PNSO African animals! And Australian animals too

New African animals from PNSO, small scale (OK!), slightly unnatural poses (rhino, giraffe) but absolutely gorgeous gazelle!

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

Yes, very very beautieful. But the species could be known as figure, on the first view.

Most are a little small for me but the warthog, gazelle, and chameleon could work

does anyone the sizes of the animals, esp. the warthog and Tommy Gazelle?

Very rare to me, interesting set.

SeanieP wrote:

does anyone the sizes of the animals, esp. the warthog and Tommy Gazelle?

In the link provided in the first post you can see the measurements of each piece. For my collection all are too small (even the warthog, that is 7,5 cm long x 4,5 height (for me, it would be good with 8 to 8,5 cm lenght)), also the gazelle is too small with 6,5 cm lenght and 6,6 cm height (for me it would be good with 8 cm lenght, roughly the same than CollectA springbok). The only animal that is not too small for me, is the chameleon -that of course is oversized

I like those sizes but do not want to buy the whole thing for just two animals

THOSE ONES are interresting too

Kikimalou wrote:

THOSE ONES are interresting too

What animal is this:

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

is it a wombat? Not too familiar with Australia animals

That's a tree kangaroo I think. Not sure of the species though.

These are great looking animals!

So I absolutely love them and I find their designs refreshing. Most of the poses are not so unnatural as they seem and a few are even spectacular in my opinion. I also love the proportions of some sculpts and I find incredible that they can put so delicate legs in such small figures.
The lion and platypus are defintely not good figures but some are really great, namely the cheetah, rhino, gazelle, warthog, etc.
About the Oceanian animal, I think Paige is completely right and it is a tree-kangaroo. Curious that it seems to be larger than the red kangaroo.

Saarlooswolfhound wrote:

That's a tree kangaroo I think. Not sure of the species though.

These are great looking animals!

I think it is a Goodfellow's Tree Kangaroo

A Goodfellow's? But where are the two clear stripes that should run along its back?

landrover wrote:

Kikimalou wrote:

THOSE ONES are interresting too

What animal is this:

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

This tree kangaroo is a must have

Do you think the gazelle is a thomson gazelle? The crocodile a nile crocodile and the chameleon a jackson chameleon and the ostrich a somali ostrich and a blue wildbeest?

Difficult to think in an exact match but I think that it fit's better with a mountain gazelle, Gazella gazella.

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

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

Gazella thomsonii: note straighter horns, paler face, wider side stripe, etc. Also, the ringhs of the horns are oblique in mountain gazelle and PNSO figure, but perpendicular to the horn axis in the Thomson's. And the shape of the head is shorter in Thomson's and longer in the mountain gazelle and in the figure.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Crocodile is obviously Nile (since it's an african species and is not slender-snouted nor dwarf), the chameleon is correct (the only species with three long forward-oriented horns), the wildebeest is of course blue (the black wildebeest have a white tail and different shaped horns), and about the ostrich I don't pronounce as I don't care about subspecies, for me, it's just an Ostrich as I'm a species collector.

Pardofelis wrote:

Difficult to think in an exact match but I think that it fit's better with a mountain gazelle, Gazella gazella.

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

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

Gazella thomsonii: note straighter horns, paler face, wider side stripe, etc. Also, the ringhs of the horns are oblique in mountain gazelle and PNSO figure, but perpendicular to the horn axis in the Thomson's. And the shape of the head is shorter in Thomson's and longer in the mountain gazelle and in the figure.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Crocodile is obviously Nile (since it's an african species and is not slender-snouted nor dwarf), the chameleon is correct (the only species with three long forward-oriented horns), the wildebeest is of course blue (the black wildebeest have a white tail and different shaped horns), and about the ostrich I don't pronounce as I don't care about subspecies, for me, it's just an Ostrich as I'm a species collector.

With the gazelle is really difficult. I think that figure is not exactly. I also can find more in the book "Bovids of the world". The brown is to dark for a Thompson gazelle but the black stripe (especially by the eyes) is more a Thompson gazelle.

I am sorry again for disapointing your optimistic identification and I really find the Mountain gazelle a very good approach. However, if geographic criterion is valide for crocodiles, it should also be considered for gazelles. Yes, mountain gazelles are not good choices for an African set like this one.
In my opinion, they just want to represent a Thomson's gazelle, it is the most popular gazelle species and I think the horns pointed forward are a feature of this species. The thickness of the horns is a consequence of the way they must be manufactured. Much probably the painting is not exactly based in a Thomson's species but it is often common that some designers mix several species when using online pictures for reference.

Yes, that's why I said that is difficult to find an exact match. And yes, I forgot that mountain gazelles are Arabian and while very close to Africa, Arabia is still Asia... However, by morphology only, the species that match best is the mountain gazelle despite having being made without thinking in it.

I really appreciate all your effort to identify species and you're doing a great and useful work.
Actually, the figure works better as a mountain gazelle but certainly PNSO mean a Thomson's gazelle. These things happen often as we observed before with the Schleich gazelle, Mojo oryx, etc.

Pardofelis wrote:

A Goodfellow's? But where are the two clear stripes that should run along its back?

You are right, a Matschie's tree-kangaroo would match better

But a Matschie don't have dark rings in the tail, and the contrast between white and rufous parts in limbs, belly and overall, head, is much stronger...

In my opinion is just a "generic" tree kangaroo with no species match

Pardofelis wrote:

But a Matschie don't have dark rings in the tail, and the contrast between white and rufous parts in limbs, belly and overall, head, is much stronger...

In my opinion is just a "generic" tree kangaroo with no species match

A generic tree kangaroo isn't a species and the other tree kangaroos are really different from this one. I can't say it is a perfect Matschie' or Goodfellow but it is closer to those ones than to any other.

It is the same for the gazelle but it is always interresting to play the game

We could also say that the other kangaroo, the one with a baby is a generic kangaroo

I also think it is more a Goodfellow's Tree Kangaroo:

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