A Darth Vader Collection and Lineage Thread....

[runnriottt]

Actually... neither SL nor myself will be indicating which is recast or not. At least it didn't read like that from SL's posts.

A down drawn line will do just that.

Pretty basic and easy to follow. Its in the design of the chart. Its all ready there.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

Err... no, it isn't. Doesn't indicate whether it's a recast or a copy. One is done without permission - making it a recast - the other is done with permission - making it a copy and accepted within the community, so I repeat, I have nothing in my tree to indicate recast.

 

[Johnnyr2525]

Here is a picture of my Darth Vader display and a video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Hwivtu-eGY

and the Bust with Mask and Vaders Face.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YI0p4TZTLrs

 

[skynet]

Skynet... I'm a little confused at what the questions are in those points, so hope I'm giving answers to your questions?

With the first one... are you asking about the SPFX or the GH RotJ? The Rubies statue had a different helmet than their regular fiberglass helmet - much better. Those who've had access to one could possibly answer whether they are related or it came from something else.

For the second one - Cyberman was given a cast to clean up for someone else and didn't know the origin and that's the creation of the Elstree, afaik.

The third - depending on how close to the originals you get the straighter the sides of the cheeks and tusk tubes get. The farther away... the more inward bent and curved that are.

Hope that helps a little.

That's all what I wanted to know thank you :thumbsup

 

[SithLord]

I told myself that I did not want to fully engage in this discussion because I know that regardless of the 'debate' that would ensue, that there would be no resolution, and it would only degenerate into personal insults.
Better to just state my position, and move on.
However with the amount of attention this thread is getting, I do think it is important to refute these specific aspects.
Mind you, these are not the only things I disagree with about this tree, but they are what I find to be the most offensive.

Gino, the intent of this is not to offend anyone. You are the only one who seems to be offended.

This is simply not true. I have pointed this out to you many times on multiple forums.
The ROTJ helmets were repurposed ESB helmets. There were no ROTJ specific molds. In other words, no new vader helmet or armor molds were made specifically for the ROTJ production. The ESB molds did not become the ROTJ molds just because they were reused for the ROTJ production.

Gino, I provide proof in that comparison of the base of the nosebridge that the screen masks all came from one mold...

This is proof that the screen-used ROTJ stunt, hero and reveal all came from one source. That detail is not on any ESB casting, or ANH for that matter.

Show me a ROTJ mask or helmet that has clear signs of coming from a screen-used ESB. I am willing to consider whatever evidence you provide.

Originally Posted by SithLord
We know that the ESB came from ANH, and that the ROTJ came from ESB. We know that the ROTS came from ROTJ.

No, we don't know, so stop saying this like it is some established fact because it is not.
Like I said above, that is simply incorrect.

Gino, you yourself have said that the ROTJ helmets are reworked original ESBs. So what is it now?

Therefore everything falling underneath that point on the tree is incorrect as well. And since that is like the second item down from the top, that pretty much makes almost the entire thing incorrect.

You can do better than that line of reasoning, or rather perhaps you don't know how a tree like this is structured. Each branch of the lineage is an indepedent event. For the ESB to have come from ANH does not require ROTJ to then follow, it just does.

What you fail to realize is that once the screen used ANH was molded, it fathered 'base castings'. These base castings are what became the ESB and ROTJ screen used helmets.

Wrong. How could you possibly think that during ANH, they anticipated the two sequels and decided to make 30 castings all of which became modified just for ESB and ROTJ? That is simply not the case. And what exactly do you base this on?

They all started out the same and were INDIVIDUALLY CONVERTED, which is the primary cause for some of the physical differences between individual helmets (even within the same film).

That would be a waste of time. That would mean that, for example, the changes in the helmets and masks would all have been done individually to each casting, and those changes perfectly matched to one another. That is rediculous. You take a template from ANH, you mold it and make ESB castings. You take an ESB template (that could be one of the ANH templates....that is a template taken from a mold off the ANH used for ESB) mold it and make ROTJ castings. You take a ROTJ casting as a template to make the ROTS.

Now, there are a handful of these 'base casting' derivatives that have made it out into the public domain and a number of people on these forums have them.

Well that is not the case. The TD, TM, SL, VP, all have different sources from different molds. They are not a "handful of base castings" from a single mold taken off the ANH. You are trying to oversimplify the lineage based on what? I have no idea.

Are some from the actual mold that came off the original ANH? Are some from castings of one of those castings. Or a casting from that? Or even a casting of THAT?
Answer:
There is NO DEFINITIVE WAY TO TELL.

There is no way that YOU can tell, but I can, or anyone else who has studied authentic castings. But you have yet to show any appreciation for the fine differences between castings. The SL, for example, is from the ILM mold and that mold is well known. Ask Don Bies about that mold.

Do you know why the Funeral Pyre ANH helmet looks to have come from that mold? If you knew about features specific to castings from that mold then you would be able to say, but you can't. So you don't really have a basis to say what can be determined because you clearly haven't studied authentic castings to any great extent. I've never seen you post any details or discuss any details of authentic castings. Why is that? You claim to have studied them, but your statements indicate otherwise. For example:

What you fail to realize is that once the screen used ANH was molded, it fathered 'base castings'. These base castings are what became the ESB and ROTJ screen used helmets.

What do you base that statement on in terms of ROTJ? You were the one arguing before that the ROTJ are simply refurbished ESB, ALL OF THEM. You fought about that tooth and nail. Then when Brian Muir shows his ROTJ helmet, you claim he showed it just to make sales and you also disputed that it was original. It has the filled chin vent and the neck extension like the TM. Does that make it ANH? Not if it came from ESB. Yet I see no basis for your claim of including ROTJ as coming from ANH apart from Brian's casting. Yet you discounted his casting as original. Then I show that the reveal, hero and stunt ROTJ masks all came from a single mold. And it wasn't an ESB mold because no ESB ever had that detail I show in common with the ROTJ castings. It is a simple explanation. If each ROTJ mask were individually modified from ANH templates taken from a single mold from before ESB, then it would be impossible for that single detail to appear on the stunt, reveal and hero ROTJ masks. It is simple logic.

By trying to determine lineage based on size variations of "fractions of a millimeter" (your own words), or because one casting has an imperceptible blemish while another one does not, is completely unreliable and foolhardy.

No, it is quantitative, and it makes perfect sense. I see nothing you offer to show me otherwise. Because you haven't examined castings from different sources in that amount of detail, you are not in a position to comment about size differences or details, otherwise you would be able to offer something tangible to counter it. But you don't, and you can't. You simply discount it out of hand, but sorry, that isn't enough.

You might as well use a magic 8 ball and get just as 'reliable' results.
While you see yourself as being scientific focusing on the minutiae, the reality is that you simply are not seeing the bigger picture.

I know this is difficult for you to accept, but it is the truth.

No, it is your belief of the truth. Your truth is based on what exactly? On what study of what castings? What have you documented? Measured? Examined? Why don't you prove me wrong with something more than just empty statements.

And where the TD is concerned (since it keeps coming up), it is the opinion of many (including some Gino haters ) that for years that you have been attempting to position it higher in lineage/pedigree than it deserves. While I feel you genuinely created this list to help the community, I feel this is also partially a platform to position the TD.

Honestly, if you believe that then I feel sorry for you. Someone asked about a lineage of Vader helmets like the Boba Fett, so I made one. And I put the TD where it is for good reason. And I outlined the rationale behind that and I've shown how its details predate anything else out there, including your ANH mask. I can show it. But it is you who fail to realize the truth of what I show. You think people hate you? I don't hate you. This isn't a contest. This is about what is authentic or not and where it fits in the lineage. I've shown that the TD has details that predate the SL and the SL origin is known. If something else comes along that was known to have been casted later, lets say after ESB, and it has the details the TD has, then I would be forced to revise my view of when it came to be. But nothing has at this point. If you have seen something, then show it.

And when it is seen to be placed in a position that the majority of the established vader 'fanatics' disagree with, a lot of us find it offensive.

No, only you find it offensive. I've shown why it belongs there.

Now, with that being said.
Some would say, well why not at least attempt to put together some sort of lineage based on...at least something? Isn't that better than nothing?

This lineage isn't based on just something, I've outlined what it is based on but I guess you didn't read that. It is based on known history of the castings. I didn't make it up. And I was specific about what my opinions were.

I would say absolutely not. Which is why this thread is so offensive to me.

Well I find many of your threads equally offensive for many reasons, which is why I stay out of them.

It does more harm than good simply because these charts not based in fact easily become the accepted truth amongst people who have not taken the time to do the hard research for themselves.

I've done the research, the result is the tree. Make a better one then and tell us what it is based on.

And we all know how hard it is to fight against the 'accepted truth' once it becomes so. I've spent way too much time over the years on this forum trying to dispel incorrect information/theories (and unintentionally making many enemies while doing so).

Gino, I've made it clear what this tree is. And I've asked for specific input to improve it or correct it. THAT IS WHAT THIS THREAD IS FOR. To make it the best tree possible based on present information. I've taken the time to look up that information, not contrive it.

And by the way, a tree isn't a tree unless it has continuity.

If you seriously want some constructive criticism, here is some.
Instead of trying to put together a lineage tree based mostly on theory where the hard facts are simply just not available, why not just start halfway down the tree.
Start with helmets where we factually KNOW the lineage WITHOUT controversy.

Come on. A tree has to start somewhere. The ANH led to ESB. The Fyberdyne lineage came from ANH. The ILM mold lineage came from ANH. The ESB lineage is clear. The 20th Century lineage is clear. The helmets coming later from DP Deluxe and Rubies are clear. What is the big mystery here? Honestly. These are all facts. The TD is ANH. That is a fact. The TD is a copy of the original according to Brian Muir. The TD is somewhere between ANH and ESB. That is where I put it. The ILM mold was taken off the original at some point near the end of or just after ANH. So a casting from that mold reflects the original ANH at that time. If something has detail that is screen accurate and precedes what we see on the SL or DJ, then it is earlier. Could it be later? Possibly but then we would see other castings showing the same details but all we see are details washing out as we go down the lineage, and a reduction in size.

I'm speaking about the lineage of the fan made recasts.
The lineage of most of them is clear and by and large without controversy.
Why not just document those items that are not in question, and leave the items that are in question completely out?

You of all people who don't like recasts want a tree with only recasts? What logic is there in that? You've got to be kidding me. A tree based on recasts is a tree based on controversy.

This is a lineage of ALL the helmets. ALL the Darth Vader helmets. It is meant as a guide to show where the different replicas and originals came from. It is thorough and as complete as I could make it.

By doing this, I believe you would actually get the support and participation of the other hardcore vader people instead of offending them.

Who here has been offended apart from you? You are not the voice of others here. From the time you have been on this forum, you speak always in terms of there being other people that share your views. That comes from someone who needs the support of others. I don't need the support of others. I know myself what this tree is and I can provide sources as to where I got the information for every branch.

I could play the same game and say there are many people that appreciate this tree, that appreciate the effort I took to put it together so they can see on one page the entire history of the Vader helmet lineage. And those same people wonder why you are making an issue out of it. With this tree those same people can be more a part of discussions about lineage and about where the helmets fit in that lineage. So that they can feel more a part of the community without having to look up every detail or ask a lot of questions. It is simply a guide. I don't claim it is perfect, because it cannot be. But it can be reasonably accurate based on what we know today. And if there is a problem with a particular branch, let me know and I will offer my reasoning behind that branch.

Because when you include items with questionable placement or inaccurate information, it only provides a disservice to the community, even when the original intent was to help.
.

My information is accurate, as is the tree. The only real issue I see you having is, again, with the TD.

 

[SithLord]

1.) The whole bunch of SPFX helmets (ANH, ESB, ROTJ).

My knowledge is (at least thats what I've read), that Phil's helmets are recasts, which are mostly a combination of different domes and facemasks. The facemasks were heavily modified as he progressed in offering them to the public (adding/removing details).

First they were mostly modified 20th century facemasks but then he went on to recast a GH ROTJ facemask (and dome?).

Yep, from what I can tell.

Now I had a conversation with Phil a year ago about various helmets and he stated, that the GH ROTJ is a recast of the Rubies helmet they used on their life sized vader statue.

That's hilarious.

He argued, that the facemask of the GH ROTJ is way too small just like the facemask on the lifesize Rubies.

Luckily owning a GH ROTJ, I've tried to compare it to the Rubies lifesize statue helmet but there are only a few good pictures of the Rubies lifesize so this was not possible.

Now, I did not believe Phil because there simply was only his statement but nothing to proof it...anyway, I then became very interested on the lineage of the GH ROTJ.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to boost the value of the helmet and I don't really care if it has relations to a screenused mask or not - it IS just a very very nice bucket which I will never part with, but I never read anything about it's lineage or origin.

Well I think its size is on par with original ROTJ (based on that mask at CIV which I identified as the hero screen ANH mask). But to say that because the GH ROTJ mask is small like a Rubies and then to say therefore it came from a Rubies is silly. It has nothing in common with a Rubies. And for him to say it is small makes sense because he increased the cheek width on his recast ROTJ mask to make it ANH. :lol And then what about the Jeff ROTJ? It is from the same source as the GH ROTJ. So I suppose the GH and Jeff ROTJ castings, which date back to the mid-1990s, both came from a Rubies which came out in 2003? :lol

2.) The Elstree ROTJ Vader:

I recently sold the helmet, but I had a DS 20th Century at the time the Elstree was still in my posession. I've compared them indepth and I can say that the Elstree is a direct copy/recast of a 20th century. It was just a little cleaned up, but more or less it is just a 1:1 recast.

Now there is NO information about who the maker of these was and what kind of story there was back in the day regarding it's lineage.

It would be interesting to learn more about that too.

That is interesting but I don't know who made the Elstree.

3.) Tusk tubes on vader helmets:

This was a thing that always bothered me...take different helmets side by side and have a look at the UPPER tusk tubes. On some vader helmets they are more straight, on some of them they are really curved.

Why is this??

Mold warpage? Bad casts? Or was it the same on the original helmets, that the upper tusk tubes were slightly curved?

Sanding. They were smoothed out to look straighter. They are also thinner on some castings. The original ANH upper tube has characteristic bends in it. Those bends arose on account of the shape of the mask as it was sculpted on Dave Prowse' head.

On a helmet which has mostly geometrical forms (triangular mouth/chin vent, straight slits on the nosebridge) it looks odd that the lower tusk tubes are straight and the upper ones are curved.

These are the three questions I mostly have on Vader helmets, but plz forgive that this is may off topic.

It's not my intention to steer the thread away, so PM's are very welcome if someone wants to.

It is just because the lower tube falls along the side of the mouth triangle and base of the cheek that it can be straighter. Once the top tube hits the temples, it has to deviate outwards towards where the ears would be on the head.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Thomas, Gino is not the only one with their doubts on the placement of your helmet, and neither am I. You are using that photo from CIV, which if I am not mistaken, was blown up to ridiculous size. How are you going to look for a fingernail sized nugget in a helmet that the photo was taken that far away from? If there is a closer picture to show the tiny dimple you are pointing to much more clearly, I'd love to see it.

Like I have said, aside from pushing the TD, the tree is not that bad. The only fear people have is what is already happening...people are taking this as gospel. Putting a tree out for people on less than full information is a slippery slope of wrongness to be sliding down. There are questions out there that have not been answered, and will likely NEVER be answered because the people at LFL at the time did not care to the level we do. They needed Vader and the slightest dimples, or millimeters of difference did not matter to them.

As to the TD...well, this helmet has been picked apart so much, I fail to see why you still push it out there. Where have you shown these details that you speak of? Are these the paint drips you are speaking of again, or is it the cut tube ends that don't match up with anything seen on screen?

The TD helmet...well, we don't TRULY know where it came from, do we? I mean, you've tried for months to defend it to no avail. Is it a nice looking face cast? Hell yes it is! There is no doubt about it. Does it have the provenance you keep trying to tell us it does? Well, I am not alone in thinking you have not offered up the proof of that.

As to the tree, you have fixed the small issues with it that I had, but you cannot detach yourself from putting that TD lid on there higher than it should be. I say higher than it should be because its origins are really not known.

 

[Vadermonkey]

Since it was mentioned, I have owned the Rubies Statue and examined a GH ROTJ first hand that they are the same faceplate, not that it requires a hands on examination. The GH was definately not molded off the Rubies though. It has extra details on the hat mount that the Rubies does not.

As to Carsten's point with the tabs in the TD cast...sort of speaks for itself IMO and although I understand why Thomas doesnt want to strip the paint I think it would help to clear up some things about the cast.

I think it would be great to get all of these helmets on a table at C5...if we're being scientific and all. :cool

 

[runnriottt]

Err... no, it isn't. Doesn't indicate whether it's a recast or a copy. One is done without permission - making it a recast - the other is done with permission - making it a copy and accepted within the community, so I repeat, I have nothing in my tree to indicate recast.

So be it. That is really not the topic so Ill leave it be.

I should complain about your use of my photo of my TD. You did not ask me to use it. However I posted it public, so I guess I have no real basis to complain. It would also make me a tad snobbish.

Would be nice to get a heads up however...

 

[Too Much Garlic]

Use of your photo? That was a photo I was given by the previous owner to use for the tree, so I assumed it was his.

 

[runnriottt]

The last owner had a set of lenses and mesh in the helmet. I removed them.

Meh. What ever. Its all good.

 

[SithLord]

Thomas, Gino is not the only one with their doubts on the placement of your helmet, and neither am I. You are using that photo from CIV, which if I am not mistaken, was blown up to ridiculous size. How are you going to look for a fingernail sized nugget in a helmet that the photo was taken that far away from? If there is a closer picture to show the tiny dimple you are pointing to much more clearly, I'd love to see it.

Qui, can you not see that the resolution of the hero ROTJ mask photo detail is equivalent to the detail of the photo of the screen reveal mask and the screen stunt mask? It is there for everyone to see. The detail is there. In the same place. The same detail. That kind of detail is unique to the ROTJ masks and therefore they came from one mold. The hero shot is nearly straight on, the reveal and stunt are 3/4 views, hence the angular difference translates into a slight positional difference but it is the SAME detail. There are even indications of other little bumps further up the base of the nosebridge to the right of that spherical bump that are clear on the stunt and also present on the hero.

It is proof. End of story. You can argue all you want about what photo it came from, lighting, distance, etc. The spherical detail can be seen on all three screen-used castings from ROTJ. That detail never existed on an masks prior to ROTJ, so it is unique to them.

Like I have said, aside from pushing the TD, the tree is not that bad. The only fear people have is what is already happening...people are taking this as gospel. Putting a tree out for people on less than full information is a slippery slope of wrongness to be sliding down. There are questions out there that have not been answered, and will likely NEVER be answered because the people at LFL at the time did not care to the level we do. They needed Vader and the slightest dimples, or millimeters of difference did not matter to them.

If anyone is in a better position to place these castings then I would like to know who.

This is is just one example of the type of detail and exhaustive comparisons I do in my study of castings (and this is the tiny version of the comparison)...I'd like to see someone do better...I'd like to see someone with the kind of casting and photographic resources that I have do better and show me what is more accurate.

As to the TD...well, this helmet has been picked apart so much, I fail to see why you still push it out there. Where have you shown these details that you speak of? Are these the paint drips you are speaking of again, or is it the cut tube ends that don't match up with anything seen on screen?

How could cut tubes match with something onscreen Qui?


Didn't you read this thread? You want me to post it again?

Find this detail in the red bracket ON ANY OTHER CASTING OUT THERE after ANH? Original or otherwise? Show me.

Can you find a tube convergence that is as sharp and screen accurate as the TD? No. If you look even at the screen mask at the time of DP studios it looks already like it does on the Paul Allen ESB...the inside V-shaped indentation softens out, why? Guess.

Here yet again for you Qui is the indentation on the lower inside left eye edge on the TD vs the SL.

Again, the right top of the tube end on the TD vs SL...the TD is earlier.

There are details you have no idea about, and no one has any idea about.

Until I show them.

The original ANH screen mask had a characteristic paint drip orientated horizontally in the center of the base of the lower edge of the nosebridge, seen below in the Tantive IV closeup scene on the left, and below that a high resolution still image of that detail. Then on the right top panel is that detail seen on the TD ANH at high magnification from below showing the sharp relief of the edge of that drop of paint. On the bottom right panel is the same area and view on the SL ANH. The SL has a lot of gunk there, thereby obscuring the detail somewhat.

So is it a reasonable comparison? I think so because the mold the SL came from is definitely from around the time near the end or shortly after ANH. But, to appease those who think they know more than I do, I also show the same detail on the next best example, the VP ANH. But, it is still quite a bit softer than the detail on the TD ANH. In fact, nothing has a richer and sharper version of that detail that I have seen thus far than on the TD ANH.

How about a little test of the knowledge of the so-called experts. What major detail is seen on the top of the left cheek of the original ANH mask and original ESB masks?

This is a VP ANH. It isn't there. I would like someone here who knows about authentic castings, a self-professed expert, to describe what the major detail is. It is a large and easily seen detail from above, and not microscopic, and it has a distinctive shape so it is easy to describe. For example, if someone else out there, anyone, has what they think is an authentic casting from ANH, and they claim it is directly from the ANH original, then they can easily tell me what that detail is, because I will be able to show them. Better yet, show me your authentic casting with that detail. And I will show you mine, both of them.

Do you study castings Qui? Do you study their details? Perhaps then you could answer this question.

The TD helmet...well, we don't TRULY know where it came from, do we? I mean, you've tried for months to defend it to no avail. Is it a nice looking face cast? Hell yes it is! There is no doubt about it. Does it have the provenance you keep trying to tell us it does? Well, I am not alone in thinking you have not offered up the proof of that.

I am not professing provenance, I am showing it is an earlier casting than the SL and the SL has solid and clear provenance. I don't need a piece of paper to show that. I can see it myself in the details of this casting, Qui. And I show those details just for you again here since you don't seem to remember yet again.

As to the tree, you have fixed the small issues with it that I had, but you cannot detach yourself from putting that TD lid on there higher than it should be. I say higher than it should be because its origins are really not known.

Qui, see if you can you tell me what the detail is on the top left cheek of an authentic ANH casting. Anyone here who is a self professed expert on Vader can tell me what detail is there.

If you think you know what makes a casting authentic, let alone what makes one casting earlier than another, then show me what you know. And if you don't, then you have no place telling me where the TD ANH should or shouldn't go.

Would you like another lesson about lineage?

Here is a comparison I've waited six years to show.

The TD ANH next to a GH ROTJ.

You don't need a mounting ring if you have an authentic ANH mask.

Yes, a fraction of a millimeter, or a few millimeters in this case, can make a difference. And so can the difference between something cast directly from the original ANH and something that is cast from a ROTJ mask, or something that is the same size as a ROTJ mask.

I can tell from photographs where something goes in the lineage based on its relative size and proportions of the mouth to the eyes. This comes from comparing castings firsthand and documenting them quantitatively. This comes from years of study and experience of authentic castings.

There is a reason why in ROTJ the Vader mask and especially the mouth triangle looks smaller in proportion to the dome than in ANH....because it is.

So if someone says that size is not important in terms of lineage, then they simply have not looked carefully at the issue, probably because they don't have the opportunity, inclination or foresight to do so.

Knowing you, Qui, you would probably like to question me about the size of the GH ROTJ being representative of the original ROTJ?

Well, let us look at the original hero screen used ROTJ mask, next to the original screen used ROTS mask.

Notice anything? They look the same size, don't they? Look at the face widths. Look at the height of the faces. If anything the hero ROTJ mask looks smaller in the face. So, in this photograph it is established a size relationship between an original hero ROTJ Vader mask and an original hero ROTS mask.

Now let us look at another reference point. A ROTS mask next to an ANH mask.

I think the size difference in the masks should be obvious. And so we are back where we began. An authentic ANH dwarfs an authentic ROTJ. The original hero ROTJ mask is comparable to an original ROTS mask in size. And a ROTS mask is dwarfed itself by an authentic ANH mask. Why are the ROTJ masks so small? Well obviously they came from a ROTJ mold, and not from an ANH era or ESB era source. A generation down at least. Simple logic. Direct comparisons.

I can ask anyone to give me measurements of their so-called authentic castings, and we will see what the standard of authenticity really is.

As we speak, someone is claiming their ESB suit is original, the helmet is original, the mask is original. But it isn't. It is a modified 20th C. And, given the size of the mask, I would be able to confirm that it isn't an original, nor even cast directly from an original. But I don't rely on size alone, it is simply icing on the cake of detail. Details tell the story, they don't lie.

I'll wait to hear what the so-called experts say about the upper cheek detail. I could go on all day showing details, but the point remains the same.

The TD ANH belongs where it is. And until I find a casting that suggests otherwise it will stay there.

 

[CTF]

Stop calling it ANH.

 

[Howard]

Very interesting thread - as always!

I've noticed the ANH has a 'hump' on its left cheek top tube, as seen in SL's pic below.
The BM ROTJ also has this hump.
Just thought I'd point this out.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Jeez Thomas, where to even begin with your grainy photos that show nothing similar. The tube end picture you show, well the little divot does not line up with what you are showing on the screen helmet. Not even close. I also see a chunk missing on the end up the TD tusk, which does not line up with anything you are TRYING to show on the SL.

Let's not even delve any further into your photos. I won't give them the credit that you do. Let me say this, since you are getting offended that ANYONE dare to question the mighty SithLord...buying helmet castings does NOT make you an expert. It merely means you have spent a lot of money without knowing where something has come from.

I notice you did not attempt to refute my statement that no one knows the origins of the TD. For all of your purchasing power, you have yet to show anything about its origins. Grainy photos that you have been shilling for years now. Nothing new. For all we know, someone could have taken this thing and repaired a broken casting. The tube ENDS show a huge difference. Where is THAT on screen? Show us how the saw gouged into the triangle on the end of the TD. Thomas, that thing has been tampered with, concealing its origins.

The TD has come from a mold no one knows of, or it was tampered with to hide repairs. Nothing jives with anything else you are trying to show. The only thing that is remotely similar is the hump Howard pointed out which you have neglected to show. How could you miss that with all of your handling?

Why not show us all the original CIV pic you blew up to look for your little bump? Let the people decide. Oh, and one more point...you CANNOT get any kind of accurate measurements just from photos.

 

[TakerVader]

What do these stand for? VP, TM, SL,TD?

Why are they (all) placed so highly on the diagrams? Where do you guys believe the TD really came from?

Just trying to understand better after reading 8 pages here...

 

[Too Much Garlic]

The last owner had a set of lenses and mesh in the helmet. I removed them.

Meh. What ever. Its all good.

No, not whatever. You accused me of using "your" picture based simply on the fact that it was without lenses and grills!?!! WTF? Just got back with the previous owner: it's HIS picture, he took it, so you have nothing to complain about here. Just wanted to set that straight.

What do these stand for? VP, TM, SL,TD?

Initials of the owners and the names the owners choose for that particular helmet cast and their spawn.

Why are they (all) placed so highly on the diagrams? Where do you guys believe the TD really came from?

They are placed high because of the detail richness they hold. I'm reworking my tree yet again, attacking it from a different perspective.

In my view I think it either came from the UK mold (a name the community is calling the mold that is the father of the screen used ESB helmets) or from a mold off a cast from that mold. That's the likely scenarios... Thomas is still trying to piece together the origin.

Just trying to understand better after reading 8 pages here...

Well... this is a tiny thread, yet. Wait till it gets to 36+ pages... then you'll just get even more confused. Sorry... that's sorta the way of Vader threads. Some good gold nuggets of interesting info... and a ****-load of bickering back and fourth between several guys and their various theories about these pieces of fiberglass.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

A little more refinement.

 

[GINO]

Carsten, your tree is actually not too far off. Light years more correct than Sithlord's.


Here's an in-depth explanation of the Don Post lineage of helmets.
You can take the in-depth version and integrate it into chart form.
Bold text indicates a generational change.


UK ANH mold base casting sent to Don Post (to use as basis for their commercial mask line.)
l
l
DP heavily modifies that casting in an attempt to make the helmet more symmetrical.
(Which later gets abandoned for an original sculpt-known as the cheap plastic DP original Vader mask).
This modified casting became the DP ANH1 master.
This modifiet helmet is then molded by DP and becomes the DP ANH1.
l
l
A DP ANH1 casting has a cabinet latch affixed to the forehead as a means to try to keep the dome secured to the forehead.
This helmet is molded again and becomes the DP ANH2 casting.
l
l
DP sells off it's only known remaining DP ANH1 casting to Jeff (JW).
DP ANH1 casting becomes the JW ANH1 master.
DP also sells off it's only known remaining DP ANH2 casting to JW.
DP ANH2 casting becomes the JW ANH2 master.
l
l
This is where the JW ANH 1 and 2 split off into different branches.
I'll mark them with an **SPLIT**
l
l
l
l
**SPLIT**

The JW ANH1 master (the one without the forehead latch) is molded and becomes the JW ANH1
l
l
As to keep the risk of being recast low, JW only ever sold JW ANH1 castings to two people. Myself and GH. My casting was sold years ago.
l
l
A JW ANH1 casting is sold to GH and becomes the GH ANH1 master.
GH recasts it as well as a set of chest armor without JW's permission (according to JW) and that becomes the GH ANH1.
l
l
A GH ANH1 casting is heavily cleaned up/modified and then molded.
This becomes the GH ANH2.
l
l
The GH ANH2 casting are what was sold to people (the one with the extra wide neck).



**SPLIT**

The JW ANH2 master (the one with the forehead latch) is molded and becomes the JW ANH2.
It was clear the JW ANH2 master had been much more cleaned up and warped than the JW ANH1 master, but JW did not know why, and the person from DP who sold them to him did not know why either.
l
l
JW sold lots of JW ANH2 castings back in the late 80's early 90's. He sold some of them to a place in LA called Steve's Lost Land of Toys, who sold them for him via consignment.
l
l
Fyberdyne buys a JW ANH2 casting from Steve's Lost Land of Toys.
l
l
The JW ANH2 casting becomes the Fyberdyne ANH master.
l
l
The Fyberdyne ANH master is molded.
l
l
Those casts are the Fyberdyne ANH1.
l
l
Fyberdyne ANH1 castings are made available to only a small handful of people.
l
l
Due to the loss of the original Fyberdyne ANH1 dome mold, a new hand scupted dome is created and paired with the Fyberdyne ANH1 castings
l
l
This creates the Fyberdyne ANH2 and was made available on a larger scale than the Fyberdyne ANH1



The story of the JW ROTJ goes like this. LFL sent MB Prod. a LFL tour helmet casting to use as the basis for their life size Vader statue.
This tour helmet mold is one with the ring cast into the top of the helmet, not the Rick Baker tour helmet mold in the archives.
Later MB sold that original LFL tour helmet casting to JW.
JW molded this helmet (JW ROTJ) and sold one casting to GH, and also a casting to myself years later. I sold off my copy years ago.
GH recast the JW ROTJ without his permission (according to JW) and sold copies (GH ROTJ).






.

 

[Davy Jones]

Pretty cool! I always wondered what the story was on those helmets Gino. Great info.