A Darth Vader Collection and Lineage Thread....

[SithLord]

Just for you Qui.....that image I showed of the grill coming through on the SL ANH...

This is what I went through just to find the right angle of light that would bring out the detail sufficiently enough to see it as an "X".

It isn't like I'm sitting around twiddling my thumbs making this up, in spite of what you like to portray of me, Qui.

And I do this for all the details I study at high resolution.

 

[Bowelrock]

Ok Im no were, on any level close to the knowledge you guys are..When it comes to Vader helmets.. My only question is.. Which helmets have a direct link to the original, and how did they come about.?

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Thomas, I am NOT the only one who could not see what you were showing in your first image. I am just the one who was the most vocal about not seeing it. That image does show it rather clearly. As to the quote I posted of yours from four years ago, it is just to illustrate a point. My point is you have YET to admit you were ever wrong about anything. You were clearly mistaken about the DJ.

I don't sit here all misty-eyed and saying "Wow, that has the look...it's fantastic!" when something doesn't. That applies to people I consider good acquaintances. You take this stuff WAY TOO PERSONALLY. No one is going to concede with you about the TM not being an ANH mold helmet. No one is going to concede that some of your pictures show what they clearly do not. No one is going to claim you are correct when you are trying to compare something in hand with an item on screen, with the distortion from the camera lenses misplacing all of your tells. It's just how it is man, and every time you post a composition, people roll their eyes.

I am not the only one. No one cares what you have. No one cares that you've sold doctored up castings. Why are you not just happy having what you have and showing it off WITHOUT all of your squiggly lines? Hell man, most of us here just want to collect little odds and ends. You took offense when I said you suck the fun out of this Vader hobby, but your obsession with having what you call the best of the best of the best of the best is the sole reason most of these threads do not last. We cannot have a discussion. We have to have you writing a diatribe to try and prove your stuff has provenance above all others.

Oh, and one more thing Thomas, I do not hide behind thinly veiled double entendres. If I thought you were lying, I would come out and say so. I said that you thought you were so sure about the DJ, which you ALSO said was the brother helmet of the SL. All I am out for is an admission of you being wrong. Just admit it one time. You've been wrong more than once, but you stick by your wrongness with a stalwart attitude. I don't get it. You might not be a liar, but you have been wrong quite a bit.

Don't ask me for the images. They have already been posted. The high res TM images spoke louder than any of the blurry screen caps you have ever posted. Please just let that go. The TM has more ANH provenance than you want to admit. The Devil is in the details, they say.

 

[SithLord]

Thomas, I am NOT the only one who could not see what you were showing in your first image. I am just the one who was the most vocal about not seeing it. That image does show it rather clearly. As to the quote I posted of yours from four years ago, it is just to illustrate a point. My point is you have YET to admit you were ever wrong about anything. You were clearly mistaken about the DJ.

I wasn't. I said it wasn't from the original mold and I was right. Where was I mistaken about it, huh?

I don't sit here all misty-eyed and saying "Wow, that has the look...it's fantastic!" when something doesn't. That applies to people I consider good acquaintances. You take this stuff WAY TOO PERSONALLY. No one is going to concede with you about the TM not being an ANH mold helmet. No one is going to concede that some of your pictures show what they clearly do not. No one is going to claim you are correct when you are trying to compare something in hand with an item on screen, with the distortion from the camera lenses misplacing all of your tells. It's just how it is man, and every time you post a composition, people roll their eyes.

I'm comparing screen captures at different angles that show the same thing. And I show also still images taken of the original ANH mask. So any argument about details at that resolution are baseless.

I am not the only one. No one cares what you have. No one cares that you've sold doctored up castings.

There you go again. I clearly show you are wrong with photographic evidence and you resort to accusing me of selling doctored up castings? You should listen to yourself. You are honestly pathetic. I don't care what you or anyone thinks about the castings I own, but I will show what makes them authentic and I will show what makes a casting authentic ANH. You can learn from what I show or stop baiting me in this thread.

You offer nothing to show contrary to what I've shown, all you offer are insults and accusations.

Why are you not just happy having what you have and showing it off WITHOUT all of your squiggly lines? Hell man, most of us here just want to collect little odds and ends. You took offense when I said you suck the fun out of this Vader hobby, but your obsession with having what you call the best of the best of the best of the best is the sole reason most of these threads do not last. We cannot have a discussion. We have to have you writing a diatribe to try and prove your stuff has provenance above all others.

I'm not saying it is the best. Where do I say that? I say it is accurate and I show why and I will compare it with other castings. And in no way do I prevent you or anyone else from showing me something better or showing me that I am wrong. But all you can do, Qui, is cry and complain. I've proven you wrong. You accused me of lying about the SL having a grill remnant. Well it does. So that is just another example of your incessant foolishness and malcontent.

Oh, and one more thing Thomas, I do not hide behind thinly veiled double entendres. If I thought you were lying, I would come out and say so.

You did say so, in so many words. You came back twice with posts saying basically you didn't believe me. So? On what basis did you not believe me when I go through a complete explanation? I had it for two days, I missed it. So? I show it now. So? What is your motive for attacking my integrity on that point on something that I clearly explain why I thought initially it wasn't there? Honestly, you are the one who takes things so seriously because for me it was just an honest mistake. Given more time I was able to see it. That's all, no big conspiracy theories, Qui. You are the one who takes the fun out of it because you are the one accusing me of lying, of doctoring my castings, of trying to portray my castings as the best. Everyone here can judge me on what I post, what I show, what I try to explain and I try to do it as reasonably as possible. But what I show is based on observation and research. And if you can't handle it because you are a TM helmet owner, then instead of attacking me personally, why don't you try to show me otherwise?

Because you can't. And if you can't provide anything constructive in this discussion then stay out of it. I'm willing to listen to counterpoints, but you offer none. You simply say I am not telling the truth, I cannot be trusted because of what I said in the past. That is ALL YOU ARE SAYING QUI. All you try to do is discredit me and you say I take the fun out of the hobby?

WHEN DO I ATTACK ANYONE PERSONALLY QUI. You, Pete, Mac are doing it to me. You are all TM owners. And you are telling ME I take the fun out of it? No I take the fun out of your own beliefs that you have about the TM being the most accurate ANH mask out there. That is what this is all about.

But I am willing to show why I think that. You are not.

At any point when I say the TD or SL is accurate, I say it by themselves and don't mention the TM. Then a TM owner comes along and opens his big mouth saying well the TM has this or does the SL or TD have this that the TM has? Or Thomas is wrong because the TD probably had the neck extension as well so it is from the same mold? WTF?

You guys have every opportunity to take whatever detail I show and show something better but you don't. And when you do try and I try to show you that you are misinterpreting the detail, you attack me personally. So what honestly is the point of trying to show you guys what I mean? Then you complain that what I show is not right because of what? Camera angles? That is so old and completely lame based on the level of detail I show. And I do use the same angles on my castings as for whatever screen shot or still image I am comparing it to.

And yes I will take it seriously when you question my integrity, just when I try to show details and I explain what I mean, my integrity is ALWAYS QUESTIONED BY THE TM OWNERS. And when do I question their integrity?

When have I personally attacked Mac with no provocation?

When have I personally attacked Pete with no provocation?

When have I personally attacked you with no provocation, Qui?

You guys should look at yourselves and ask what about the hobby should be fun. But instead you find the time to attack someone personally just because they are able to show what makes something authentic to what we see on the Tantive IV mask and in great detail.

So live with it.

I said that you thought you were so sure about the DJ, which you ALSO said was the brother helmet of the SL. All I am out for is an admission of you being wrong. Just admit it one time. You've been wrong more than once, but you stick by your wrongness with a stalwart attitude. I don't get it. You might not be a liar, but you have been wrong quite a bit.

Your problem is that you don't understand or read English properly. You don't actually read that when I state something I state it as best as I suppose or deduce or guess or suggest. Why should I apologize for guessing? Or for deducing? Or for supposing something? Hmmm?

I've admitted I am wrong before Qui and you know it. But show me where I am wrong here.

All you do is try to show where I have been wrong before, but show me where I am wrong here. STAY ON TOPIC. But you can't, because all you can do is resort to questioning my integrity. And it seems that is about all that we can ever expect from you.

Don't ask me for the images. They have already been posted. The high res TM images spoke louder than any of the blurry screen caps you have ever posted. Please just let that go. The TM has more ANH provenance than you want to admit. The Devil is in the details, they say.

Say what you like, I've presented my case on the details and it is there for anyone to judge. You can cry about it all day and say how bad they are all day, but they show it. And notice that Carsten just showed that one little detail....oh wow! Oh I am so impressed! Ya right. And he compares it to a blurry screen capture detail and then draws all kinds of incorrect conclusions as to what he is seeing because he doesn't have the kind of resolution both in his TM casting and in the photographic reference he is using to begin with.

But because you are who you are, you cheer lead his efforts, even when not knowing anything yourself about authentic ANH vader castings. You are a follower, nothing more. And you offer nothing apart from attacks of personal integrity.

How many TM owners are there? How long have they had their castings? They can at anytime show me up with any kind of detail in answer to what I show for the SL or TD. And I welcome it.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Thomas....you are amazing. I am not a TM owner. LOL...too funny. You really are letting this anger you for no reason what so ever. I am not making up the doctored up casting thing, Thomas. You said the TD casts you have sold lack some of the details. You said the same thing about the SL casts, so explain how I am pathetic.

Thomas, I never said you lied. I said I did not see it. The information YOU provided was poor. No one saw the X there. Again, I am the only one who called you on it.

It's funny how you attack the TM owners with such zeal. You honestly do. You say they show the detail and you turn around and argue it, trying to prove them wrong. How is that different what you say I do? You lack the evidence to prove them wrong, so that lumps you into the same boat as myself.

Thomas, you are the one who is trying to give yourself provenance. You've done it before. You tried to rope Brian in and he refuted your claims. I forget which mask it was, but you know the story better than I do.

Thomas, here is my problem with you and the SL markings. You examine these things down to macro details. I have said this before. Now I will say I doubt you. I doubt what you say about having the grill marks always in the SL. YOU would NOT miss such a detail. Never. I am not giving you any more credit than you think. I am telling you how you blow these things up. The grill in the SL you showed at the angle you showed it is BLATANTLY obvious. How could you miss that for TWO YEARS? Two years of examining the helmet and you missed that detail? Really? Okay, if you say you did, I will accept it, but I am ALLOWED to doubt it.

Look, I am not attacking your integrity. I have been wrong in the past and I wear my bagdes of mistake proudly. It makes me learn. Hubris is never a bad thing, Thomas.

Thomas, you start this crap every single time and then go on the defensive, writing your little Vader novellas. No one reads this stuff, man. I know I am not alone in saying this, but as soon as you post your grainy photos, my brain shuts off. They show NOTHING.

You asked how you were wrong in this case, I am going to tell you. The CLEAR images the TM owners have shared with us here CLEARLY show that the TM shares traits with the Tantive ANH helmet. These were not grainy, distorted screen caps. These were very good, hi res pics. The ONLY time you have posted such pics was when you were showing off the paint drips on the sides of the TD trying to prove something.

You say you admit you were wrong before. I've never seen it. Not when it comes to Vader. Not when it comes to troopers. You've never said you guessed so and so was the case. You have stated it as empirical fact. You have a loooooooooooong history of this.

Thomas, I am going to state this as clearly as I can so you can understand it. I have nothing personal against you. The ONLY one who has put your integrity into question is YOU. Those were your words that were quoted. It is YOUR actions in removing images that gives people pause to think you are obscuring where you have been wrong. I despise your internet persona. Your drive to always be right. That said, that is likely not you in reality. I love the insults you hurl my way, making things personal. The thing is, they are words there, Cowboy. I take them with a grain of salt. I've been called much worse.

As to Carsten's images...here is why I take them as what they are. They are CLEAR. Hard to argue with a clear image. Blurry screen caps can be argued to death...over and over and over. Don't debate how he shows an imaged and compares it to blurry screen caps, man. That is your MO as well.

 

[SithLord]

And it isn't just the right cheek that I can go through this exercise on accuracy, but also the left cheek.

Here again is the Tantive IV mask, left cheek, and I've boxed the area of interest. Can anyone even describe what this detail is? Can they show it at high resolution using their oh-so-authentic masks? Well with the SL ANH I can, just as I have done with the rabbit ears on the right cheek. Just as I have done with the paint detail on the right cheek (the light versus dark areas).

And this detail isn't in the Corbis images, by then it was painted over.

So? You want to prove me wrong? Go right ahead...I'm showing this Tantive IV image so let's see what you come up with. I've given you the head start...and the clue.

And obviously I already have the detail at high resolution on the SL or I wouldn't have brought it up.

So? Anyone? Bring forth your authentic castings.....

The detail here cannot be described in terms of camera angle or lighting or how many feet away the camera is. It simply is there. As the mask changes orientation, it is still visible. So any argument about angle or distance or lighting is moot. Watch the scene. What as Vader turns his head. The detail is there. Find a still image with that detail. It is clearly there if that image is old enough. And then get on with it. Show me that detail on your authentic casting, anyone. And I will show it to you on the SL ANH.

I don't need to talk about anyone else' casting, I just will talk about the SL ANH and what makes it authentic. And what makes something that came from a mold taken off the original ANH should have if that original ANH had the original screen paint at the time it was molded. I offer this screen capture as a starting point. So? Judge me based on that why don't you?

 

[SithLord]

Thomas....you are amazing. I am not a TM owner. LOL...too funny. You really are letting this anger you for no reason what so ever. I am not making up the doctored up casting thing, Thomas. You said the TD casts you have sold lack some of the details. You said the same thing about the SL casts, so explain how I am pathetic.

Wrong again. Go back and read what I posted. It is there for everyone to see. I said the third pull was cleaned up and it not representative given the mold had shrunken by then. So? Where do I state that for all the pulls, Qui? Read for once.

Thomas, I never said you lied. I said I did not see it.

You have no basis for saying that I didn't see it because you don't have the casting in front of you. Therefore given no basis the only conclusion one could make about me saying that the detail is there but you maintain that it is not is that if I were lying. So don't try to put paint a rosy picture about your accusations when they are clear as day.

The information YOU provided was poor. No one saw the X there. Again, I am the only one who called you on it.

You call me on something with what basis? With what evidence to the contrary of what I clearly show is a remnant of the grill pattern Qui? I explained clearly why I had stated it didn't have the grill originally. I stated the dates on which I made the post and the date on which I received the casting. So? Two days. What more do you want? Was that information to poor for you Qui? You are hopeless.

It's funny how you attack the TM owners with such zeal. You honestly do. You say they show the detail and you turn around and argue it, trying to prove them wrong. How is that different what you say I do? You lack the evidence to prove them wrong, so that lumps you into the same boat as myself.

No, I present the TD or SL and then they approach me with questions about what I say I think about the castings and then they invariably bring up the TM. That is NOT ATTACKING TM OWNERS QUI. That is defending what I know about my own castings. They are free to offer whatever they can about their own castings. That is where you are wrong.

I showed you evidence of the grill remnant but whenever I show you are wrong you ignore it and keep going on and on about how wrong I am. You are hopeless.

Thomas, you are the one who is trying to give yourself provenance. You've done it before. You tried to rope Brian in and he refuted your claims. I forget which mask it was, but you know the story better than I do.

Wrong again Qui. I explained even here how Brian was absolutely sure that the TD was cast from the third or fourth original ANH mask and I've always disagreed when I could have taken the easy route and say oh yes my mask is so rare it is the only one on the planet that came from another ANH original apart from the screen mask. But I don't. So there you go again accusing me of "roping in" Brian. WTF does that mean anyway? I am the one who refuted his claim about the source of the TD simply by stating that the grill on the TD is the same on as on the original screen mask so it would have to come from that.

This really shows just how ignorant you are and just how you will say anything to discredit me.

Thomas, here is my problem with you and the SL markings. You examine these things down to macro details. I have said this before. Now I will say I doubt you. I doubt what you say about having the grill marks always in the SL. YOU would NOT miss such a detail. Never. I am not giving you any more credit than you think. I am telling you how you blow these things up.

Oh really? I blow this up? Do you know how stupid you sound? Someone asked if the SL had the grill and I explained that the original ANH mask had it when the ILM mold was taken. I then show that the SL has a remnant of it, barely, and is covered up by a lot of filler material. But it is there and it is something I didn't mention since that was only about a year or so ago that I found it and why start a thread just on that point?

The grill in the SL you showed at the angle you showed it is BLATANTLY obvious. How could you miss that for TWO YEARS? Two years of examining the helmet and you missed that detail? Really? Okay, if you say you did, I will accept it, but I am ALLOWED to doubt it.

You seem to forget again what I wrote. I didn't discover it yesterday, Qui. Use your head for once.

Look, I am not attacking your integrity. I have been wrong in the past and I wear my bagdes of mistake proudly. It makes me learn. Hubris is never a bad thing, Thomas.

Don't say you are not attacking my integrity when clearly either you are or you are just not aware of what I am showing or you for whatever reason I will not guess.

Thomas, you start this crap every single time and then go on the defensive, writing your little Vader novellas.

No. Go back and read any thread I've started about the TD or SL and there will be the TM owners to throw in their 2 cents. I will always discuss the TD or SL in and of themselves and make a distinct effort to avoid comparisons. But, as always, the TM owners come in and try to make trouble and then bring up the TM. So? I will then address it just as I've done here.

Please point out to me here in this thread Qui where I initiate an attack on TM owners or on the TM.

No one reads this stuff, man.

That's funny, because there were over 10,000 views of this thread in just 34 days, Qui. :lol

And clearly you read it since you keep posting here about it. :rolleyes

So again, your usual one-liners that mean nothing with no basis to them.

I know I am not alone in saying this, but as soon as you post your grainy photos, my brain shuts off. They show NOTHING.

Then why bother posting Qui if you don't like them? Honestly look at yourself. If they really bother you so much then offer something substantive to counter them otherwise just find another thread to waste your time in. But this is always a continuous personal attack by you on myself WITH NO BASIS.

You asked how you were wrong in this case, I am going to tell you. The CLEAR images the TM owners have shared with us here CLEARLY show that the TM shares traits with the Tantive ANH helmet. These were not grainy, distorted screen caps. These were very good, hi res pics.

And I showed how Carsten's interpretation of his hi res pic was wrong.

The ONLY time you have posted such pics was when you were showing off the paint drips on the sides of the TD trying to prove something.

Qui, go back and look at the images and comparisons I've posted in this thread and tell me that I don't show high resolution. You should really hear yourself.

You say you admit you were wrong before. I've never seen it. Not when it comes to Vader. Not when it comes to troopers. You've never said you guessed so and so was the case. You have stated it as empirical fact. You have a loooooooooooong history of this.

Why does that upset you so much Qui? I was wrong about AA in that he claimed to have sculpted the original TK helmet. Brian saw a clay sculpt in a hallway at Elstree studios and didn't know who sculpted it. He had assumed that he would do something like that. So for quite some time he agreed that it would probably have been Andrew. So? Even he didn't know for a time. We proceed on assumptions and based on what we hear from reasonable sources. Andrew lied about that and he misled me and many others. So? Should I apologize for being misled by Andrew? Should I apologize and say I am wrong for falling for his lie? I was wrong. But I was right about how the cases would proceed. It went to England and he is still selling helmets. So? We haven't yet seen the original molds, as Andrew still hasn't had to turn them over to Lucasfilm. So? We still don't know what he has for the helmets, regardless of whatever I argued for their accuracy at the time. But arguing for accuracy of what I saw in front of my face, of teeth gaps that had indentations indentical to those of an original TIE helmet....I discussed those things Qui. But you paint me just as an AA supporter when you fail to recall exactly how those discussions went.

And you seem not to recall the Biblical moment when at the conclusion of one of the last major SDS threads that I said I was wrong about Andrew sculpting the TK helmet. But it wasn't like I was pushing for that either, I was simply going by what I saw was authentic in the TK stunt helmet.

So? Why do you have such a personal vendetta? Hmmm? And about what? I don't say I am wrong? If I thought the center ridge was made in clay separately and then added on the Vader dome, and then Brian comes along and says that it wasn't done that way, you are mistaken. Then I have been corrected and I mistook what I thought I heard Brian say. Then I was wrong. So? The TM owners jump on things like that to portray me as:

1. Untrustworthy.

2. Unknowledgeable.

3. Tending to distort facts: ie: lie.

4. Tending to only present my own castings in the best possible light while at the same time denigrating anything else.

I stand behind everything I try to discuss or interpret or explain on this or any other forum and I try to do so fairly, reasonably and without resorting to personal attacks. But I consistently do not get the same measure of attention to cordiality in return it seems.

Thomas, I am going to state this as clearly as I can so you can understand it. I have nothing personal against you.

Everything you write and the behavior you show and the amount of effort you go through giving great attention in particular to me and this thread indicates otherwise. Just as whenever I try at other times to present something in some way about Vader in a serious discussion, you will throw your two cents in just as you always do. Just to say I am wrong or just to accuse me of something. That is all you do, Qui, and your posts in this thread and in every other thread I try to make a contribution show that clearly.

The ONLY one who has put your integrity into question is YOU. Those were your words that were quoted. It is YOUR actions in removing images that gives people pause to think you are obscuring where you have been wrong.

I remove images if I want to. But I can put them all back if you want them. Just let me know. If my image host gets too full and too slow in loading pages, then I have to dump images. But if I ever do remove images, it is long after the thread has since been active or of interest. Unless you think, for some reason, that my comparisons are worth keeping in the threads, the many threads you've argued against me that my comparisons are worthless. Doesn't it seem contradictory then that you would pine about the images going missing if you detest them so much? You are a real piece of work. A mess of logical inconsistencies.

I despise your internet persona. Your drive to always be right.

And that is what this is all about, Qui. That is exactly why you post the way you do and address me the way you do. You've answered my question, thanks.

I try to be accurate. I try to back up what I say if I think I know something or if I know something. I try to contribute as best I can. But I get flack from idiots like you.

Why do I have to explain myself to someone like you? Do you recall for example when I stated at the end of my account of why I thought the TD ANH was early that if someone came along with a father of the TM with all those features I went through plus the neck extension that I would be proven "WRONG, WRONG, WRONG"....that was an exact quote Qui but you conveniently ignore that, just as you always conveniently ignore what I actually post and instead paint some kind of picture of intentional neglect, misinformation, and deception on my part. All of it baseless, all of it personal, and all of it without any attempt to show something substantive as a counter argument and instead the same lame blather.

That said, that is likely not you in reality. I love the insults you hurl my way, making things personal. The thing is, they are words there, Cowboy. I take them with a grain of salt. I've been called much worse.

You can avoid any confrontation with words if you like simply by being reasonable. Why is it that we always argue Qui? Ask yourself that. I have nothing personal against you. But you clearly have something personal against me. It is you that needs to work on yourself and how you relate to others, not me.

As to Carsten's images...here is why I take them as what they are. They are CLEAR. Hard to argue with a clear image. Blurry screen caps can be argued to death...over and over and over. Don't debate how he shows an imaged and compares it to blurry screen caps, man. That is your MO as well.

These images of the same detail on my TM casting clearly resolve more than what Carsten shows. So get some glasses.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Thomas, I would like to ask one question of you. When, in ANY of my posts did I call you stupid, ignorant or any of the tripe you are throwing my way? Explain to me why you are TRYING to make this personal. I am not going to cry to the net nanny and say you are insulting me, but I want you to explain WHY you are attacking me personally. Quote me calling you stupid, ignorant, a liar or any of that ilk.

Again, I will state for you that any evidence I have seen regarding your helmets has come from you, so if the fault is anywhere, it is in your presentation.

In regards to the views, people watch this like a train wreck to see what you will do to dig your way out of a mistake you may have made in the past. That is why this is a popular thread. It has nothing to do with your grainy images.

Thomas, I have to state again, I have nothing personal against you. I haven't called you a psycho. I have said that you have stepped in it a few times and I wait for you to attempt to dig yourself out. I will try and explain why your attitude upsets me. Please follow along, it will be clear and not a single insult. Please try and maintain civility.

You backhandedly malign other castings to bolster your own. There is no room for you to argue this. It is a fact. This thread is riddled with it. You have backed a liar and a thief who tried to make his buck off of Liz Moore's work. Hell, you probably think he is still right. That part is supposition on my part. Everything you see that is not something you have put your hands on is worse than your items, in your opinion. You haven't a kind word for a casting that is not yours. There is a litany of proof behind my statement and anyone can sign up to the Den to see your behavior. You simply cannot just let the hobby be fun. You have to have the best. You are a bully. You beat people into submission with unclear, grainy pictures until people stop responding. You then see this as a win. Evidence, no matter how poor, does not make you a winner in a debate. It just means you bored people to sleep.

Thomas, I do not like bullies. People do not tend to like them at all. What you do is bullying. When someone dares to disagree with you, you make it more personal. Disagreement does not make you a liar. It just means we disagree. Why you take this so personally over a piece of fiberglass is beyond me.

Explain to me the need to have your items be top of the pops, if you can. That is what this all is....an ePeen measuring contest. I do not stalk you in every thread if I think you are right. Sadly, you have yet to offer up clear proof to your rightness. This is not only my opinion, Thomas. You talk about Gino, but you are worse. Far and away worse than Gino. He merely states his knowledge and you can take it or leave it as you choose. You bludgeon all of us to death. Look back at how many times you have posted the same things.

I'm sorry you are all hurt and tense over the things that I and others have said. It is our perceptions of your behavior. My things are my perception. Pete's are his and Mac's are his.

Thomas, if everyone says the sky is blue...guess what? The sky is blue.

 

[SithLord]

Just in case things here get particularly ugly :confused here's a larger version of the lineage....after all that's what I thought the topic was here for a time. :confused

 

[SithLord]

You backhandedly malign other castings to bolster your own. There is no room for you to argue this. It is a fact. This thread is riddled with it. You have backed a liar and a thief who tried to make his buck off of Liz Moore's work. Hell, you probably think he is still right. That part is supposition on my part.

Well that's an incorrect supposition. You must think I am stupid to think that.

Everything you see that is not something you have put your hands on is worse than your items, in your opinion. You haven't a kind word for a casting that is not yours. There is a litany of proof behind my statement and anyone can sign up to the Den to see your behavior.

Do you want me to quote every time in this thread I've complimented the TM in some way?

You simply cannot just let the hobby be fun. You have to have the best. You are a bully. You beat people into submission with unclear, grainy pictures until people stop responding. You then see this as a win. Evidence, no matter how poor, does not make you a winner in a debate. It just means you bored people to sleep.

Well sorry if you see it that way. You have every opportunity to provide images to the contrary. So if I show evidence and back up what I say, then I am a bully. Nice logic.

Thomas, I do not like bullies. People do not tend to like them at all. What you do is bullying. When someone dares to disagree with you, you make it more personal. Disagreement does not make you a liar. It just means we disagree. Why you take this so personally over a piece of fiberglass is beyond me.

And you are baiting me in this thread. Now you are accusing me of being a bully.

Explain to me the need to have your items be top of the pops, if you can. That is what this all is....an ePeen measuring contest.

I don't, but I've been asked why I put the TD where it is in the lineage. So I tried to explain that but then get flack from you know who. Same with the SL ANH. Someone says it doesn't have detail or accuracy of the screen ANH helmet. So? I'll show that it does. I am simply responding to comments made, Qui, I'm not the initiator.

I do not stalk you in every thread if I think you are right.

Well you never think I am right. So here you are again.

Sadly, you have yet to offer up clear proof to your rightness. This is not only my opinion, Thomas. You talk about Gino, but you are worse. Far and away worse than Gino. He merely states his knowledge and you can take it or leave it as you choose. You bludgeon all of us to death. Look back at how many times you have posted the same things.

Did I talk about Gino here? You brought up your good friend, and you are here because he can't be.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

I brought up Gino as an example. We are acquaintances. He can be here if he so chooses.

I also thought, and still think, you are wrong with your placement of the TD. I'm not alone, I am just the one to say so.

Explain to me how I am baiting you, Thomas. Is questioning your tree baiting? If so, then I suppose I am baiting you. Sorry you do not have thicker skin when it comes to your helmets. You are not the initiator of the doubts about your helmets, you just take it to a personal level attacking anyone who does not kowtow to you.

I am still waiting for you to show where I personally attacked you Thomas. I have said nothing to you in this, or any thread, that I would not say directly to your face. I just want to hear your explanation for the insults, because it still seems like they are just there because I disagree.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

That X pattern straight on doesn't resemble the shape of the grill. It did in the other picture, but that was taken slightly from above, so will make it appear like a narrower angle. If the mark is a perfect straight legged X, then it is not a grill imprint and if that is the only place it is clear, then I'm not sold. Looks more like filler being scraped level from the teeth towards the middle creating these X patterns. I've seen that before when sculpting.

Another thing... poor the sorry fool who had to clean up that grill if filler was added like that to cover the whole thing. Easier to just remove the grill and do it that way. As a comparison, the UK mold style wasn't filled level, hiding the grill, so would be much easier to remove.

Carsten, you show that detail, so how can I not show that detail in a comparison? How can I not correct what you show? Why bother then? You opened the playing field for that detail. If TM said you can show that specific detail then please let me know. If he did then great, then I'll show it on my TM as well. I'm not playing a game, I am responding to your incorrect analysis with proof.

So, because I've gotten permission... then you've suddenly automatically gotten permission too? Seriously, where the hell is the logic in that! Well, you posting pictures of your SL, then you've given me permission to post all the SL pictures I have, is that how it works for you, 'cause then I can easily play your game.

And your proof, with the pictures you post is a joke. I can equally say your analysis in incorrect and basically, that's what I'm doing, and I'm showing better proof than you, yadda, yadda, yadda - I'm better than you nonsense you resort to. Sad to say, you have no clue what the TD has under its paint and if it turns out its rabbit ears are like the TMs, then I'm gonna seriously ****ing CRY because of all the **** you put us through, but if it is exactly like the SL, then I'll concede that the TM is different, but not after a repaint of the original, 'cause it is already proven without a doubt that the TM and TD are related to the same lineage.

The father of the TM would not prove **** about the TD, silly man. Stripping the TD or if a brother to the TD is found will prove something about the TD and it's relation to the TM. Your argument is so left field.

And I've just checked and couldn't find the TM being brought up in comparison argument until YOU brought it up in post 241 - http://www.therpf.com/showpost.php?p=1209508&postcount=241 - in fact, the whole current discussion about the TM started with you using the wrong picture for the TM original, commented on by me in post 255 - http://www.therpf.com/showpost.php?p=1212019&postcount=255.

I thought we were having an adult discussion, but I guess you can only belittle and insult me. Just because I'm not seeing things your way, doesn't mean I'm wrong. Also doesn't mean you are wrong. Just means there are more ways than one to interpret these details. We can continue getting personal or angry because the other doesn't see things the way we see them... or we can be constructive and acknowledge that details speaks more than one language.

In fact, I think I should just about quit this discussion right now, 'cause this debate is an absolute disservice to any of these helmets being discussed here. And anyone claiming they have a perfect representation of the Tantive ANH is lying. I've seen too much to buy into "sales" talk and posturing. And then we wouldn't have these ridiculous discussions about small freaking details, that are open to interpretation. I know I've said this before about leaving the thread... but tell me this... is this current progression really constructive in any way?

 

[SithLord]

So, because I've gotten permission... then you've suddenly automatically gotten permission too? Seriously, where the hell is the logic in that! Well, you posting pictures of your SL, then you've given me permission to post all the SL pictures I have, is that how it works for you, 'cause then I can easily play your game.

Go ahead, post any high resolution images of the SAME DETAIL I POSTED of the SL ANH. Go ahead! I have a TM ESB mask. I've studied it. And if you are going to post something that makes no sense, I will show you what it is supposed to look like and how it relates to the original condition of the original mask. I said to Tom I wouldn't post images, but what choice have you left me?

And your proof, with the pictures you post is a joke. I can equally say your analysis in incorrect and basically, that's what I'm doing, and I'm showing better proof than you, yadda, yadda, yadda - I'm better than you nonsense you resort to.

Then do it. It isn't just that I say that your analysis is incorrect, Carsten, I show why it is incorrect and then I go on to show that the SL has the detail to the right of the scar that is on the original mask before the repaint. If you can show me otherwise I invite you too. I'm not trying to be snarky or an egoist or anything like that, I'm simply showing what I think is correct based on my own observations. If I'm proven wrong then I welcome the lesson because my main interest is to learn about these castings. Being right or wrong isn't the point, but rather learning about how these are related to the original.

Sad to say, you have no clue what the TD has under its paint and if it turns out its rabbit ears are like the TMs, then I'm gonna seriously ****ing CRY because of all the **** you put us through, but if it is exactly like the SL, then I'll concede that the TM is different, but not after a repaint of the original, 'cause it is already proven without a doubt that the TM and TD are related to the same lineage.

It turns out that the TD ANH seems to be exactly like the SL ANH. And I have proof as well the TM matches more the Corbis photos than earlier. But I can't show it. :lol

Here's more evidence that the SL and TD are the same...I did some daylight shots today of the right cheek, and found that the way the light reflects off the surface of the TD produces the same pattern as seen on the original mask and on the SL, showing that the area just to the right of the scar is identical. I also confirmed that there is a scar line on the TD just like the one on the SL, along with the little bits that come off the line toward the bottom, I can also make them out on the TD. So that was a nice discovery and I'm actually surprised about that. If the TD was like the TM, then the profile of the reflection on that part of the cheek surface would be very different because the TM has a very complex topography there compared to the SL.

The father of the TM would not prove **** about the TD, silly man. Stripping the TD or if a brother to the TD is found will prove something about the TD and it's relation to the TM. Your argument is so left field.

No it isn't, Carsten. The father of the TM will be more like the TD in some ways, but in other ways uniquely similar to the TM. It will be the version of the mask prior to the slight alterations to the eyebrows of the TM, for example, and also if it has the neck extension, it will provide a view of something closer to the template, if not the template, for the ESB masks. It will tell us a lot about both the TD and TM.

And I've just checked and couldn't find the TM being brought up in comparison argument until YOU brought it up in post 241 - http://www.therpf.com/showpost.php?p=1209508&postcount=241 - in fact, the whole current discussion about the TM started with you using the wrong picture for the TM original, commented on by me in post 255 - http://www.therpf.com/showpost.php?p=1212019&postcount=255.

Well, that was based on Mac attacking me personally yet again and that was in relation to the big TD vs TM thread ok? He brought it up. I wouldn't have mentioned the example of what I discussed in that thread to have to defend myself yet again against his nonsense.

But we didn't get into TM details until you were the one that started arguing about the TM being ANH...so that's how it all started.

So don't put it on me.

I thought we were having an adult discussion, but I guess you can only belittle and insult me. Just because I'm not seeing things your way, doesn't mean I'm wrong. Also doesn't mean you are wrong. Just means there are more ways than one to interpret these details. We can continue getting personal or angry because the other doesn't see things the way we see them... or we can be constructive and acknowledge that details speaks more than one language.

Agreed. But then lets deal with details.

In fact, I think I should just about quit this discussion right now, 'cause this debate is an absolute disservice to any of these helmets being discussed here. And anyone claiming they have a perfect representation of the Tantive ANH is lying. I've seen too much to buy into "sales" talk and posturing. And then we wouldn't have these ridiculous discussions about small freaking details, that are open to interpretation. I know I've said this before about leaving the thread... but tell me this... is this current progression really constructive in any way?

Well nothing is perfect but I've tried to show why the SL is at least for me the closest to the original ANH. For me at least yes because it has forced me to re-examine a lot of things about the TD vs SL and I've learned some new things. Whether others care about that or not isn't important to me because for me what is important is to learn more about these castings.

I'm still waiting on the top cheek detail, the twin points on the side of the nose, the twin points on the lower cheek edge, and the detail on the left front cheek face. I offer images of detail that the SL has in relation to the original ANH but I see no one, especially you and the other TM owners, offering anything to show me that it has those things. So on the one hand you contend the TM is exactly like the Tantive IV original, and yet when it comes down to it you won't back that up by showing me the same details I show of the SL ANH.

 

[SithLord]

Problems I see with your tree:

1. You have the DJ ANH, TD ANH and TM ESB coming off the same mold? Same branch?

The DJ ANH and SL ANH are brothers and so it belongs with the MP and SL. That really goes to show how far off you are in terms of knowing the relationship between these castings. Since when did the TD and DJ share a lineage?

2. And what, the DJ, TD, TM, VP, 20th C are all the same generation? Not by a long shot.

3. And you have nothing coming from an ESB original? What about the 20th C line? That doesn't come from ANH, Carsten.

4. What makes the Christie's and TM related to the same mold?

5. You are putting the 20th C at the same generation as the TM? It isn't. That would be like saying the 20th C is the same generation as the original ESB. Same goes for the VP.

6. The BM ROTJ came from an ANH mold? Come on. Did Brian say that? So then we are supposed to believe that Brian's mask is from ANH and the other original ROTJ masks are not? That's what your tree shows, it shows that Brian's helmet isn't original. And he says it is original ROTJ.

7. Don Post didn't use the ILM mold, that has always stayed at ILM. So that's also incorrect.

8. And you or someone questioned me about the source of information to say whether the ILM mold was made by Rick Baker yet you use the information I provided in your tree?


So your entire line off the UK mold is based on what? Tabs? :rolleyes That is like saying that reptiles and birds belong in the same part of the tree because they both have claws. A tree is supposed to show generation based on time, and yours doesn't show that, it is simply a grouping based on tabs versus no tabs. Your tree doesn't help us understand the generational relationships, it is merely categorizing helmets, but that isn't what a tree is for. A tree identifies lineage based on generation, so you are missing the point of what a tree is supposed to be.

To say for example that the 20th C is from an ANH mold lineage makes no sense. It is an oversimplified categorization based on tabs/no tabs.

I was the one that distinguished the UK vs US lineages based on the DJ/SL/MP and the TM/TD/VP....the lineage you are using for your tree. But that doesn't mean that everything comes from one mold and I know you know that but then why make a tree that will only confuse people and make them think they all come from the same mold?

Since you have so much confidence in the UK vs US mold idea let me ask you this, do you even know where the US mold was made?

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Still waiting, Thomas.

 

[SithLord]

For those guys who were coming down on me about my initial post about the grill on the SL, MAYBE YOU SHOULD READ FURTHER IN THE SAME THREAD.

Huh Qui? This really goes to show how biased you are in your attacks on me.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Wow, you are grasping at straws here, Thomas. I want you to explain why you've decided to openly insult me like you have and you post about screens being filled in? All that post shows is that you CAN and HAVE been wrong before. It doesn't show why you felt the need to be insulting because I dared to disagree with you. It doesn't explain how you missed something that can be so clearly seen in the pics you have posted either.

You are ducking the issue at hand, and it seems Mac was right. When you get backed into a corner, you start with the personal insults.

 

[SithLord]

Explain to me how I am baiting you, Thomas. Is questioning your tree baiting? If so, then I suppose I am baiting you. Sorry you do not have thicker skin when it comes to your helmets. You are not the initiator of the doubts about your helmets, you just take it to a personal level attacking anyone who does not kowtow to you.

I am still waiting for you to show where I personally attacked you Thomas. I have said nothing to you in this, or any thread, that I would not say directly to your face. I just want to hear your explanation for the insults, because it still seems like they are just there because I disagree.

Because you know nothing about Vader casting authenticity. Yet you persist in saying I am wrong. Why? You have no stake in this. It is just personal for you. And you state that yourself!

You want the quotes? Here you go!

Post #56

Thomas, I want to preface my comment by saying we have all been over this before on the Den, and I mean no offense.

That said, aren't you putting the TD a bit higher on the list than it should be? I mean, cut down tusks and various cracks that do not match up with anything else.

The thing is, this is all opinion. Some of it is correct, but the TD thing...well, you have been pushing that particular face for a while.

Edit: RBJ also asked the same question, but last I was there, no "consensus" was reached upon the TD.

Post #59

Lineage is a question of accuracy. Claims were made that did not hold water regarding the TD.

You are in no position to judge anything about the TD. But you find the need to comment about what I've presented in the past about it.

Post#104

So, the consensus is that the SPFX helmet came from the GH ROTJ recast. If that is the case, Thomas' tree is incorrect as well. See, the problem with this entire thread is it is one person's opinion, and frankly, there is a bias involved in some of these tree postings. Honestly, Carsten's tree feels closer.

You try to discount my tree as being incorrect based on something that I myself determined about the later SPFX castings which you misunderstood. You identify bias in terms of the tree being just my opinion, yet you praise Carsten's tree....on what basis? Why does it "FEEL CLOSER"?

You give no reason, you give no account of why his tree is "closer". You simply reject my efforts out of hand. That shows your bias.

Post#113

My other point about Phil and his stuff was that you have it coming off of the 20th C while others say it was a recast of the RotJ piece. My God, man, is it so hard to take a little bit of criticism? I am not the only one who feels this way. THIS is another reason I said it is one man's opinion.

See, you are put off that I point out the flaw in your argument to say my tree is inaccurate. You say "others say it was recast of the ROTJ piece". I WAS THE ONE THAT SAID THAT. But you forget and that's how silly your point is in regard to trying to use that to discount my tree. Then of course you keep saying "I'm not the only one that thinks this". Typical. If I show you are wrong then you come back and say "oh everyone else agrees with me". Well, where have we seen that kind of ploy used, hmmm? Oh, everyone agrees with me. Ya right, Qui.

Post #145

Thanks for that, Paul. That is kind of the point I was driving at...well, pretty much all of the points I was driving at. The issue with this tree idea is that one person's tree will be pushed around as gospel, and no offense to Thomas, if RR pushes it to the 501st guys, they will believe it to be so. Costumers are a funny lot sometimes.

Keep at it though, Thomas and Carsten. I am watching how this plays out with interest. Good job, guys.

Funny how that sounds just like Gino's post #28

Until then, just be advised not to take any list like this as gospel (and that would include my own list if/whenever that gets made).

Yet neither you nor he offer anything specific in regard to how the tree can be improved, you just attack my "opinion" as unreliable, as just an opinion, as inaccurate. The implication is there, the motive is clear.

And it is personal.

Post#159

I am not for holding back info. Some do, and that is their business. Gospel is not just about the Bible, thanks for bringing religion into the thread. Another definition of gospel is something regarded as true and implicitly believed. People will accept this list, which I see has the TD back in it, as an axiom, or gospel, because one person took the time to foist his opinion on the masses.

No mention is given to the opinion of all of these helmets, original film helmets, coming from the same mold. Wouldn't that make a lot of this tree false?

As far as the costumer thing going, you are the one taking it to the SL, who I believe means Sith Legion. Are they not a costuming group? If they are not, then my apoligies for bringing it up in my ignorance.

Thomas, I know I am upsetting you, and frankly, that is no longer my intention. That was so last year. My intention is to make sure people know that this is just YOUR opinion of how a tree of Vader helmets should look. You can protest that it is not going to be taken that way, but we both know it is. If you were truly wanting people to NOT accept this is the all seeing truth, you would put caveats all over this thing. Don't shift this back on me. You are the one making the list, and of course, you should expect it to be scrutinized. It's a shame that only Carsten and I seem to be questioning your list. (I say seem, because I cannot speak for Carsten, only myself.) If I took the time to do what you are doing, I would expect it to be picked apart and take no offense in people doing it.

That said, keep up the work. It is still interesting information for members here who love Vader and cannot be bothered to join the Den.

And the, Qui, you never answered MY QUESTIONS:

Post#161

Was there a problem with the placement of any of the other helmets?

If you have a problem with the TD just say so or ask instead of just saying the entire tree is one person's opinion. It isn't.

Is it just my opinion that the 20th Century or DS 20th Century came from an ESB?

Is it my opinion that the GH ANH came from Don Post studios?

Is it my opinion that the JB V2 is a 20th Century mask and GH dome?

Is it my opinion that the CKing came from a DP Deluxe?

Is it my opinion that the ICPhysics comes from a Rubies FG?

Is it my opinion that the Brian Muir ROTJ is an original?

Is it my opinion that the DJ ANH came from the Rick Baker mold?

Is it my opinion that the Celtic touch came from a 20th Century?

Is it my opinion that the Sith Planet is a modified Fyberdyne?

Is it my opinion that the VMO1 came from a source similar to that of the GH?

Is it my opinion that the Elstree ROTJ is from the 20th Century?

Is the TM helmet lineage my opinion?

Is the relationship of the VP ANH with the TM my opinion?

There are some opinions I have but it is based not just on opinion but OBSERVATION AND STUDY. The ROTJ Pyre is from the Rick Baker mold. So I think is the MP. The newer SPFX helmets are from the GH ROTJ. The older from the 20th C mask/GH dome although that opinion isn't just my own.

And then funny enough after I posted that, Gino comes in with his Jeff W.-based lineage from which all fan helmets came from. :rolleyes Strange coincidence, huh? You lose the argument and then he has to step in.

You both echo the same thing, that the entire tree is just my opinion, and because my opinion cannot be trusted according to you, given my previous opinions or previous mistakes or previous inconsitencies, then therefore this tree cannot be trusted to be accurate, it cannot be considered valid and we should all ignore it and use Carsten's tree instead. Carsten's tree is the correct tree, the valid tree, the tree that is most accurate.....it JUST IS. IT JUST IS CORRECT BECAUSE CARSTEN'S OPINION IS THE CORRECT ONE.

That is what I call bias. You offer no explanation as to why Carsten's tree is better than mine, you simply say that it is just my opinion, but you do not apply the same criterion for accepting or rejecting Carsten's tree, you JUST ACCEPT HIS TREE BECAUSE IN YOUR WORDS IT FEELS CLOSER.

WTF? Feels closer? Give me a break. What criteria do you use to establish the accuracy of a tree, Qui? Opinion? What?

You failed to answer me when I asked you about the lineage points that I raised, and you just keep on going through this entire thread trying to discredit me.

Let's continue....

Post#187

This one takes place after I Gino...of course at that point you feel it necessary to step in again...even mentioning Gino....and trying to find a flaw in my argument that the ROTJ masks come from one mold, an argument I show with proof that discounts Gino's claim that the ROTJ helmets are all refurbished ESB.

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?

You say I am pushing the TD, you say I am on the slippery slope of "WRONGNESS".

READ MY POST #192 about why the TD is early.

Your personal attack continues in post #195

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.

All you do is insult my photos as being grainy, you refer to me as the almighty SithLord, you insult me by saying just because I bought a helmet doesn't mean I am an expert, then you say my mask was tampered with...with absolutely no basis!

Nothing you say is with any basis! You simply attack, and offer nothing to refute what I show, nothing to support what you say.

And this is always the case with you Qui. And it is always personal.

Your post# 205

Carsten, now yours seems like it has it cold. Good job! Keep it coming!

Uhhh.....so what exactly makes Carsten's tree "have it cold"????? Give me a break. Bias. You fail to point out one thing that is wrong with Carsten's tree, yet I've pointed out what is wrong. You simply accept his tree as perfect, and mine as flawed, with no reason and no explanation.

BIAS.

Your post#216:

Wow Thomas...you know what? You are the sole reason the fun gets sucked out of collecting. You keep showing the same things hoping against hope that we will all see what you see. When we do not, you get your underwear in a bunch and post MORE useless drivel which also shows nothing. Remember doing it over the Ainsworth stuff? I do. Have you admitted you were wrong there? I believe the rest of the collecting community has seen him for the fraud he is.

What are we supposed to see in your images? I don't see the image you have tried to highlight. I doubt if anyone looks closely, as you have begged us all to, they will see it either. It called being myopic. I will stress this again...you "examining castings" means doodly squat in the big picture because not one single person on the RPF knows what happened to the original mold, how many masks were cast from that mold, where those casts are nor where they were used. That is fact.

So what, I haven't spent $6000 on a helmet. So what, I have not given money to a person I despise just to "examine" his helmet. Have you bothered to strip the paint from the TD yet? Are you afraid of what you may or may not find?

I am done giving you any kind of acknowledgment in regards to anything other than owning some great castings. That doesn't make you an expert. What have you even crafted? I know you have offered castings, but do you know the intricacies of pulling from molds? I don't, which is why I ask questions and do not assume to be the know it all.

You cannot accept that you may not know anything. There is a hell of a lot I do not know, in regards to Vader. You know what though, I ask. I ask everyone. This is how knowledge is gained. I never presume to know it all. I will even readily admit that I do not know as much as you do about some of the things. I do know that you are TOO CLOSE to the TD to be objective about it. How long have you been trying to force its lineage, Thomas? How many threads have we seen where you drum it up, over and over and over...and are shot down equally as often by people with more knowledge than EITHER of us? Did you think to try it here and people would not remember?

As far as you measuring from photos, you are the one who said you could tell where something goes on any lineage tree via photos. How can you do that accurately? You cannot. Let's not get Mac in here to talk about lens distortion and "6 feet!"

Frankly, Carsten seems to have a more accurate tree.

You attack me about AA, you accuse me for being the sole reason there is no fun in collecting, you imply that I still haven't seen AA as the fraud he is, implying that I follow someone who lies to the community and thereby attack my integrity, you call me myopic, you say that me examining castings means didly squat and say it is a fact, then you insult the fact I spent over $6000 on a casting, then you say that owning nice castings doesn't make me an expert, then you say that I was shot down in my TD threads about its lineage...

and then, again, you say Carsten has a more accurate tree. BASED ON WHAT QUI?????

And the rest is just more attacking by you, more baiting, more trolling....and it is all personal because you offer nothing specific, no constructive arguments, no photographic evidence to back up your insults or your insinuations.

 

[SithLord]

Wow, you are grasping at straws here, Thomas. I want you to explain why you've decided to openly insult me like you have and you post about screens being filled in? All that post shows is that you CAN and HAVE been wrong before. It doesn't show why you felt the need to be insulting because I dared to disagree with you. It doesn't explain how you missed something that can be so clearly seen in the pics you have posted either.

You are ducking the issue at hand, and it seems Mac was right. When you get backed into a corner, you start with the personal insults.

No, it shows that you are just trying to discredit whatever I say based on a quote from a thread you didn't even read completely! It is fact, not an insult.

I clearly explained in the post that it COULD BE THERE AND I HAVE TO EXAMINE IT MORE.

But you use that as indication that I AM LYING ABOUT IT BEING THERE NOW.

YOU ARE THE ONE ATTACKING ME.

You disagree with me on what basis Qui? That I can't be trusted because of what I said in the past, which I show you to be just an attack on your part? You are the one grasping at straws.

I don't mind people disagreeing with me and I've said that many times. But provide something constructive, all you do is say I am wrong I am pushing the TD I am fabricating everything, I cannot be trusted. WTF?

WHY?

You offer nothing to show why?

 

[SithLord]

Wow, you are grasping at straws here, Thomas. I want you to explain why you've decided to openly insult me like you have and you post about screens being filled in? All that post shows is that you CAN and HAVE been wrong before. It doesn't show why you felt the need to be insulting because I dared to disagree with you. It doesn't explain how you missed something that can be so clearly seen in the pics you have posted either.

You are ducking the issue at hand, and it seems Mac was right. When you get backed into a corner, you start with the personal insults.

Your post #399

Thomas, one question is bugging me about the grill impression. You examine these things to macro detail the most minute little bump, but it took two years for you to notice grill impressions on the SL? That seems fishy, and this is probably why people are questioning you with SERIOUS doubt.

So far, the TM owners who HAVE posted have posted very clear pictures and not blown up to blurriness screen caps.

Now, you can address this in a civil manner, but at this point, you are just repeating the same things. Just explain how you have failed to "amend" your initial viewing of the "missing grill impressions" over the course of two years since you have had the SL. It's hard to believe since no minute detail, real or perceived by you, is missed.

So you jump on Mac's posting of the point I make in TPD thread about the SL WITHOUT READING FURTHER. YOU JUST FOLLOW MAC's LEAD WITHOUT THINKING FOR YOURSELF.

See this?

So everything you were arguing about me in relation to what Mac posted was negated by the simple fact that I explained it COULD BE THERE BUT I STILL NEED TO EXAMINE IT SINCE I JUST HAD THE CASTING FOR TWO DAYS QUI. You don't listen!

Your post #407:

Thomas, the problem with your information about the origins is that it is all second hand. Believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear. If all of the ILM masks have the same features - cast tabs, grillwork visible in the face - but yours does not, well that should give you pause.

Edit: This doesn't just apply to your information, it applies to most of it out there. We simply do not know and cannot tell by screen captures what is real and what is an artifact.

You didn't even know that the ILM MASKS DONT HAVE TABS. You are so full of BS. You just say oh my info is just second hand....to try to discount the provenance of the SL ANH.....WITH NO BASIS!!!!! JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO DISCOUNT IT.

Then you come up with this nonsense:

Post#416

Oops...should have said the UK mold.

As far as calm, the issue still remains with the grill in the SL. I'm sorry, but your picture doesn't show anything that anyone but you truly sees. I wasn't really trying to give you any more credit than you deserve. You take these images and nuances of casting flaws down to macro levels of photography. This is why my mind is boggled that you would miss so key a feature.

Here is my theory, and I could be way off base. The SL was doctored up before you received your copy. Some of the key things that others pointed out regarding the Tantive style helmets are not on your SL, but do apparently exist on the TM. Some of these features exist on the other UK helmets though, right?

So you come up with this lame theory BASED ON WHAT?????? You say the SL was doctored up? What do I show that indicates that to you QUI? BE SPECIFIC. Otherwise keep your theories to yourself.