ANH Hero DL-44 Discussion - Three ANH Greeblies Found

[Vanitas]

Are we absolutey sure the old post production shot is the same hero bracket? Or that there was only one? The knob and lack of dovetail is obvious but this has always seemed to me to have some of the same drag marks on the cradle and a striking patina

To borrow some images, both from past postings and the Pawn Stars blaster thread:

I think it's rather clear that the two mounts are radically different.

 

[Edraven99]

Having private photos is fine and dandy, Scott. It's perfectly fine for anyone to do, it's a code of sorts here as far as our morals go. But telling the community that you have them and don't/won't share is not fair to the community either. It's daunting and teasing in a way towards the many, many other people that deserve and badly want to see them with their own eyes to study.

Look at how many things have surfaced just from all of the people that have contributed to this one, single thread alone. It would not have happened without multiple minds looking at the same old pictures we've had for close to two decades at least, well beyond this thread. If it wasn't for sharing and collaboration, none of us would have realized what we have learned about this prop.
It took many years for anyone to even realize that the top-piece of the grill was the same section as the lower two, but in time, Pat kpax noticed it, realized it and made it public.

A good amount of us have worked on this prop over the years, even before us. It's never going to be understood unless people share their resources, thoughts, ideas, realizations etc..

All we have to work from as far as this prop goes, are photos.


-Carson

This is an incredibly myopic response to say the least.

To say it’s not beneficial to the community by confirming or clarifyng information is just false. So you’re saying that someone that has pertinent or firsthand knowledge but is bound by an NDA not to disclose specific details but is still willing to confirm whether people are on the wrong or right track isn’t beneficial?

Were you also one of those people who complained about Brandon not sharing more details of the V2 lightsaber prop and that he should have pulled out calipers for measurements and took it apart to see how it was put together because you are entitled to this information just because you “want it”?

 

[deadbolt]

Actually.. I'm starting to think the Cradle might be correct too, only the vertical portion of the mount is very wrong though. And it's visibly brazed onto the Cradle in the Pawn Stars photos.
The Pre-Pro and Post-Pro Hero mount matches perfectly in the original photos for sure in entirety, even the slightly offset square hole in the center of the mount, it offsets to the left a tad on the Hero's. Where as this vertical and crossbar clearly aren't correct, but possibly replaced for some odd reason??

I wonder if maybe the vertical on the Hero was also brazed on and maybe broke loose at some point? The Pawn Stars Cradle seems to match pretty well, but the new, brazed on vertical is obviously different and possibly filling/covering in the 'Under-Cut' on the top-side of the square-hole? Which clearly cuts into the bottom-side of the cradle in the center on the original Hero mount..
I think I can sort of make out the other two smaller Under-Cuts on the left and right side under the cradle, but slightly obscured by the new vertical section.

Any thoughts?


-Carson

 

[deadbolt]

This is an incredibly myopic response to say the least.

To say it’s not beneficial to the community by confirming or clarifyng information is just false. So you’re saying that someone that has pertinent or firsthand knowledge but is bound by an NDA not to disclose specific details but is still willing to confirm whether people are on the wrong or right track isn’t beneficial?

Were you also one of those people who complained about Brandon not sharing more details of the V2 lightsaber prop and that he should have pulled out calipers for measurements and took it apart to see how it was put together because you are entitled to this information just because you “want it”?

No I wasn't involved in the V2 saber discussion at all, however these photos were already leaked elsewhere before being posted here. It was only a matter of time that they would pop up on the RPF, so I don't think it would hurt the NDA situation much after that point..

I didn't mean people should break promises and such, my primary point was that dangling photos over members heads and the teasing aspect it causes doesn't seem very proper for the rest of the prop community. Claiming absolute proof of certain details without any peer confirmation, etc., despite being right about said details.
It's better to just not even mention that you have them at that point, especially since the lower quality video we've all seen was already public by that point.


-Carson

 

[kpax]

Are we absolutey sure the old post production shot is the same hero bracket? Or that there was only one? The knob and lack of dovetail is obvious but this has always seemed to me to have some of the same drag marks on the cradle and a striking patina

Are you talking about the Pawn shop bracket having the same drag marks as the HERO?

It doesn't really. Aside from the lack of dovetail, as my older comparison shows, the right side vertical has a kink in it vs the HERO and there is a very noticeable circular gouge to the left of the center knob caused by a plyers no doubt trying to tighten or loosen the knob at some point. Not on the Pawn version but can be seen pre and post.

 

[Edraven99]

No I wasn't involved in the V2 saber discussion at all, however these photos were already leaked elsewhere before being posted here. It was only a matter of time that they would pop up on the RPF, so I don't think it would hurt the NDA situation much after that point..

I didn't mean people should break promises and such, my primary point was that dangling photos over members heads and the teasing aspect it causes doesn't seem very proper for the rest of the prop community. Claiming absolute proof of certain details without any peer confirmation, etc., despite being right about said details.
It's better to just not even mention that you have them at that point, especially since the lower quality video we've all seen was already public by that point.


-Carson

Stating that he has access to these photos is the difference between “I have evidentiary information” and “in my opinion”.

There’s far too many people in this community that present opinions as “facts” without any substance to back up these claims.

I would think that in a thread such as this where it’s rife with theory and speculation that a little concrete fact would be welcomed and not dismissed as “teasing”.

 

[kpax]

This is an incredibly myopic response to say the least.

To say it’s not beneficial to the community by confirming or clarifyng information is just false. So you’re saying that someone that has pertinent or firsthand knowledge but is bound by an NDA not to disclose specific details but is still willing to confirm whether people are on the wrong or right track isn’t beneficial?

Were you also one of those people who complained about Brandon not sharing more details of the V2 lightsaber prop and that he should have pulled out calipers for measurements and took it apart to see how it was put together because you are entitled to this information just because you “want it”?

Lets not get too heated or confrontational now. This thread has been going for a LONG time and everyone has been very civil and gracious to date.,, mostly,,, ; )

I think Carson's point is that it can be very frustrating when a member says they have "better" images or proof that something is not correct and can't or wont share the evidence. I understand about NDAs. No problem. I honor such promises and agreements. Issue is that the one claiming they "know better" "can" be incorrect. Their interpretation may be wrong so other members want to check it out for themselves. If they can't, they really can't be sure. It has been the case a few times. Comes down to trust and the members history and experience. That is the frustration. Can't be helped sometimes so we carry on...

 

[kpax]

Stating that he has access to these photos is the difference between “I have evidentiary information” and “in my opinion”.

There’s far too many people in this community that present opinions as “facts” without any substance to back up these claims.

I would think that in a thread such as this where it’s rife with theory and speculation that a little concrete fact would be welcomed and not dismissed as “teasing”.

... who are these people... I want a list !

; )

 

[chubsANDdoggers]

kpax no repro cradle has a dovetail even remotely similar as this. Not Todd’s, FM and obviously not either of DEC..

 

[chubsANDdoggers]

Here is the cradle lined up with hero. But the center isn’t similar..

But it’s does have the flats in back which the hero does have as well..

 

[MastahBlastah]

Didn't Scott say that these aren't the pawn star blaster photos he's seen? So no issue here, right? Unless they belong to someone else? Either way, thanks for sharing Vanitas

 

[kpax]

Didn't Scott say that these aren't the pawn star blaster photos he's seen? So no issue here, right? Unless they belong to someone else? Either way, thanks for sharing Vanitas

… move along. Move along….

 

[thd9791]

Actually.. I'm starting to think the Cradle might be correct too, only the vertical portion of the mount is very wrong though. And it's visibly brazed onto the Cradle in the Pawn Stars photos.
The Pre-Pro and Post-Pro Hero mount matches perfectly in the original photos for sure in entirety, even the slightly offset square hole in the center of the mount, it offsets to the left a tad on the Hero's. Where as this vertical and crossbar clearly aren't correct, but possibly replaced for some odd reason??

I wonder if maybe the vertical on the Hero was also brazed on and maybe broke loose at some point? The Pawn Stars Cradle seems to match pretty well, but the new, brazed on vertical is obviously different and possibly filling/covering in the 'Under-Cut' on the top-side of the square-hole? Which clearly cuts into the bottom-side of the cradle in the center on the original Hero mount..
I think I can sort of make out the other two smaller Under-Cuts on the left and right side under the cradle, but slightly obscured by the new vertical section.

Any thoughts?


-Carson

Are you talking about the Pawn shop bracket having the same drag marks as the HERO?

It doesn't really. Aside from the lack of dovetail, as my older comparison shows, the right side vertical has a kink in it vs the HERO and there is a very noticeable circular gouge to the left of the center knob caused by a plyers no doubt trying to tighten or loosen the knob at some point. Not on the Pawn version but can be seen pre and post.

Thank you everyone for the confirmation. Not trying to re-hash old info, like Carson said thats what is striking to me. The vertical part is an awful repro to my eyes but the whole cradle.... very weirdly looks familiar.. I see a lot of the same scratches all over the place.

Actually - this is a dangerous thing to say - I see a couple of the same dings on the vertical posts. I'll tag them in a second. The bottom bevel is also crooked in a similar way. What if the original mount was broken and cracked, they fixed it and sanded/ground it smooth again, removing material and making it unrecognizable?

 

[thd9791]

They could have even re-blackened the mount afterwards, making a stupid brown patina to try and match the original.

 

[kpax]

kpax no repro cradle has a dovetail even remotely similar as this. Not Todd’s, FM and obviously not either of DEC..View attachment 1532114View attachment 1532115

This mount is similar to the MR mount but the MR center opening is smaller and lower and the crossbar offset is thicker on the MR.

 

[kpax]

Thank you everyone for the confirmation. Not trying to re-hash old info, like Carson said thats what is striking to me. The vertical part is an awful repro to my eyes but the whole cradle.... very weirdly looks familiar.. I see a lot of the same scratches all over the place.

Actually - this is a dangerous thing to say - I see a couple of the same dings on the vertical posts. I'll tag them in a second. The bottom bevel is also crooked in a similar way. What if the original mount was broken and cracked, they fixed it and sanded/ground it smooth again, removing material and making it unrecognizable?

Center opening is off besides the wonky right post.
Also the dovetail…

 

[chubsANDdoggers]

This mount is similar to the MR mount but the MR center opening is smaller and lower and the crossbar offset is thicker on the MR.

No it’s not similar to either the MR mounts in detail honestly. Similar as apple are to oranges but otherwise this PS mount is completely unique..

 

[thd9791]

Center opening is off besides the wonky right post.
Also the dovetail…

Yea - thats whats got me. This makes absolutely no sense. I was suggesting they sanded/ground almost the whole mount, it might explain the soft edges. Let me point out what I see in photoshop, I'm not very good

I also think it was Todd's costumes that pointed out a rectangular mount instead of a dovetail in the faded B&W picture, thanks to chubsANDdoggers you can see it in the diagonal one

 

[kpax]

No it’s not similar to either the MR mounts in detail honestly. Similar as apple are to oranges but otherwise this PS mount is completely unique..

Similar in the way it attaches to the crossbar.

 

[chubsANDdoggers]

Similar in the way it attaches to the crossbar.

No again not similar. Honestly..