|
|
Post by sbell on Sept 24, 2010 5:08:41 GMT
Its really too bad that the Miragaia is already found to be inacurate when it looks like such a promising figure.   There is absolutely no excuse for Carnegie to make their Miragaia inaccurate. I mean, really, these guys must have been staring at the scientific illustrations and or paleoart for hours before they molded their model. It must have been a conscious move on Safari Ltd's part to not include the shoulder spike, otherwise it would amount to plagiarism. I would assume that the REAL reason for "modern" figures to include "pronated" arms is due to their (e.g Schleich, Papo, etc.) attempt to circumvent copyright issues. So why the hate on CARNEGIE (not Safari, dammit)? From what I've found, no shoulder spikes were found with Miragaia, so they didn't include them. Do we really want companies to start assuming at all times, just because we think they should? And there is no such thing as copyrighting a posture in a figure. It would be like having to make human models with backwards arms because someone else put them forward. |
|
|
|
Post by tanystropheus on Sept 24, 2010 5:47:49 GMT
There is absolutely no excuse for Carnegie to make their Miragaia inaccurate. I mean, really, these guys must have been staring at the scientific illustrations and or paleoart for hours before they molded their model. It must have been a conscious move on Safari Ltd's part to not include the shoulder spike, otherwise it would amount to plagiarism. I would assume that the REAL reason for "modern" figures to include "pronated" arms is due to their (e.g Schleich, Papo, etc.) attempt to circumvent copyright issues. So why the hate on CARNEGIE (not Safari, dammit)? From what I've found, no shoulder spikes were found with Miragaia, so they didn't include them. Do we really want companies to start assuming at all times, just because we think they should? And there is no such thing as copyrighting a posture in a figure. It would be like having to make human models with backwards arms because someone else put them forward. LOL. No Carnegie hate, I assure you. I guess my reasoning here is a little bizarre, as well.  Definitely no Carnegie hate. I will be picking up ALL of the 2011 Carnegie figures, as well as some of their previous dinosaurs e.g Tylosaurus, Beipiaosaurus at some point. I have the Carnegie Mammoth. Some times I get annoyed when companies make very obvious mistakes e.g Why even bother releasing a figure that can't stand on its own two legs?( I have a really stylish batman figure from many years ago, that can't even freakin' stand! What a waste!) The Miragaia is excellent, with or without a shoulder spike. If only WS's Kentrosaurus had a better head, though. It would have been a nice set of stegosauridae...so close...d**n |
|
|
|
Post by bokisaurus on Sept 24, 2010 7:53:23 GMT
Hatzegopteryx I am the most interested in seeing. I wonder if it will be in flight or if it will be walking/standing. Concavenator is being made and they didn't think to put any of the weird new ceratopsians in??? I was hoping for a Diabloceratops or Medusaceratops from them. Ya, I was hoping that they would release one of those new ceratopsians. Impressive list from CollectA, if I am correct, this would be the first years that there won't be any overlapping figures from them and Safari/Carnegie. And I do hope that Hatzeg will be the walking/standing pose... hard to imagine not dong it in that pose. |
|
|
|
Post by EmperorDinobot on Sept 24, 2010 9:44:32 GMT
Miragaia may not have had the shoulder spikes, but Dacentrurus, Lexovisaurus and so on did.
|
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Sept 24, 2010 13:12:04 GMT
Miragaia may not have had the shoulder spikes, but Dacentrurus, Lexovisaurus and so on did. But Stegosaurus, Wuerhosaurus, and Huayangosaurus, as examples, did not--so why would the Miragaia figure be considered incorrect if the skeleton does not show them (despite that portion of the skeleton being known), and the artist not assuming they were there? |
|
|
|
Post by Himmapaan on Sept 24, 2010 19:09:23 GMT
Miragaia may not have had the shoulder spikes, but Dacentrurus, Lexovisaurus and so on did. But Stegosaurus, Wuerhosaurus, and Huayangosaurus, as examples, did not--so why would the Miragaia figure be considered incorrect if the skeleton does not show them (despite that portion of the skeleton being known), and the artist not assuming they were there? I think he did say it may not have had the spikes, no?. |
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Sept 24, 2010 19:18:34 GMT
But Stegosaurus, Wuerhosaurus, and Huayangosaurus, as examples, did not--so why would the Miragaia figure be considered incorrect if the skeleton does not show them (despite that portion of the skeleton being known), and the artist not assuming they were there? I think he did say it may not have had the spikes, no?. If you go up the thread far enough, some people are complaining that the figure is incorrect because it does not have spikes--even though there is no evidence to assume either way. To wit: Miragaia should have had the shoulder spikes, srsly.
Its really too bad that the Miragaia is already found to be inacurate when it looks like such a promising figure.
So while it may not have had shoulder spikes, he gave examples of some that do; and I gave examples of some that don't. My main point is that calling the figure inaccurate based on the spikes is specious and pointless, because there is no evidence for said spikes. |
|
|
|
Post by Himmapaan on Sept 24, 2010 19:23:06 GMT
Aha, I see. I do remember the complaints about the lack of spikes, but I forgot that EDB's earlier comment was one of them. |
|
|
|
Post by bokisaurus on Sept 24, 2010 20:58:25 GMT
Attenborosaurus! My favorite plesiosaur   Awesome. Let's hope it's one of their better ones. Hopefully it makes a great companion to the Hydrotherosaurus. That is one heck of a list. I do wonder which ones are Deluxes, and which ones are standard line. We know that the rhomaleo was supposed to be part of the deluxe set this year. Now, the Hatzego, Irritator, Alamosaurus, are all good candidates for Deluxe versions. |
|
|
|
Post by bokisaurus on Sept 24, 2010 21:04:17 GMT
I really hope they make a good Rhomaleosaurus. That's one of my favourite fossil casts to see at the NHM. Here is another photo of this 1:40 scale Rhomaleosaurus figure. This is the revised version. Remember, it was delayed/pulled from this years release due to some last minute modification. From what can be seen based on this photos alone, it looks like its a pretty good model. It seems to fit the fossils pics I have seen. So, what you think Dr. A?  |
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Sept 24, 2010 21:08:08 GMT
I really hope they make a good Rhomaleosaurus. That's one of my favourite fossil casts to see at the NHM. Here is another photo of this 1:40 scale Rhomaleosaurus figure. This is the revised version. Remember, it was delayed/pulled from this years release due to some last minute modification. From what can be seen based on this photos alone, it looks like its a pretty good model. It seems to fit the fossils pics I have seen. So, what you think Dr. A? Where did you find a picture of the Rhom? |
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Sept 24, 2010 21:25:51 GMT
Not too bad. Here is my reconstruction of Rhom for comparison:  and also for comparison, here is a crude sculpture I produced with accurate proportions:  |
|
hermes888
Full Member
My Favorite GIANTmicrobe out of the 6 I have, an Orange Amoeba.
Posts: 184
|
Post by hermes888 on Sept 24, 2010 21:30:10 GMT
They should make a Kosmoceratops for 2012. Papo/Safari should, that is.
Any news on Papo? We know CollectA and Safari LTD, but no Papo?
|
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Sept 24, 2010 21:30:18 GMT
Looks a little soft on detail, but it looks pretty cool |
|
|
|
Post by DinoLord on Sept 24, 2010 21:44:54 GMT
Look's like one of Procon's better ones. Hopefully the painted on teeth don't look too horrid like on the Hydrotherosaurus.
Hermes, where have you been? I haven't seen you around LOTP lately.
|
|
|
|
Post by simon on Sept 24, 2010 22:04:13 GMT
That pliosaur looks gorgeous. Procon is really ramping up the quality. Looks like I won't be embarrassed to display it next to the Carnegie Tylosaurus.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seijun on Sept 25, 2010 2:11:45 GMT
The fins look like they came from an inflatable pool toy. Other than that, I like it.
|
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Sept 25, 2010 2:31:15 GMT
Yeah, I thought they looked a little fat too, the way light appears to be reflecting off of them. Hopefully it will be part of the paintjob and the fins won't be too fat.
I have to say though, I'd prefer fat fins over thin fins, most of the time they are made way too skinny!
|
|
|
|
Post by itstwentybelow on Sept 25, 2010 3:09:12 GMT
Wow, I'm happy to say that I'm quite impressed with that figure. Might be the first CollectA model I decide to invest in. I sure hope this is a sign of great things to come!
|
|
|
|
Post by bokisaurus on Sept 25, 2010 5:58:13 GMT
Here is another photo of this 1:40 scale Rhomaleosaurus figure. This is the revised version. Remember, it was delayed/pulled from this years release due to some last minute modification. From what can be seen based on this photos alone, it looks like its a pretty good model. It seems to fit the fossils pics I have seen. So, what you think Dr. A? Where did you find a picture of the Rhom? ;D Peter Leung, CollectA's General Manager  He sent me the photos last July when I asked him about the figures status. Cool, ya? Glad that it looks really nice, and at 1:40 scale, good size. |
|
Awesome. Let's hope it's one of their better ones.
![[][][]cordylus[][][] Avatar](http://files.sharenator.com/Troll_Face_U_MAD_RE_wrestling_1-s407x405-126802.jpg)
He sent me the photos last July when I asked him about the figures status. Cool, ya?