Schleich 2015 list of releases with pictures!

NightLioness wrote:

I'm gonna trow a tantrum if they are NOT gonna include the Frisian in the 2015 collection....

Count me in!

Why, why, why so many new horses!? And with same models and same colours than some other horses... -.- I think i won't collect Schleich horses anymore because it's obvious that these horses also will be horribly painted... Maybe i will just get all the horses and specials that came out this year and then that's my collection... I'm angry and sad about this...

mohkis wrote:

Why, why, why so many new horses!? And with same models and same colours than some other horses... -.- I think i won't collect Schleich horses anymore because it's obvious that these horses also will be horribly painted... Maybe i will just get all the horses and specials that came out this year and then that's my collection... I'm angry and sad about this...

I'm not sure about the paintwork, since I believe the 2014 Müller editions were nicely painted. Also, the Tinkers (mare and foal 2015) are nicely painted.

Damon wrote:

mohkis wrote:

Why, why, why so many new horses!? And with same models and same colours than some other horses... -.- I think i won't collect Schleich horses anymore because it's obvious that these horses also will be horribly painted... Maybe i will just get all the horses and specials that came out this year and then that's my collection... I'm angry and sad about this...

I'm not sure about the paintwork, since I believe the 2014 Müller editions were nicely painted. Also, the Tinkers (mare and foal 2015) are nicely painted.

I agree with Damon, four out of five Müllers were very nicely painted and I think the Arab mare in the Advent Calendar has had a nice lick of paint as well.

Thereby, I think it is quite harsh to say [quote=]it's obvious that these horses also will be horribly painted.[/quote] Of course we are all endowed our own opinion, but ... Well.. Most people are positive.

For me the paintwork isn't the biggest problem - horrible sculpting bothers me more. That frisian for example.. I really don't know what to say about his head and neck.. The rest of his body is like a few  sizes too small. Such a poor thing.
This is a Friesian;

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

And this one. I guess the sculptor had used this as a reference photo. But..

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

Arabo friesian. To me at least.

There are several types within any breed. This always leads to many discussions between breeders and lovers of that breed, who try to force their own opinion of which is the preferred type onto the others. Schleich chooses one breed type to model, in horses, dogs, etc. As long as Schleich models that type anatomically correct, it should still be appreciated, apart from the breed type you personally prefer.

Valinor wrote:

There are several types within any breed. This always leads to many discussions between breeders and lovers of that breed, who try to force their own opinion of which is the preferred type onto the others. Schleich chooses one breed type to model, in horses, dogs, etc. As long as Schleich models that type anatomically correct, it should still be appreciated, apart from the breed type you personally prefer.

I salute thee, this is valid stuff right here.
Of course there are variating types and some appeal to greater audience and some don't. And of course there isn't too much variating with the friesian, but there certainly is.

I know - of course there is many types of horses in every breed. And everyone like what they like. And I really liked the older Schleich stallion. Very nice horse.
But is there a line where the breeder makes a horse look like a cross breed of shetlander and frisian?

The same breeds tend to look differently in Europe and in America. That is given nowadays. Take an American Shetland or a Shetland Pony from its homeland, you wouldn't say that it's the same breed. Or a Rough Collie from its homeland on the british isle, or the American Rough Collie. Just two examples.
And which type of, for instance, Arabian Horse would Schleich need to model, a sports horse that excels in endurance, or a top show horse? They just don't have the same look in most cases.
Wild animals the same. The look of the animal (not just its colour) depends even on the time of the year.

The problem for me isn't the type of Friesian they sculpted (I like them all: lighter or heavier, all are beautiful). The problem is the size of head (HUGE!!!) and the miniature hindquarters, what create really a disproportionate animal. The front looks like from completely different specimen than a back part. That's why I think we cannot say it is anatomically correct sculpture. But the face and mane and pose are certainly very nice, there are elements we can love in this model, it has a lot of charm.
But, for the more possible and natural proportions (much more acceptable and harmonious) the older figure of Schleich was much better. The new sculpture is really an impossible horse

Ana wrote:

The problem for me isn't the type of Friesian they sculpted (I like them all: lighter or heavier, all are beautiful). The problem is the size of head (HUGE!!!) and the miniature hindquarters, what create really a disproportionate animal. The front looks like from completely different specimen than a back part. That's why I think we cannot say it is anatomically correct sculpture. But the face and mane and pose are certainly very nice, there are elements we can love in this model, it has a lot of charm.
But, for the more possible and natural proportions (much more acceptable and harmonious) the older figure of Schleich was much better. The new sculpture is really an impossible horse

I think it's just «an effect of photography». When I do some photos of my animals with rotated head, they look like they have very big heads very often indeed.
So I think we haven't worry about it. I like his proportions, it's really high quality for Schleich.

Let's all just wait until we see them life before we make too harsh a judgement.

I didn't want to be too harsh for that figure, even with flaws I'm still quite liking it, it has a lot of charm: very nice pose, cute face, lovely long mane, I like how the forelock is put on the side -> cute!!      

But I'm talking about the realism only because I saw some of you are not sure about the type of Friesian it represents. So I think the problem is not the type but the proportions between body parts. I don't know if it's just an effect of photography.  So far the comparison with real horses seems to confirm my opinion. But I agree we have to see the real thing to be sure  
(note: short back, small hindquarters, huge neck and very big head and absurdly big ears of the figure. The blue silhouette is based directly on the schleich catalog photo, I changed nothing)

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

source of the photo: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Wow, this comparison is cool!

Can I also get a round of appalause for only one pony with braids!

Gwaine wrote:

Wow, this comparison is cool!

Can I also get a round of appalause for only one pony with braids!

I'm glad you like this comparison

I'm not sure what would you like me to do? Comparison of the pony with braids to the real mini shetland? Did I understand it right?

No, I am just very glad that Schleich seems to have dropped their braid fetish.

Agree with Annas first post And I'm not a dump even though I might sound like that. ; >
I do know those things, the prolem is that particular model horse for me.

Gwaine wrote:

No, I am just very glad that Schleich seems to have dropped their braid fetish.

Oh, OK, now I understand

Personally I don't mind the braids. I would prefer good proportioned horses with braids than wrong proportioned with the "normal" mane. But I understand that for many collectors the braids are disturbing. Totally understand that.

Ana wrote:

Gwaine wrote:

No, I am just very glad that Schleich seems to have dropped their braid fetish.

Oh, OK, now I understand

Personally I don't mind the braids. I would prefer good proportioned horses with braids than wrong proportioned with the "normal" mane. But I understand that for many collectors the braids are disturbing. Totally understand that.  

The past few years Schleich has been too 'childish' and I think they are now taking steps back in the right direction.

Ana wrote:

I didn't want to be too harsh for that figure, even with flaws I'm still quite liking it, it has a lot of charm: very nice pose, cute face, lovely long mane, I like how the forelock is put on the side -> cute!!      

But I'm talking about the realism only because I saw some of you are not sure about the type of Friesian it represents. So I think the problem is not the type but the proportions between body parts. I don't know if it's just an effect of photography.  So far the comparison with real horses seems to confirm my opinion. But I agree we have to see the real thing to be sure  
(note: short back, small hindquarters, huge neck and very big head and absurdly big ears of the figure. The blue silhouette is based directly on the schleich catalog photo, I changed nothing)

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

source of the photo: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

You did very demonstrative comparation! Yeah, it looks like his head is too big indeed.
Well, we have to wait. Once I read an interesting fact: if you do photo with long distance to your object (about 2m or more), you'll get right proportions. If you do photos with a distance less than 2m, you'll get an effect «fish's eye», often it appears like a big head or short legs.

JonasV wrote:

Agree with Annas first post And I'm not a dump even though I might sound like that. ; >
I do know those things, the prolem is that particular model horse for me.

Oh, Jonas, I just noticed you actually said the same thing about proportions few post earlier. Sorry that I just wrote the very same thing. So we agree entirely. But it seems the comparison I made explain it also on picture
About the type it represents I can't really say. The back may be from the modern type and head with neck from the old heavy type

And, Jonas, I would NEVER say you're dumb, I hope I didn't write anything what could made you think that I would say anything like this

Gwaine wrote:

The past few years Schleich has been too 'childish' and I think they are now taking steps back in the right direction.

Yes, they are more serious again, I think that's a good sign!!! Hope they will become even more serious and realistic in future.

Anasta SchwarzeWölfin wrote:

You did very demonstrative comparation! Yeah, it looks like his head is too big indeed.
Well, we have to wait. Once I read an interesting fact: if you do photo with long distance to your object (about 2m or more), you'll get right proportions. If you do photos with a distance less than 2m, you'll get an effect «fish's eye», often it appears like a big head or short legs.

Yes, that's why we will have to see in real.
About the photography - exactly, when you take photos from short distance you may except some distortions. I would say the professional photographers from Schleich should have know it but maybe they didn't? At least we can hope

Anasta SchwarzeWölfin wrote:

You did very demonstrative comparation! Yeah, it looks like his head is too big indeed.
Well, we have to wait. Once I read an interesting fact: if you do photo with long distance to your object (about 2m or more), you'll get right proportions. If you do photos with a distance less than 2m, you'll get an effect «fish's eye», often it appears like a big head or short legs.

Yes, that's why we will have to see in real.
About the photography - exactly, when you take photos from short distance you may except some distortions. I would say the professional photographers from Schleich should have know it but maybe they didn't? At least we can hope [/quote]

I hope they know, but some photos are terrible XD Unfortunately, no one lens can eliminate completely the distortion. It can be imperceptible, but in such situation photograph needs background.

From a look at the wildlife:

I think they generally did quite a good job this year, minus a few small concerns.

Arctic wolf: Absolutely beautiful! I will definitely be getting this one early.

Alligators and Crocodile: I like them. They are much nicer than the previous crocodile and match the young crocodile from last year. I think the movable jaws are a nice touch too.

Snakes: The boa constrictor looks a little too uniform in colour and I think its spots look indented in the model? Hopefully I'm wrong but it does look a little off. The other snakes are quite nice in my opinion.

Scarlet macaw: It's okay, but probably not as nice as the other macaws as the bright feathers underneath the wings make it a little cartoony.

Ostrich - Very similar to the current male ostrich... Somebody get the chicks a mother. ): Otherwise, a good model. It's just a shame that it wasn't female.

Eagle Owl - It's okay I suppose, but it doesn't appeal to me. I think it would be nicer with closed wings. Schleich's made too many birds with open wings recently.

Rhinoceros - I don't get it. It's exactly the same as the previous one, isn't it? Are they just returning the model that was retired last year or is there something new about it that I'm missing?

Lion - The pose is a little awkward in my opinion. It looks terribly unbalanced, but I suppose it would look okay in a fighting scene of some sort?

Gray Wolf - It looks like it's having a bath, covered in soap. I like the creativity in having its fur sticking out as though it's growling, but I am not convinced that it works. I'll have to see it once it's available.

Tigers - I absolutely love the tigers, except for two minor concerns. I don't like the eyes of the orange cub. I think they should have gone with dark brown or dull green. I know it's meant to make it cute, but I think it just makes it look off. The white tigers look good, but I'd prefer to see Schleich make a new subspecies of tiger or a full family with different poses than have white tigers. Besides, in reality, white tigers are a mutation that should not be bred so Schleich can only be selling them to appeal to younger audiences, not to be educational. Other than that, I think the tigers look splendid and are much better than the previous versions.

Panda Cub - It looks adorable, but we've seen pandas plenty of times. At least Schleich is doing their part in saving the species...

Hyena - It looks really good I think. I have no criticism - a needed species that was well made.

Nests - I like the creativity with the nests - as well as having the egg that is open-able for the ostrich. I would have preferred the egg to look more natural, but it's okay I suppose. The plants attached to the nests aren't too appealing imo. They all look quite bland.

Chameleon - I like the idea, but I don't think it looks too good. The paint does not match the model.



I would have loved to see an Australian species or two and I think they could sell quite well, but I guess I'll just have to wait another year in hope.

Sorry if I seem too negative. I just think that 5 years ago horses were much prettier with painting and everything. Like the last arab mare has too much toy look like head, they all have some pink accessories or something... And also that they make 19 new horses in January, it's too much, and some of them are not even new models.... I would like to have all Schleich horses, but it's stupid to pay 150 euros for 19 horses, and if you don't even like 10 of them....