That's a nice way of saying don't get personal about things, and I'll play fair. I don't mind discussing details, or hearing counter arguments with something to back it up apart from the usual blather, but if people get unnecessarily personal then that accomplishes nothing.
So listen to yourself first and then tell me who is the arrogant one.
Yawn! Another set of grainy pictures.
Yes, clearly the TM doesn't have the "bunny ears". These features depend heavily on how you light them and photograph them. It's very easy to get them to not show up in photographs.
Compare with Tantive:
Let's see the comparison again. Oh wait... it's there as well... and exactly like it is seen on the Tantive.
Jet Beetle posted this in the M.A.S.H thread. Hope he doesn't mind me quoting it here.
With all these flaws you present on your TM copy... I'm wondering why you bother when you've been told time and time again that it was a faulty cast. I'm beginning to see just how faulty.Jet Beetle said:
Back and to the left..
Back and to the left..
Back and to the left..
Go ahead, prove your point with more grainy pictures. I don't waste time posting grainy pictures. I post things pretty clear for everyone to see - no need to strain the eyes to see the details.
You keep indicating that the neck extension should have existed prior to the molding. Or even after. It was a temporary addition added to the helmet when it was molded, just like the filler in the chin vent and filler behind the teeth grill. It just baffles me how you argument that it isn't a UK mold feature because you didn't see it in ANH. It was a feature added for molding that was REMOVABLE. So why the hell would you see it on the helmet in ANH?SithLord said:
Funny, you used to say that the grills had been removed from the helmet prior to molding it for the SL mold. Or are you now saying that that feature was removed from the SL copies? So, which is it? If it is a feature that was removed from the copies, then I hope the buyers are aware of it, as most I've talked to expected a perfect copy and you've confirmed to me before that they were untampered with copies of the original.SithLord said:
Just found where you stated that:
In this thread: http://thepropden.aokforums.com/3-vt1676.html?start=30SithLord said:
So which is it?
Just saw the rear neck pictures of the SL and TD. Just looks like the TD was cut round at the bottom tip, where the SL goes further down to a point, with otherwise the bottom and back lining up.
Even have one that lines up even better with more details on both pieces lining up fairly nice:
Last edited by Too Much Garlic; May 9, 2010 at 9:16 AM.
The GB is a fan sculpt. At least his latest. While on holiday last time stateside, (and when I picked up my TD and SPFX) I got a chance to hold one. Really, the GB is a totaly diffrent helmet... I dont see a base at all. i could be wrong however. GB is a stand up guy, I am sure he would sort it out.SithLord said:
Here is a comp shot from that trip.
GB, DPDLX, TD, SPFX.
GB confirmed on SithTrainingTemple that his source was the hollywoodprops helmet.
http://hollywoodprop.com/vaderhelmets.htm
Their helmet just looks like someone vac-formed a Don Post and then created their helmet from that vac-formed shell.
Not sure of his latest versions.
Oh... you should make the chin vent larger and straighten the upper edge on that SPFX... the guy who did that work must have done it while being drunk.
Last edited by Too Much Garlic; May 9, 2010 at 8:00 AM.
VS.SithLord said:
For those that do not follow Carsten link:
The Prop Den Mar 9, 2008 in the thread SL ANH Darth Vader Helmet
SithLord said:
SL, I see you posted TM pictures - though removed them. Hope you cleared those with TM or the TM group like I did with the ones I've posted. If not, can we expect to see SL and TD owners to post pictures of their helmets without having to clear it with you first? Is that how we are doing things now? If that's the case: TD and SL owners - post away.
But I understand completely why they don't get involved. They don't need this ****. In fact, neither do I. So far I have not seen anything close to that level of accuracy from the TD or the SL. I only have SL's word... there's no one else to corroborate the story... and that... in all good detective work means insufficient confirmation. You need at least 2 or 3 sources individually corroborating a story - with the TM... we have that confirmation. But absolutely nothing from the TD or SL. Personally, this is a waste of my time. Have fun.
Last edited by Too Much Garlic; May 9, 2010 at 12:05 PM.
The C-scar and all the other details of the "TM" Darth Vader facemask are 100% correct.SithLord said:
The SL and TM compared to the Tantive IV...
RAW images above of the masks, below the closeup of the scar area. NO alteration to the images.
[IMG][/IMG]
And here with just an increase in the unsharp mask to the bottom three images equally...that's it...the lower part of the C-scar on the TM is higher up than on the original ANH, which means there was some kind of change to the front cheek face...
[IMG][/IMG]
And for those bright-eyed ones who would say oh look at all that detail on the TM, well you might then realize that all that stuff isn't all supposed to be there, otherwise you would have the kind of detail that you see on the SL below which confirms that this is the way the C-scar was during the Tantive IV scenes...the TM just doesn't have the quality of these details, which means a lot of that schmutz on that front cheek face came later...or there was some kind of wear on that area and that's why you don't see details like these below...
Nothing out there has this kind of ANH detail....
Now that being said, the TM still does have a lot of good detail but then to say oh it is identical, oh the C-scar is identical, oh this is the closest thing to the original ANH....well sorry that's not the case. And I'm not doing this to tear down the TM I'm just saying that you have to put the details in context.
Edited to play nice and because I'm assuming from the response that Carsten got the point...
(And they are not a little bit smaller than the original as well)
.
Last edited by Trap Joe; May 9, 2010 at 2:11 PM.
Too Much Garlic said:
The Hollywood Props mask is too symmetrical for it to really be a Don Post Deluxe, even modified. The cheek lines are too straight, and the eyes are too symmetrical. The mouth walls are too thick. It looks more like someone tried to modify a Don Post Standard. If the "tell" that it might be a DP DLX is the mounting system then even the mounting system looks sloppy.
If it ever were a DP DLX, the modifications are hardly improvements.
As Vader 71 and Carsten pointed out:
So does the SL have grill marks or does it not?
Personally, I'm done. I have no further desire to drag these helmets through the mud anymore just because I disagree with what SL is claiming. I have no desire to continue this debacle and I apologize to all for being responsible for dragging the thread in this direction.
The helmets don't deserve this ****. We don't deserve this ****. And personally, I've got better things to do. And this... is a waste of my time.
Carsten, don't apologize for bringing the things to light that you have, especially about the TM. It does give some credence that all of the OT helmets could have POSSIBLY come from the same mold. I am always thankful for new knowledge, and this thread brought it in spades. Not just to me, but every Vader fan who will read it.
Vader will always have the "Bigger shlong policy" surrounding it. Sad. Such a good thread that as usual headed south over a stupid point.
The SL and the TD is a kick ass helmets for those that have em. Not many exist. Same is said with the TM. As are Ginos, as are Stones. As are... you get the point.
Yeesh.
I have this one which is made by Hasbro.
I also have this one made by wilton, I believe.
Even the Hasbro Voice Changer has a lineage.
Too Much Garlic said:
Actually, the dome was a PITA. To be honest, the helmet is on its second paint job and shelf duty. Worn once... Just too heavy. That was a pic from the first Day I had it. The mask was not all that hard, but the dome.. Man.. That guy must have tossed it off a bridge and down a dirt road to sand it!
This was paint up #1... Its only time in action. Damn near broke my neck.
Oh... the sanding on the dome was also done by the same drunk... sorry about that... never got around to finish things up. Unless you stripped the primer and paint... and found something more... then... well... it wasn't this sorry drunkards work. And yes, it was heavy as ****.
Man, you should post pictures of it painted. Would love to see how it looks now. Also, if you wanna exchange the dome, try find a good DP DLX dome and rework that.
Last edited by Too Much Garlic; May 10, 2010 at 1:57 AM.
This thread has gone all quiet, why?
I was wondering that myself.
I am enjoying the education.
I would really like to know some more infos about the grill impressions.
I showed one of them from the TM and it looked nowhere near as clean as the one on the SL. I could show it again if you want. There is no comparison and how can you honestly boast about the TM with images like the ones below in which you cut out almost all the resolution? I showed high magnification high resolution of the "ear" closest to the L-scar compared to that on the TM. Compare yours to the SL....and you know perfectly well it doesn't come close.Too Much Garlic said:
Again, you are not showing the resolution I showed before Carsten.Let's see the comparison again. Oh wait... it's there as well... and exactly like it is seen on the Tantive.
I know exactly what my TM casting is. I know exactly where the flaws are and it has nothing to do with what I've shown here Carsten. I've already shown a front view on TPD of my copy at the same angle/view as a photo of the TM original and there's no difference. I could show that here again if you want. But if you want to see those things then I don't want TM owners crying to me about showing it.With all these flaws you present on your TM copy... I'm wondering why you bother when you've been told time and time again that it was a faulty cast. I'm beginning to see just how faulty.
Give me a break....you show no resolution in those images to be able to tell details on that scale.Go ahead, prove your point with more grainy pictures. I don't waste time posting grainy pictures. I post things pretty clear for everyone to see - no need to strain the eyes to see the details.
Show me this detail at this resolution Carsten on the TM...I showed it from my own casting and there's no comparison.
I never said it was a permanent addition Carsten. I said it wasn't ANH.You keep indicating that the neck extension should have existed prior to the molding. Or even after. It was a temporary addition added to the helmet when it was molded, just like the filler in the chin vent and filler behind the teeth grill. It just baffles me how you argument that it isn't a UK mold feature because you didn't see it in ANH. It was a feature added for molding that was REMOVABLE. So why the hell would you see it on the helmet in ANH?
We see that exact same neck extension on a hero ESB mask. It never was on the original ANH at the time of ANH, nor do we see it anytime between ANH and ESB (ie: the tour). So? It was likely added at the time of the ESB production. For you to argue that it was added at the same time as the filler material is simply without basis. The TM neck in the rear itself is modified along with the neck extension...it isn't like the SL or TD back there and the SL and TD come from two different lines. So the neck extension has to be later. Furthermore, even though the TD and TM neck edges are very similar, they are not identical all the way around. The TD has actually a bit longer neck edge in the front middle part...there's more of a taper to it than on the TM.
Did it ever occur to you that the neck extension was added to a copy of the original ANH and not to the original ANH itself? The TM mask itself is a copy of something, probably an original ESB template that itself was still ANH, so that is a possibility. They could have just taken a casting from a mold taken from the original mask, then added a neck extension to it and sharpened the eyebrows slightly.
Please tell me when did I say that? I never said that Carsten.Funny, you used to say that the grills had been removed from the helmet prior to molding it for the SL mold.
Maybe we should talk then whether the TM copies are tampered with?Or are you now saying that that feature was removed from the SL copies? So, which is it? If it is a feature that was removed from the copies, then I hope the buyers are aware of it, as most I've talked to expected a perfect copy and you've confirmed to me before that they were untampered with copies of the original.
If you want to play dirty then I am all game, Carsten. Bringing up SL owners in that light is completely underhanded. But if you want to do it that way it works both ways.
I thought originally it wasn't there, but some time after that I found evidence that it was....but it took some comparing the alignment of certain details.Just found where you stated that:
In this thread: http://thepropden.aokforums.com/3-vt1676.html?start=30
So which is it?
The TM group has no authority, only TM.Too Much Garlic said:
I posted them for your benefit Carsten, but then removed them because a TM COPY owner complained. So I did the gentlemanly thing. If you want, I'll put them back. If you continue to make a case of details you show fuzzy images of, I'll put them back so that you learn what resolution really means. But now I ask you to show the details I show at the resolution I show to make your case. I don't need to show them. You have a TM casting.
And I've posted much more than that on TPD, Carsten and you know it.
Carsten, I showed the details and took them down again. You should have them if you followed the thread. I know you've seen the original comparisons so what are you going on about?But I understand completely why they don't get involved. They don't need this ****. In fact, neither do I. So far I have not seen anything close to that level of accuracy from the TD or the SL. I only have SL's word... there's no one else to corroborate the story... and that... in all good detective work means insufficient confirmation. You need at least 2 or 3 sources individually corroborating a story - with the TM... we have that confirmation. But absolutely nothing from the TD or SL. Personally, this is a waste of my time. Have fun.
Show me this:
And tell me that the TM has superior detail than the SL. I don't need to show it myself because I know already.
Trap Joe said:
No, the C-scar bottom edge turns toward the nose higher and more curved than on the original ANH. I showed that here in my original comparisons.
Show me this detail then on the TM....it is a complete mess in that area...that is not original ANH detail guys. But go ahead, just show me this part of the cheek area on the TM...I can show it for you if you want...
CSMacLaren said:
Well the question would be, did the original ANH mask have the grills in it when the ILM mold was taken and the answer is yes. But on the SL it is extremely difficult to make them out because of the amount of material covering them. So anyone looking at them wouldn't be able to tell there were grills, but the original did have them. The grills would look nothing like what you see on the UK side of the lineage as they were almost completely covered up as opposed to material just oozing through the grill to fill it.
Ok updated the lineage...after all that's what this thread is mainly about
Added the MGM ANH helmet, added the Rubies Statue helmet, corrected the VaderMonkey V1 ESB stunt placement, corrected the Gypsyboy and put it after the Hollywood Props helmet which I also included. Also, things were getting crowded in a big way on the left side so I completely reworked the left side to make things more symmetrical overall, just to balance out the tree a bit aesthetically. I also put the correct image for the TM ESB original. I know the VP ANH is a mask but it was associated with a ROTJ dome, at least that's how the owner got it.
Too Much Garlic said:
I'll echo what Qui said, no apology necessary Carsten.
Carsten, you know exactly the kind of respect I have for the TM ESB. There are certainly areas on it that are superior in detail than anything else, as each casting has its strengths. The TD has the paint going against it but in spite of that it still shows some surprisingly early detail here and there. The SL has some really fine detail that is associated with the original paint on the original ANH, as I've shown....you can see the little bump patterns on the SL corresponding to the paint on the original. The TM has terrific sharpness, and yes it does have some detail better resolved in certain areas, for whatever reason. I'll point out for example on the right side of the mouth triangle of the TM that horizontal line that you guys pointed out before...a perfectly horizontal scar. It's there on the SL but messed up a bit. The TD in that area is smooth with the paint or it just isn't there. I take all the details into account and look at what they reveal in terms of an overall trend, in addition to the more obvious things.
And I respect at least you trying to argue specific points about why I put things a certain way on the lineage...
Reply with Quote
