Blaine's Synoptic Animal Collection

Very very interesting

I love your nudibranch display.

pipsxlch wrote:

I love your nudibranch display.

I agree, espectacular photo.

Wow The two Agatsuma Entertainment are missing on mys shelves

Your collection becomes more and more a comparison method for me, to see which animal species I´ve to replace in future to gain a more "realistic" collection in terms of size. For now and as a species collector, I´ve different species, but when I present them together, they aren´t very realistic, especially comparing older models with the newer ones.

I already knew your wonderful collections of invertebras cause I always observe your "bug of the day" thread, but seeing microorganismes and nudibranches, something I don´t really collect, I must agree: it´s nearly your own natural museum!

Thanks Duck-Anch-Amun (and others)

Taking a break from the mollusks (will do the cephalopods this weekend) to showcase the 2019 Science and Nature figures that arrived in the mail today:

1. wedge-tailed eagle, Aquila audax
2. Australian magpie, Gymnorhina tibicen
3. yellow-footed rock wallaby, Petrogale xanthopus

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

It seems there is a real improvement in this series, is it only me ?

Yeah, I love the australian magpie and it´s on my whishlist.
The wedge-tailed eagle is nice even that I already have the Southland Replicas one. However it was for sure expensiver than the S&N one and mine have a problem with the balance -.-

Can not await mine :)

yes, I am happy I held-out for this wedge-tailed eagle. The SR one is very nice but this one is nice too, takes up less space, and, as mentioned, much cheaper. There probably could have been more white on the neck of the magpie but it's fine. I am going to walkaround the wallaby for my next blog post :)

They are wonderful. Very well made models from Science and Nature.

Congratulations for these last three S&N figures. I am somewhat distracted regarding these. I think I like all of them and may get them eventually.

OK, the last of the mollusks, for now :). Today we visit the cephalopods.

First up, prehistoric cephalopods. All of these are from various Kaiyodo Dinotales sets. I will eventually get the CollectA tube set as well:
1. Douvilleiceras sp.
2. Pachydiscus sp.
3. Polyptychoceras sp.
4. Rayonneceras sp.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Next squid and cuttlefish.
1. spear squid, Heterololigo bleekeri (adult and paralarva, both by Kaiyodo)
2. giant Australian cuttlefish, Sepia apama (Yowie Group)
3. butterfly bobtail squid, Sepiola birostrata (Kaiyodo)
4. Japanese flying squid, Todarodes pacificus (Kaiyodo)
5. swordtip squid, Uroteithis edulis (Kaiyodo)
6. vampire squid, Vampyroteuthus infernalis (Agatsuma Entertainment)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Octopi, nautaloids, and the giant squid.
1. common octopus, Octupus vulgaris (CollectA)
2. flapjack octopus, Opisthoteuthis albatrossi (Takara Tomy A.R.T.S.)
3. Japanese pancake devilfish, Opisthoteuthis depressa (Ikimon - Nature Techni Colour)
4. ocellated octopus, Ampioctopus fangsiao (Kaiyodo)
5. winged argonaut, Argonauta hians (Agatsuma Entertainment)
6. giant squid, Architeuthis dux (Safari Ltd.)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Here is the Safari giant squid with the 2018 CollectA sperm whale!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Of all these, only the Safari giant squid and the Yowies giant cuttlefish are on my wishlist - the others are wonderful, but too big for me. The same scene with the sperm whale (the same model that I have too) is one that I planned to photograph too, once I have the squid in a future.
All these models are superb and very realistic!

very beautiful collection of cephalpods!

Wonderful Architeuthis

Pardofelis wrote:

Of all these, only the Safari giant squid and the Yowies giant cuttlefish are on my wishlist - the others are wonderful, but too big for me. The same scene with the sperm whale (the same model that I have too) is one that I planned to photograph too, once I have the squid in a future.
All these models are superb and very realistic!

You like 1:32, right? The Kaiyodo Pachydiscus is plausibly 1:32 for a smaller specimen (it's about 1:55 or 1:60 for exceptionally large individuals).

Beautiful figures again. Nothing better to me than some awesome cephalopods!

halichoeres wrote:

You like 1:32, right? The Kaiyodo Pachydiscus is plausibly 1:32 for a smaller specimen (it's about 1:55 or 1:60 for exceptionally large individuals).

I like 1:20, but I have a wide variation acceptance for terrestrial animals and a much wider one for marine animals. For larger cetaceans I tend to have more or less about 1:60 to 1:100

Thanks for the Pachydiscus suggestion, but I only collect extant species or recently extinct (last 5 centuries more or less). One of the reasons is that we don't know the exact appareance of prehistoric species with very few exceptions, especially colours.

Great batch again, I'm pleased we chose the same common octopus.

Kikimalou wrote:

Great batch again, I'm pleased we chose the same common octopus.

Kikimalou wrote:

Great batch again, I'm pleased we chose the same common octopus.

Yes, the Papo one is probably better in general form, but it has an obvious anatomical error (2 siphons)

bmathison1972 wrote:

Kikimalou wrote:

Great batch again, I'm pleased we chose the same common octopus.

Yes, the Papo one is probably better in general form, but it has an obvious anatomical error (2 siphons)

The same for me

Pardofelis wrote:

halichoeres wrote:

You like 1:32, right? The Kaiyodo Pachydiscus is plausibly 1:32 for a smaller specimen (it's about 1:55 or 1:60 for exceptionally large individuals).

I like 1:20, but I have a wide variation acceptance for terrestrial animals and a much wider one for marine animals. For larger cetaceans I tend to have more or less about 1:60 to 1:100

Thanks for the Pachydiscus suggestion, but I only collect extant species or recently extinct (last 5 centuries more or less). One of the reasons is that we don't know the exact appareance of prehistoric species with very few exceptions, especially colours.

Ah, nearly the opposite of me! I only collect things from 541-66 million years ago :)