Not possible. You are now saying your TD is later than the SL, as we have already proven that the TD and TM are linked together to the same original molding of the ANH, so any detail that are different no longer links back to the original helmet at a later time in its life - only how it appeared in that one molding. And until the TD rabbit ears have been able to be determined I will hold to my belief they are identical and the SL is different.
No, how could I be saying the TD is later? Do you mean because it has the same rabbit ear as the SL? Your assumption is that the TD and TM are from the same source and so should have the same detail. For arguments sake, let us say that the TM has the identical rabbit ears as the SL, just that by the time of ESB there was some repaint done and that has partially obscured that detail. That's my interpretation. But when I say that the TD ears are the same as the SL, that is because I checked. But checking, and then being able to photograph them, are two separate things. But I did.
Below you see the SL ANH ear top left, and the TD top middle and right under different lighting conditions. Bottom left is the rabbit ear on the original ANH when it had the original paint from a still photograph. Middle bottom is the TD ANH again and the bottom right is a screen capture of the same detail seen on the Tantive IV. It is the same object and shape and it is in the right location as you can see from the little bump to the left of it that shows up on the SL ANH (smaller box to the left of the rabbit ear).
This supports that the TM is showing that area after the original mask, (or a copy of it) received some kind of work, or wear. And it also shows that that shape of the rabbit ear is the original shape.
And since paint was already peeling from that area... very likely the first molding took the loose paint, leaving only the outer shape intact for the second (SL mold) molding.
That's a possibility, but you don't GAIN a more distinct shape from the rabbit ear if that was the case. And you wouldn't see the TD having the same shape if that was the case. Rather, I propose there was paint ADDED later, and it flaked off and that is what we are seeing on the TM.
The Elstree carpet picture shows a more aggressive shape to that top mark like seen on the TM, than the smooth shaped SL - although, that picture IS a little small to make things out perfectly... but so are most screen captures with their motion blur and lens distortion.
Yes, not the best example for detailed analysis unfortunately.
And regarding my comment about the TD being from the ANH production mold. Maybe it wasn't from you, but it was certainly mentioned in this very thread - post #170 - as a possibility, which again had to be refuted as possible.
Now, I could spend a lot of time going through quite a bit about the front cheek face and the details on it and how they are arranged and how they compare to the SL ANH or TM ESB. But I think a lot of what people think about the TM is that the front face of the cheek on the right side is identical to that of the Tantive IV mask. That the paint blemishes match perfectly in every way, and that there is some kind of problem with the SL. To those with a TM or SL for that matter may wonder why there isn't that extra layering to the scar, the depth, and therefore the SL must be from after that time, from after a repaint. I've shown from some details here that the SL front cheek face has incredible detail at even the highest level in relation to the screen mask....in relation to that mask before it was repainted (and it had repaint work done twice by the way, once in certain areas by the time of the Corbis photos, and again for the Chronicles photos which was clearly a more complete repaint).
So then why the discrepancy some may ask? Why should the SL have detail in some areas of that cheek, but the scar doesn't seem substantial enough? I asked myself that.
And so I studied the alignment from every possible angle and also the curvature. I know I can match the scar to the SL scar perfectly. And I know that the TM scar curves more on the bottom and is a greater distance on its lower curve from the bottom edge of the cheek than the SL or the original. But showing that introduces complications on account of showing an original detail to that degree.
So then what?
Well, part of the thing that makes the TM scar stand out so much is not only the depth, but also there is as someone mentioned a secondary scar inside of that, something which the SL doesn't have. So what is to the immediate right of the scar makes a big difference in whether the TM or the SL actually represents what we see onscreen and therefore which one has the correct detail, the actual surface as it was at that time of the production.
Well, there are tiny bumps I could point out (the twin bumps near the top of the scar where its line goes almost vertical) etc., but I'm going to cut to the chase. I had for some time noticed a distinct line going diagonally across that area top right of the scar on the SL ANH. it was such a noticable line with a specific relief that I thought I would look for it on the screen mask, and sure enough, after an exhaustive search, I found it, and I show it below.
On the left is the Tantive IV scene with a box showing the area that I enlarge and focus on (Enlarged). Below that is an enhanced version of that part of the frame (Enhanced). To the right of each of those images is the corresponding part of the SL ANH. Given that the line going through that part of the scar is so hard to make out to someone who isn't used to seeing that kind of detail amidst the noise in the image, I've drawn a red line indicating its location in the panels just to the left of the SL ANH images.
Now, for those of you who will still say I am just seeing things, lets go to a still image of that same area on the original mask before it was painted, shown on the right panels. The top right panel is the original part of that still b&w photo. The thing that always frustrated me about that photo was that light was reflecting just off the area that was most interesting, thereby obscuring detail. However, another thing that I noticed about the way the light was coming off the surface was that there was that it had a diagonal boundary on the bottom left part of it close to the scar. In the top image I put a red line to show where it would be. On the bottom image I darken that same image to bring out the difference in intensity and that boundary in the reflection, with the extent of the line shown in the black box.
It corresponds exactly to where the raised line is on the SL ANH, and the faint detail seen also on the Tantive IV mask. This is not just a coincidence. The line is there. It is there on the original ANH mask before the repaint. And the SL ANH has it in tremendous detail and relief. Only the SL ANH could have led me to that detail seen onscreen, or explained why the reflection off the face of the cheek in the area of that still photo had such a definite straight boundary to it.
So if that line, which is so clear on the SL, goes through that area of the scar on the right side, and on the TM that line simply doesn't exist, then it demonstrates, along with all the other details I show, along with the fact that the TD ANH has the same rabbit ear as the SL ANH and as the original ANH, that that is the way the original front cheek face should look like.
Also, notice the light and dark areas on the screen capture of the front cheek face...part of that is how the light reflects off the surface but also part of it is due to the surface having slightly raised and lower areas depending on how much paint is there. I could later on show, yet again, that the raised areas on the original mask and the SL match perfectly, demonstrating that the SL has the original paint pattern on that surface.
