FAUNA CASTS ACROCANTHOSAURUS

[kevin]

;D

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Really cool paint job there ! Reminds me of the WWD Allosaurus..which was really nice...

The hands had some casting issues I think..they look a bit soft on detail.. :?

[[][][]cordylus[][][]]

I think they were like that to begin with.

You could always paint on some detail though; scales, claws, etc.

[Tyrannax]

My favorite paint up, hands down.

The size of the eye, which you brought out with your incredible painting skills, really gives the animal a "massive" look- if you know what I mean.

[kuni]

Wow. One of my favorite theropod paintjobs of yours. The patterning hits exactly the right note - interesting and colorful, while still being naturalistic.

One suggestion, though - a black line around the teeth and mouth will help define the head a little and make its details more obvious. This "blacklining" is often used when painting figurines as it helps to break up different areas.

[kevin]

All right, so I want to chime in here, but i do not want to sound too preachy. i do respect everyone's opinions, and their right to have and express them, but I am a little bugged here. So.

I want us to maybe try to remember a couple of things.

a) These pieces are all largely a collaberation of all of us. All of them were posted as clay pieces for our inspection and comments before ever being cast into finished pieces. This includes anatomy and proportion, and scale. I too think this acro seems on the smaller side, but, Malcolm did give the dimensions of the piece, and that was given the green light back when. I think it seems a little unfair to me to swoon over the finished clay mock ups, and say it's great and boy we want one, then have qualms at what the finished product looks like. Though granted, the casting process does seem to soften ssome of the details, but the same is said of the Carnegie pieces, to a degree.

b) yes there is a...look..to Malcolm's finished work. I don't know if it is dificulty getting small details cast, or what, but yes, there is some roughness, and has been in most of the pieces. Fair enough, but I find it charming, giving them a distinctive style, much like schleich and carnegies. And, since the finished product is displayed, I had a choice of whether or not to buy it after seeing the pics. It is easy enought o download the pics and zoom in, in order to get a good look at the detail, so if you buy it, it is with full knowlege of what flaws may or may not be there. again it just seems a little unfair to look at the fig, order it and then complain on the open forumabout the quality of the piece. I know for a fact that if a piece is miscast or unacceptable for whatever reason, malcolm will replace it, or try to work out a solution. I just think his style is just gonna be what it is. As for the detail on this piece, perhaps the hands and feet are a little lacking, but the rest is not. I was really surprised once it was done how much detail was brought ut.

So, I guess a little preachy, but these are absolutely unique pieces, partly designed by us, the forum. Also, keep in mind that he never set out to do ultra detailed, super nifty resin statues or anything like that. He wanted to produce a toy line for the collector. A toy that was accurate, while being affordable, and there are always, always certain compromises to be had when doing that.

[stormnl]

impressiv painting job,,,i like it very much

[[][][]cordylus[][][]]

Many of the pieces can look fine as clay prototypes, but the casting problems can mess things up, and that's when people announce their qualms...

[bokisaurus]

Dec 28, 2009 21:27:41 GMT [][][]cordylus[][][] said:

Many of the pieces can look fine as clay prototypes, but the casting problems can mess things up, and that's when people announce their qualms...

Really? I think it's clear enough from the posted pictures, and I have yet to receive a piece that did not meet the quality expectation.
I think people tend to forget that Malcolm's pieces are one of a kind, individually produced by ONE person. He is a one-man operation, it's what makes all of his pieces so unique.
Frankly, I would rather spend my $$ of his pieces than on Safari's. Don't get me wrong, I love Safari, but they are just wayyyyyy over-hyped, really IMHO. And they are so mass produce you can't miss them, just so common.
Also, for the price he is selling them? I really hope he can finish up all the ones he started.
If you don't like what you see, well then don't buy it. Simple really. I hate for him, or any other artist to get discourage producing unique pieces due to rampant complaints.

[[][][]cordylus[][][]]

I never even said I didn't like them

There are some casting issues- I don't mind them. But there are some.

And just to defend safari, they are "over hyped" because they are making the most accurate and beautiful figures as of now (we'll see how that papo pachyrhinosaurus comes along though!).

[kevin]

Safari's spinosaurus was hardly the most beautiful piece asround.It is of poor quality, fatally overpriced, and seriously overhyped. Sorry, but it's true. I love Malcolm's pieces. Yes, there are casting errors, I guess. Yes, there is a sofness or lack of detail in the hands and digits. I have thoughts. But as a whole they have been covered many times over in the critiques of his earlier pieces. We really deconstructed both the rex and dilopho. SO, I guess what we can say here is that the previous noted issues appear to be ongoing. I would suggest then, that since Malcolm is quite aware of those comments, that since he has not really refined those bits much that he feels they are acceptable as they are. Maybe its just his distinctive style. I don't know. But I suggest that we focus on the piece as a whole, or get a couple of reviews written and posted so this can be addressed but without overhashing it.

Remember, i am not judging these pieces by the standards of detailed resin pieces, for that is not what they are intended to be. I judge them as toys, and by the amount of pleaasure I recieve owning them.

[[][][]cordylus[][][]]

Ok, one safari spinosaurus that has some problems... compare that to the rest of the recent ones ;D

Malcom's are intended as toys? I thought they were more like "desktop" sculptures?

[bokisaurus]

Dec 28, 2009 22:40:08 GMT [][][]cordylus[][][] said:

I never even said I didn't like them

There are some casting issues- I don't mind them. But there are some.

And just to defend safari, they are "over hyped" because they are making the most accurate and beautiful figures as of now (we'll see how that papo pachyrhinosaurus comes along though!).

Why am I not surprised? In your opinion perhaps, but for me, they are over hyped, really. It's one reason I am not that excited with their figures. Now don't get me wrong, I still like Safari, I never said I did not. And I don't consider them the best, or making the most beautiful figures, that is all based on personal taste. And I don't really care for accuracy all that much

[kevin]

Go back and re-read his original posts. This was intended as a toy line for collectors.He was even gonna out in plants and critters, in toobs and stuff. Remember? He is not trying to put out a line of desktop models. At least his vision changed. ANd, he wanted them to be affordable. That is partly why he is using the material he does. Resin would be a great chice if he wanted to do models. But he is doing pvc toys, dig?

[kevin]

Dec 28, 2009 22:57:12 GMT [][][]cordylus[][][] said:

Ok, one safari spinosaurus that has some problems... compare that to the rest of the recent ones ;D

Malcom's are intended as toys? I thought they were more like "desktop" sculptures?

From Dec 7th of last year, in Malcolm's original thread, still available to read:

Ok, so if someone were planning on making a limited edition line of dino toys- which would you like to see made? After the obligatory T-Rex and Triceratops. Should they be made in 1:40 scale? What about prehistoric mammals, should there be a few of those as well? I am 'toying' with the idea of doing this after seeing all of the cool toy lines out there and the toys they have made

I thnk the intent for the line seems quite clear....

[[][][]cordylus[][][]]

ER, aren't "toys" meant to be, well, played with?

[kevin]

and.....who says these are not? He says a toy line for collectors...that sounds a lot like the McFarlane dragins, for instance. I certainly do not play with my toys. And I have a tendancy to glue aticulation points in place, they just bug me so. My point being he says they are toys, he says they are not intended to compete with the medels and/or statues. He just wanted a nice affordable toy line that collectors would appreciate. Why is that a problem? You ALL ere gushing over the idea a year ago. SO what happened? He finally gets them out there, and you've changed your mind?/ I was initially skeptical, how many people actually do get them produced? It's why I avoided the topic in the beginning. But, here we are, and there they are. What's the deal?

And, just because they are on stands, and more static, does not mean they are not toys. As case in point, I point directly to the Carnegie pachycephalosaurus. On a stand, still a toy. And from your beloved, holy God substitute---I mean toy line. ;D

I know, the thought is a toy needs playability, I don't believe that myself, and wish more were molded to bases, or at least pegged on.

[bucketfoot]

I haven't followed this thread, but as a general comment to all those critical of Malcolm's sculpts:

Y'all can go intercourse yourselves.

Malcolm is producing an AWESOME line that is better than Carnegie, Bully/Schleich, etc. AND a labor of love.

If you have nothing positive to say - don't buy them. I have, and I will do so again in the future.

Malcolm has produced pieces for MUSEUMS you iceholes.

You ought to be GRATEFUL that he has embarked on this project.

Or else - SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!

[Tyrannax]

Why is there always a useless argument being engaged upon in almost every thread? Honestly, no one dislikes Malcom's work. I am starting to believe misunderstanding has led to a lot of this..

[kevin]

yea. He is making nice toys, and others are trying to get nice models. I think they are pretty close. I am not arguing per se. I am just pointing out that as a whole, the foruim has been a lot less receptive to the finished pieces than they are to the in progress material. I am not sure why, and it bugs me a little. I see the point about the hands, and agree. I also wish the eyes and teeth were better defined in his models, but i don't think they were produced with repainting in mind, so some of that is likely my own fault. There are at least two to three more layers on top of whatever he put on, so that has probably had an effect. I think to critique the piece as a whole, you'd need to look at his original paint, or possibly an unpainted piece. I posted this to show my work....

But, I think it looks better in more predatory colors, more menacing.Really, there is a lot more body detail than I thought. Scales, not just wrinkles. And I love how the top lips flare out some and are wider than the bottoms, overlapping them a bit. In indoor light, there are a lot of natural shadows occurring here. The hands are facing the right direction. The raised spine ie more a hump of muscle, not a flimsy mini-sail like Carnegie's. Over all, this animal is much more heavily built. It's body and tail are held nice and horizontal, it is posed mid stride, looking as if some poor unfortunate has just grabbed it's attention. All this is possible by the base. One may say that the right foot is not well formed, but one could also say it is firmly planted and sinking into the mus, which is squishing around the toes. The base is sculpted as a muddy mess. It's cool. Just really cool.