Ordered this guy last week. I got worried when I saw that nobody has done a review on it yet 😅. This model looks even better than what I thought. Can’t wait for my first batch of haolongood figures to arrive. It has quickly become my favourite company for dinosaur figures.
I can’t watch right now but I’m going to edit my comment with my thoughts. I’m sure this’ll be another amazing review Andy. Edit: I think these are better than the pnso, that one had a weird pose and a derpy look plus the brown+stripes. Amazing review Andy, I think the green looks better than the yellow but I’ve always loved green on hadrosaurs. The images seen in the news and stuff online look nothing like the ones you’ve got there. I’d previously eh, they’re ok. Now they’re fantastic I think that they look better than the prototypes or early images or whatever. Also as I’m currently sculpting a hadrosaur seeing this video, it provides me with wonderful references thank you Andy.
Agree - I can't stand how the PNSO one looks. Specifically, they do a great job with PNSO on the scaling but they really drop the ball on the head - something about the eyes (and I'm not a fan of the piercing blue eyes on so many figures, this one included, but it's even more unnatural on the PNSO one - most living archosaurs do not have bright blue eyes, including the vast majority of birds - so I find it exceptionally unlikely it'd be so common with non-avian dinosaurs either, yet PNSO seems obsessed with it and did the same thing on their Allosaurus, which I do have). The other part is the fleshy area of the head - it's unlikely, given they had quite scaly skin, to have resembled a chicken's comb or anything like it and I get so tired - even as a paleontologist who is generally fine with some creative license here and there) - of seeing such an obsession in recent reconstructions with chicken or turkey-like neck and face skin. That's improbable - dinosaurs, even when integument is present in the fossil record - appear to not have had the scaleless, naked, thin skin of those birds (that being yet another avian specialization for weight reduction, since most birds are volant - they fly - so thick, scaly skin adds up in the weight department where every gram counts in flight - and non-flying dinosaurs did not need to do that). My intuition is that it'd be, in life, quite different in appearance than structures seen on what is actually an extreme minority even among modern birds (nearly 11,000 species of living birds - the vast majority lack those flappy skin bits). The PNSO one looks a bit chicken-ish. The actual fossil, however, does at least suggest fine scaling (relative to the very broad scales on the neck) on the 'crest'. The PNSO also takes greater liberties with the height and shape of the structure, but the actual placement - very posterior in the PNSO and a bit more anterior here - is more accurate in the PNSO, while simultaneously they seem to fail to account for post-mortem bloat and deformation, as well as the flesh anterior and posterior to the structure, which in life would have made the structure, particularly if it was expandable, protrude less from the profile of the animal when 'at rest" than their model suggests. They also missed the fact that broad scaling is seen right up to the very base of the structure in the fossil - and importantly they place it a bit too far back, making the Haolonggood model in that area more accurate because in the fossil, the prominence of the structure - the highest point - is roughly above the ORBIT - the eye - and not behind it, as seen on the PNSO. PNSO has it abruptly terminate anteriorly, while in the fossil there is a suggestion of skin and flesh forward of the stucture that would in life create less of a tomahawk shape and more of a gentle slope. It's subtle, but it's there. Then, of course, there is significant individual variation among dinosaurs even of the same species in terms of the skeleton - and it's likely there would be some variation in such head structures, too - particularly by age or gender. Either way, the PNSO sure does have derpy looking eyes, I agree ;)
@bataar_productions7741 the figure represents edmontosaurus regalis which was up to 42 ft at 1/35 makes it should be between 13 and 14 inches long like the pnso. Recent finds of e. Annectens have also shown it to above 40 ft at full grown. The smaller specimens are of sub adults. There is even fossils suggesting it was as much as 50ft. Which would make it rival shantungosaurus in size.
@@laurelsherman811exactly bro thank youuuuu, I’m so tired of telling people that, these figures are absolutely beautiful, but whatever stupid reason haolgood made them way to small
In real life, most animals in a population do not represent the largest size that species can attain. So I think it's fine. They don't have to all be giants.
It breaks my heart how small it is as I prefer this over the PNSO one in almost every way other than it's unfortunate size. I just can't bring myself to get it now I've seen how small it is it'd just look out of place alongside PNSO's Cameron and Doyle
PNSO edmontosaurus is far superior than HLG edmontosaurus. I like the pose of PNSO better, the color is more natural and much better applied. The skin texturing in the PNSO is more scientifically accurate and much more natural and detailed than the HLG. The crest design and the overall animal reconstruction is far superior in the PNSO, and the size is just a huge bonus as well.
Ordered this guy last week. I got worried when I saw that nobody has done a review on it yet 😅.
This model looks even better than what I thought. Can’t wait for my first batch of haolongood figures to arrive. It has quickly become my favourite company for dinosaur figures.
is this video of werewolf transformations #1 from this channel of werewolf tv coming in youtube?
Awesome review Andy!!
I like the pnso one better but haolonggood is getting better
Thanks for the video!! See you later!! Stay safe.😊
I can’t watch right now but I’m going to edit my comment with my thoughts. I’m sure this’ll be another amazing review Andy.
Edit: I think these are better than the pnso, that one had a weird pose and a derpy look plus the brown+stripes.
Amazing review Andy, I think the green looks better than the yellow but I’ve always loved green on hadrosaurs.
The images seen in the news and stuff online look nothing like the ones you’ve got there.
I’d previously eh, they’re ok.
Now they’re fantastic I think that they look better than the prototypes or early images or whatever.
Also as I’m currently sculpting a hadrosaur seeing this video, it provides me with wonderful references thank you Andy.
This video of werewolf transformations #1 from this channel of werewolf tv is coming on youtube?
@@MonsterXenomor I thoroughly have read your comment.
Is it supposed to not make any sense, like at all?
I’m very confused
@@MonsterXenomor uh wat
@@Shqiponjëland is this video of werewolf transformations #1 from this channel of werewolf tv is coming on youtube that is like the year 2015?
Agree - I can't stand how the PNSO one looks. Specifically, they do a great job with PNSO on the scaling but they really drop the ball on the head - something about the eyes (and I'm not a fan of the piercing blue eyes on so many figures, this one included, but it's even more unnatural on the PNSO one - most living archosaurs do not have bright blue eyes, including the vast majority of birds - so I find it exceptionally unlikely it'd be so common with non-avian dinosaurs either, yet PNSO seems obsessed with it and did the same thing on their Allosaurus, which I do have). The other part is the fleshy area of the head - it's unlikely, given they had quite scaly skin, to have resembled a chicken's comb or anything like it and I get so tired - even as a paleontologist who is generally fine with some creative license here and there) - of seeing such an obsession in recent reconstructions with chicken or turkey-like neck and face skin. That's improbable - dinosaurs, even when integument is present in the fossil record - appear to not have had the scaleless, naked, thin skin of those birds (that being yet another avian specialization for weight reduction, since most birds are volant - they fly - so thick, scaly skin adds up in the weight department where every gram counts in flight - and non-flying dinosaurs did not need to do that). My intuition is that it'd be, in life, quite different in appearance than structures seen on what is actually an extreme minority even among modern birds (nearly 11,000 species of living birds - the vast majority lack those flappy skin bits). The PNSO one looks a bit chicken-ish. The actual fossil, however, does at least suggest fine scaling (relative to the very broad scales on the neck) on the 'crest'.
The PNSO also takes greater liberties with the height and shape of the structure, but the actual placement - very posterior in the PNSO and a bit more anterior here - is more accurate in the PNSO, while simultaneously they seem to fail to account for post-mortem bloat and deformation, as well as the flesh anterior and posterior to the structure, which in life would have made the structure, particularly if it was expandable, protrude less from the profile of the animal when 'at rest" than their model suggests. They also missed the fact that broad scaling is seen right up to the very base of the structure in the fossil - and importantly they place it a bit too far back, making the Haolonggood model in that area more accurate because in the fossil, the prominence of the structure - the highest point - is roughly above the ORBIT - the eye - and not behind it, as seen on the PNSO. PNSO has it abruptly terminate anteriorly, while in the fossil there is a suggestion of skin and flesh forward of the stucture that would in life create less of a tomahawk shape and more of a gentle slope. It's subtle, but it's there.
Then, of course, there is significant individual variation among dinosaurs even of the same species in terms of the skeleton - and it's likely there would be some variation in such head structures, too - particularly by age or gender. Either way, the PNSO sure does have derpy looking eyes, I agree ;)
Awesome! So pretty 💅
can you please do a comparision with rebor's kiss tyrannosaurus?
Way too small for 1/35 scale. But still a beautiful figure
Not really, that's pretty much how big most individuals were. They rarely got to be super big.
@bataar_productions7741 the figure represents edmontosaurus regalis which was up to 42 ft at 1/35 makes it should be between 13 and 14 inches long like the pnso. Recent finds of e. Annectens have also shown it to above 40 ft at full grown. The smaller specimens are of sub adults. There is even fossils suggesting it was as much as 50ft. Which would make it rival shantungosaurus in size.
@@laurelsherman811exactly bro thank youuuuu, I’m so tired of telling people that, these figures are absolutely beautiful, but whatever stupid reason haolgood made them way to small
@@laurelsherman811 exactly IMO this one will need a re-release in the proper scale.
In real life, most animals in a population do not represent the largest size that species can attain. So I think it's fine. They don't have to all be giants.
these sino-saurs are competing with each other with details.
노란색이 좋네
Second
It breaks my heart how small it is as I prefer this over the PNSO one in almost every way other than it's unfortunate size. I just can't bring myself to get it now I've seen how small it is it'd just look out of place alongside PNSO's Cameron and Doyle
FIRST?
PNSO edmontosaurus is far superior than HLG edmontosaurus. I like the pose of PNSO better, the color is more natural and much better applied. The skin texturing in the PNSO is more scientifically accurate and much more natural and detailed than the HLG. The crest design and the overall animal reconstruction is far superior in the PNSO, and the size is just a huge bonus as well.