A Darth Vader Collection and Lineage Thread....

[SithLord]

Another example showing the difference in tube end length during filming of ANH...the left image showing how much longer the tube end is in a Death Star corridor scene versus the right image showing it is noticeably shorter. One can watch frame grabs from each of these scenes as Vader rotates his head to see that it is not an effect of angle, it is a real difference in length. At some point during the production it appears the left tube was shortened...

and the right was lengthened...

 

[Davy Jones]

This is part of the reason its so hard to argue with you Thomas. You post so much crap that someone would have to write a novel to offer their rebuttal. I have done it before and gotten no closer to convincing you what is wrong with the comparisons and simple misunderstanding of the facts you put forth. I dont have the time or patience to do it that often. Then when no one contests your opinions onlookers assume you have won the argument...

 

[illbethere1]

I really never noticed that about the inconsistant tube lengths on ANH.... Now that I do it kinda gives credence to the TD's tusk dilemma if thats the case.

Yippe kay ya MF's,,, Bloody 1st post:love

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Why don't you sit back and just learn then? You reject the TD out of hand, yet you say you ask and claim to be open to new information. But you are not. Because I present the TD you reject it.

This is all I will address. I reject it because of the LACK of evidence. You haven't presented a good case for the TD. In hundreds of postings, you have yet to make a case for it. You haven't presented any new info since you've last tried to foist it upon us. It's the same, tired drawings. Period. Again, you cannot separate yourself from it being unknown.

Thomas, YOU have nothing to teach me. That is why I pay you no mind. And FYI, I brought up Ainsworth as an example of you FAILING to admit you can ever be wrong. You believed his tripe about his helmets being from a screen used mold and presented hundreds of your red line drawings, which were ALSO wrong.

 

[CSMacLaren]

Another example showing the difference in tube end length during filming of ANH...the left image showing how much longer the tube end is in a Death Star corridor scene versus the right image showing it is noticeably shorter. One can watch frame grabs from each of these scenes as Vader rotates his head to see that it is not an effect of angle, it is a real difference in length. At some point during the production it appears the left tube was shortened...



and the right was lengthened...

If these above two came from different scenes, note that these are two different angles. The problem with only posting closeup shots is that it abstracts the object from camera distance, perspective distortion, etc.

In the shot to the right, the mask is turned away from the camera such that the (wearer's) right cheek is obscured behind the nose. Further, you can't see the corner of the helmet/dome's flange. Thus you see more of the side of the right tube.

The shot on the left shows the head turned more towards the camera. Depending on the camera distance and how much the camera operator zoomed in, what you are seeing may be explained by foreshortening.

If the screen-used ANH was shortened during production, but that argument presumes it stayed that way. All descended castings should then have shortened tubes. But that is not the case. The TM has proper length tubes. The Corbis shots show the screenused ANH as having proper length.

The Tantive scene in ANH is supposed to have been shot last. We see the tubes in their proper length.



Above: The viewer's left, a.k.a. wearer's right tube is not cut, but due to camera distance and angle, the opposite tube is shorter appears shorter.



Again, the viewer's left, a.k.a. wearer's right tube is not cut, but due to camera distance and angle, the opposite tube is shorter appears shorter.

I realize your TD's tubes have been cut shorter so their surfaces are behind the surface of the mouth. At best, if you place tusks on them, the base of the tusks will be flush with the surface, unless too much has been cut, and then the theory would not hold. I'd encourage you to try recreating accurate tusks, then recreate the same photography distance and angle and see if you can reproduce the exact same look. Short of that, this will end up being a squabble over how to interpret images.

Any additional discussion is just a revamp of the 20+ page thread we'd discussed on The Prop Den. IIRC, nobody was convinced back then. I certainly hope the points others contributed were not overlooked or forgotten, then the saying applies: "If we don't learn from history...."

Thomas, I realize you really want to put the TD in prominence over all helmets owned in the fandom, and hope that there are features on the TD that no-one else has. But in ascertaining this, one cannot stretch the facts to fit a theory. A theory has to stretch to fit the facts.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

We all know that the TM was reworked at the tusk tube ends as the tips had broken, so cannot be used in an argument about accurate length. The VP shows the correct Tantive tusk tube lengths.

 

[CSMacLaren]

We all know that the TM was reworked at the tusk tube ends as the tips had broken, so cannot be used in an argument about accurate length. The VP shows the correct Tantive tusk tube lengths.

Ah yes, I recall now, as it's been a while since I've been focused on Vader stuff. However, the TM tubes were not completely broken off as some might think, but there is sufficient length remaining to show the tubes were nowhere near as short as the TD.

 

[SithLord]

This is part of the reason its so hard to argue with you Thomas. You post so much crap that someone would have to write a novel to offer their rebuttal. I have done it before and gotten no closer to convincing you what is wrong with the comparisons and simple misunderstanding of the facts you put forth. I dont have the time or patience to do it that often. Then when no one contests your opinions onlookers assume you have won the argument...

What is your problem? You offer nothing except posts like this?

 

[SithLord]

This is all I will address. I reject it because of the LACK of evidence. You haven't presented a good case for the TD. In hundreds of postings, you have yet to make a case for it. You haven't presented any new info since you've last tried to foist it upon us. It's the same, tired drawings. Period. Again, you cannot separate yourself from it being unknown.

Thomas, YOU have nothing to teach me. That is why I pay you no mind. And FYI, I brought up Ainsworth as an example of you FAILING to admit you can ever be wrong. You believed his tripe about his helmets being from a screen used mold and presented hundreds of your red line drawings, which were ALSO wrong.

You clearly don't remember what I've posted already on TPD and what is new that I've posted here, but I don't expect you to. But then don't say it is the same as before, or I will SHOW YOU WHAT IS NEW.

Nothing changes what the SDS helmet is, ok? The mask has interior detail like the original. The flatter swoop is seen on screen rear caps. I was arguing things like that...things I could OBSERVE. How could the spaces between the teeth of the SDS TIE be identical to an original TIE mask?

And maybe you should go back and read the two times I did admit where I was wrong about AA, Qui! So DONT TELL ME THAT I DONT ADMIT WHEN I AM WRONG.

So? You have nothing to offer in regard to discussion of details. Therefore you have nothing to say about where the TD should go. You cannot even provide me with an answer to my question about the cheek detail.

So Qui? Why do you do it? Why do you always interject in one of my threads just for the heck of it? What is your interest in this? I could understand if you were a Vader helmet expert trying to knock some sense into me by showing comparisons of details I had missed or misinterpreted, but you don't!

Qui, how many Vader helmets do you own now? Do you even collect them?

Show me something with earlier detail otherwise your opinion doesn't hold water.

 

[SithLord]

I realize your TD's tubes have been cut shorter so their surfaces are behind the surface of the mouth. At best, if you place tusks on them, the base of the tusks will be flush with the surface, unless too much has been cut, and then the theory would not hold. I'd encourage you to try recreating accurate tusks, then recreate the same photography distance and angle and see if you can reproduce the exact same look. Short of that, this will end up being a squabble over how to interpret images.

Mac, why would adding tusks to cut ends on the TD replicate any look onscreen? THEY ARE CUT. :confused There is no point doing that. Tusks on the TD would be recessed to far back...because they are cut BACK even behind the front face of the mouth triangle.

The point I'm trying to make is that the original screen mask POSSIBLY had the tube ends cut and reworked to be a different length. The cut points and angles on the TD match any other mask out there in terms of how the sides of the tubes meet the corners of the mouth triangle, which I've shown.

Mac you've handled many castings, including at least one or two authentic ones, hopefully with tusks on them. You can rotate them and you won't get that much of an effect. You can watch as Vader TURNS HIS HEAD in the Death Star detention and hallway scenes and it is NOT an effect of angle.

Thomas, I realize you really want to put the TD in prominence over all helmets owned in the fandom, and hope that there are features on the TD that no-one else has. But in ascertaining this, one cannot stretch the facts to fit a theory. A theory has to stretch to fit the facts.

NO. That is NOT what I want to do Mac! I want to put it where I think it should go in the tree and I've been trying to show why.

I am not HOPING ANYTHING. I AM SHOWING IT. SHOW ME SOMETHING WITH EARLIER DETAILS.

I own the TD and SL, so I compare them. And I compare them in turn with everything else I see. I know that the TD is earlier than the SL, and I know when the SL was pulled and have a reliable account of when its mold was made. So that gives a timeframe in which the TD MOLD.....MOLD....would have been made. Whether the TD casting came from that mold at that time or not I don't know. But I'm going by when that mold would have to have been made.

You know that anything from the UK would have to be earlier than the ILM mold, right? Show me something earlier than the TD then from the UK lineage. If you cannot, then the TD stands as the earliest, until something comes along to suggest otherwise. It is the earliest representative, as to when it was pulled, I have stated why I think it is also an old casting.

And if you disagree then show me something older.

Mac, I don't see you answering my question about the detail on the cheek top, maybe because you don't have a casting early enough to show it. :confused

 

[SithLord]

We all know that the TM was reworked at the tusk tube ends as the tips had broken, so cannot be used in an argument about accurate length. The VP shows the correct Tantive tusk tube lengths.

Well the VP ANH is close but not exact. The VP tube ends were reworked compared to the original ANH. They are tapered down more near the tips and smoothed out. You can see the difference in height and length. The length difference isn't great but there nonetheless.

The SL ANH has the identical tube convergences, lengths, details, imperfections, etc. The Darth Jones ANH tube ends were reworked a bit but close to the right length.

Note that the VP shares the same softer rounded shape of the V-shaped indentation where the tubes join together....not as you see on the original ANH in the Tantive IV scene.

 

[SithLord]

I'm still waiting....anyone?

Someone show me a mask with original ANH detail on this top cheek surface....no one? Maybe no one has something early with that kind of detail? Hmmm?

Perhaps another clue is in order...

See it? No? Maybe that is because you don't have an early casting...but for me it is clear as day. The sigmoid cheek detail. Just another one of many details I've studied, Qui, and you haven't.

You can criticize my comparisons, the details I show, the graininess of the images, the red squiggles all you like. You can even complain I show the same thing over and over again, Qui, or anyone else here.

But I've never shown this, and I've never shown a few other things I've posted here elsewhere either, the right eye corner detail, the size of the TD compared to the GH ROTJ and how large the crown of the head of an authentic ANH mask is, the sharpness of the tube convergence indentation in relation to the Paul Allen ESB original stunt mask (or anything else for that matter), the horizontal paint detail on the base of the nosebridge.....you see those before Qui? If you have then please, point out where I posted them before here or on TPD.

So? I'm waiting for the Vader experts to chime in on that cheek detail, I can only give so many clues. :ninja

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Dude, I don't even give a damn anymore. It just is not worth it. There are bigger things in life to worry about. You win! Happy now? I am never going to see what you see in your goods, despite all of the crap you post. Have fun in your little kingdom.

 

[SithLord]

Ah yes, I recall now, as it's been a while since I've been focused on Vader stuff. However, the TM tubes were not completely broken off as some might think, but there is sufficient length remaining to show the tubes were nowhere near as short as the TD.

The TD's (or what it came from) tube ends were cut, with a sharp edged tool. They would have been longer prior to being cut. You can no more discuss tube ending length on the TD as you can with the TM.

Want to see where the TD cut end is in relation to the screen ANH? Start by looking at the circumferential white line on the screen mask tube convergence (indicated by the red arrows)....

Then line up the cut end of the TD tubes and voila!

Coincidence....maybe. But compelling nonetheless.

 

[SithLord]

Dude, I don't even give a damn anymore. It just is not worth it. There are bigger things in life to worry about. You win! Happy now? I am never going to see what you see in your goods, despite all of the crap you post. Have fun in your little kingdom.

Accept what you wish to accept and see how far it gets you...

I study authentic castings. You do not.

You've left the argument the same way you entered it. With nothing.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Accept what you wish to accept and see how far it gets you...

I study authentic castings. You do not.

You've left the argument the same way you entered it. With nothing.

Wow...really? You spend thousands of dollars and are not one step closer to proving where something has come from. How does THAT feel? This is all some vindication for your purchases. Try and paint it any other way PLEASE. Thomas, I do not get you. You are like a dog with a bone who refuses to let it go, no matter the proof. The other experts, and we know who they are, have all refuted your claims soundly. Remember trying to say the TD fathered the ESB helmets?

You are a man with a lot of money and a lot of free time. NOT an expert in authentic castings. I TRIED to leave the argument. Leave you to your devices, but if you are going to keep pressing, I will press back and continue the debate.

I do not see you as a bad person, Thomas. I never have. You doggedly pursue something YOU think is right, despite people pointing out other things. Really, if I could copy and past the entire TD thread catalog, I would and let the masses here decide. I've read your evidence. My opinion is not colored by me having this mask, like yours. My opinion is based SOLELY on the evidence YOU have presented. So, be angry with yourself for not making your case.

 

[SithLord]

Wow, almost 6000 views in 24 days....

:rolleyes

 

[SithLord]

Wow...really? You spend thousands of dollars and are not one step closer to proving where something has come from. How does THAT feel? This is all some vindication for your purchases. Try and paint it any other way PLEASE. Thomas, I do not get you. You are like a dog with a bone who refuses to let it go, no matter the proof. The other experts, and we know who they are, have all refuted your claims soundly. Remember trying to say the TD fathered the ESB helmets?

Where are your buddy experts now Qui?

You think the money matters to me? I'm a collector and I study authentic castings.

Where is this proof that you speak of Qui? Where is this sound refutation of which you speak?

You are a man with a lot of money and a lot of free time.

No, you think that of me. Paint me as you will. I do not presuppose what you spend your money on, or how you spend your free time, or how much free time you have to spend?

NOT an expert in authentic castings. I TRIED to leave the argument. Leave you to your devices, but if you are going to keep pressing, I will press back and continue the debate.

I'm waiting for you to describe or show me the detail on the top of the cheek of an authentic casting. And you don't. So you are telling ME I am not an expert? You post not one photo, show no authentic castings, nothing. Zippo.

I do not see you as a bad person, Thomas. I never have.

Thanks, I don't think you are bad either. But this isn't about being bad or good. I am showing you and everyone here why I think the TD goes where it goes in the tree. Simple.

You doggedly pursue something YOU think is right, despite people pointing out other things.

Qui, all you point out is that I am stubborn and that what I show is meaningless. What does that prove? Nothing.

Really, if I could copy and past the entire TD thread catalog, I would and let the masses here decide. I've read your evidence. My opinion is not colored by me having this mask, like yours. My opinion is based SOLELY on the evidence YOU have presented. So, be angry with yourself for not making your case.

I am not angry with you and I am not angry with myself. I merely will endeavor to convince if I encounter a tough audience. And I have plenty more to show...but I think it wouldn't really matter what I show, Qui, your mind is made up not based on what I show but based on who I am.

 

[SithLord]

Remember trying to say the TD fathered the ESB helmets?

I considered that as a possibility at one point, but not so much anymore. I've considered many possibilities Qui, but I continue to study castings and compare them. If I still thought the TD fathered the ESB castings, then it wouldn't be on a side branch off the original ANH with a dead end, would it.... :rolleyes

 

[CSMacLaren]

Mac, I don't see you answering my question about the detail on the cheek top, maybe because you don't have a casting early enough to show it. :confused

I wasn't aware you posed that question to me directly.

Actually, I'm not the least bit concerned of what you think I have or don't have. After all those 20+ page threads, I concluded that the hobby isn't fun when it turns into a one-way conversation with a runaway train.

But I'll at least give you the courtesy of a response and then go back to living life.

You say that you can see a helmet rotate and not get that much of an effect, and yet in the past you've used screenshots like that to show the tubes were short like your TD. Those same screenshots you posted just now are great examples illustrating my point of an optical effect that tubes can look like they are not protruding past the bottom lip of the mouth.

With respect to the detail you're calling to question, I have to refer back to past 20+ page threads on The Prop Den where, for example, you misconstrued physical cracks and damage on the surface of the TD for inherited traits from the mold off the original. The conclusion we reached was that unless you were willing to remove the paint, anything obscured by paint is purely postulation.

There is an inordinate amount of TD posts and closeup shots and it is detracting from the original focus of this thread. If indeed this isn't about maneuvering the TD into a superior position above all helmets in the fandom, let's return back to the lineage tree overview. I actually enjoyed some of the questions and challenges you had regarding the Don Post Studios lineage.