poses if I had the option of adding bases, maybe a fallen log that the dino is running over. What do you think? I am going to try to post a photo or two of the Rush dilo as it seems relavent, but it probably won't work as i just can't seem to figure out how to post photos here.
|
|
|
Post by dinonikes on Dec 14, 2008 18:32:59 GMT
hey it worked- here is another one of this dilo-
|
|
|
Post by dinonikes on Dec 14, 2008 18:35:18 GMT
Here is a photo of Roger Walshlager sculpting the Dilo- I don't know who the dudes are with him. Roger is the guy in the smock.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Dec 14, 2008 19:45:35 GMT
Bases would be kickass Actually i don't know why they are so underrated in the dinosaur toys industry...I mean,look at McFarlane's Dragons (which i collect):they ALL have a base of some sort,yet it can be taken off easily to play with the dragons ;D
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Dec 14, 2008 23:07:57 GMT
But that would make them more expensive.
|
|
|
Post by ningishzida on Dec 14, 2008 23:52:47 GMT
If you wanted to have a succesful line of toy Dinos I think you should:
1.Find sculptors who are as good as those that are making Papo's and make them with opening jaws as well. Movable heads are possible too, without making the dino look like an 'action figure'. What would be great is if you can give the the detail of Papo, but of a soft rubber with metal armature so they will be completely posable. You can make both the common and unusual creatures because if they are Papo quality, people will buy them.
2. Do make some of the exciting new animals, like the giant new pterosaur Hatzgeapteryx. The earlier amphibians, earlest dinos and the mammal-like reptiles would be good choices as well...... but to stay in business you will probably need to make the 'mainstream dinos' too.
3. 1:40 is a good scale. This makes you dinos compatible with other lines and fairly close to the 28-35mm wargaming figures, because fantasy RPG players buy a lot of dinos too.
4.. Offer Two distinctly different adult poses "male and female" and at least one juvenile.
5. Make diorama sets of Mesozoic plants and smaller animals to support the dioramas people will make wih your figures.
|
|
|
Post by dinonikes on Dec 15, 2008 0:06:16 GMT
Having bases on some of the running two leggers wouldn't necessarily mean higher costs. I know there is a bit more material, but there are other factors too. Any added costs that might be a factor would be outweighed by this- would you pay a bit extra to have a good figure that will stand up for display as opposed to a good figure that falls over all the time?
|
|
|
Post by wheezy on Dec 15, 2008 0:14:59 GMT
Bah, herbivores. I do love dilophosaurus, though. Also, who cares if Irritator is only a skull? It's a really cool skull, and it gives the sculptor a little freedom when coming up with a spinosaurid body for it. Besides, your herbivore diversity is more like "generic always-made species from group, then another one from that group". My list: T-Rex(only concession to tradition) Irritator Dilophosaurus Masiakasaurus Eotyrannus Acrocanthosaurus Rugops Dacentrurus Segnosaurus Rebbachisaurus Monoclonius (back to the classics!) Gargoyleosaurus Tsintaosaurus Quetzalcoatlus in stork pose (not a dinosaur I know, but it still belongs here) Thescelosaurus I could say the same about carnivores Bah There are so many already made. i would agree with some of these suggestion like Dacenturus and the Rebbachisaurus instead of Kentrosaurus and agustinia. However gargoylesaurus may be difficult in a 1/40 scale to get all the detail in considering it only grew to 10 -12 feet. The same with Thescelosaurus which only only grew 8 feet. I think He has already confirmed the rex stego tricera and now possibly the dilo and i think he is doing a different line with non dinos so the quetz would be put into that group. All i did was give my suggestions about dinos i would like to be made. Why do you keep criticizing my suggestion. I am entitled to my own opinions and i don't do it to others.
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Dec 15, 2008 2:58:52 GMT
I like theropods best, so I fully support kuni's list
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Dec 15, 2008 3:11:42 GMT
But that would make them more expensive. Not necessarily. I doubt a little rock attatched to the occasional foot to make the figure stand upright would make the price skyrocket!
|
|