Building The Death Star - PRODUCTION

One thing that the overlay pictures also show is that the trench is thinner then the replica... I know that you're oh so happy to notice that :eek

You're completely correct. I actually started the process of further reducing it a couple days ago.

I am actually GLAD to hear you notice that; here's why.

I'm running into MAJOR headaches with the current "go" at it (more on this in a moment), and am beginning to think I would have been better off just to leave well enough alone. After all, it was only off by ONE millimeter, and now I'm risking mucking things up just for 1mm!

But..

It was bugging me that it wasn't quite right, and now I'm very happy to hear validation that my assessment was correct.
 
Last edited:
So here's the headache I've created for myself.

To decrease the trench height yet again, this time I had to work off the lower dome (since I added 2mm styrene strips to the upper to form the notches/gaps).

I had to start by sanding off the paint that was there.

Well...

Little did I realize just how much paint I'd added! Due to all the layers of paint, and the soft styrene substrate (months ago I'd already done this with styrene strips on the lower dome; just not enough), I ended up rounding off the edge of the lower dome. So when laying the new strips, they would angle down and not be paralell with the upper dome.

Not only that, but the amount that it slopes down varies, such that the after paint removal, the overall trench height going around the circumference VARIES anywhere from 9mm up to 10.5mm

So no I'm needing to go in in with .5mm thick styrene with even thinner strips applied just to the very edge of the dome so that the main strip will lay flat, and at 8mm down from the upper dome.

I'm about 1/3 the way around now, and so far so good - I have an even 8mm gap where I'm finished (its 9mm in the photo above). But it has been a pain in the butt!
 
Last edited:
well, look at it like this

if there was ever a project where you needed to "leave it all on the table" this was it

beat the crap out of the 1mm that was bugging you...

when it's all said and done, at least you'll have a great story about what a pain in the ass that sphere with a gap in the middle was to build!
 
"leave it all on the table"

What does that mean? He should, or shouldn't, obsess over these details?
 
Yeah - one way or another, it'll get done and done properly. And once teh trench is at the correct 8mm height, the scale effect on the overall model just pops. Its like night and day, and just psychologically makes the whole thing look "bigger".

I'll keep fighting it. In the end, I'm not 100% confident the entirety of the lower dome edge will be exactly 8mm from the upper all the way around, or that it will all lay exactly flat/paralell to the upper edge. But I WILL keep at it until any variane (it at all) is visually imperceptible.
 
Going back to the strips I added to the upper dome to shorten the height and create the notches, remember I mentioned that the corresponding strips no longer exist on the original model. They have been lost.

Which of course suggests they were at one point ADDED, most likely after the entire construct was assembled (much like what I have done).

I wonder if this passage (from the Ralph McQuarrie page on imdb) lends insight as to why they did so:

For the original Star Wars, the special effects team had to come up with a believable size for the Death Star that would allow it to appear round in long shots, but still appear flat in close-ups, since these had to be created by using flat sections of model, placed on flat tables. McQuarrie ended up calculating that the Death Star was 92 miles in diameter, which makes it approximately 290 miles in circumference."


If the filmmakers had "mentally adjusted" the overall size of the fictional space station to make it much bigger than initially conceived, then it may make sense that they in turn reduced the height of the trench to make it smaller in relation to the overall globe (assuming that in the fictional world it would be the same size - 400' to 500' high) but in reality on the model smaller since the whole thing got bigger. Make sense?

I also seem to think that in the Rinzler book on the Making of Star Wars it is mentioned that at some point in production and for some reason they had to increase the fictional size of the space station. Might have been where they - in the book - were discussing the attack plan computer graphics.
 
Last edited:
"leave it all on the table"

What does that mean? He should, or shouldn't, obsess over these details?

it means he should make sure he's absolutely 100% looking at that thing when it's finished and thinking "damn... I did good"

not finished, looking at it and saying "damn... I should have fixed that"

yes, by all means... obsess away
 
If you haven't already bought those Rapidograph pens, there is a more common fine pen available at Michael's with an alleged 0.2 mm line width. Pretty fine, and only a few bucks.


-Mike
 
Rob, I have to agree that the smaller that trench, the more humongous this sucker will appear. It will add so much to the scale and I never thought about that until you mentioned it. :)

Dave
 
Rob, I have to agree that the smaller that trench, the more humongous this sucker will appear. It will add so much to the scale and I never thought about that until you mentioned it. :)

Dave

I'm about half way around bringing it down from the 9mm in the latest pic to 8mm.

At 8mm, it is just about dead right.

Pics later...
 
All right, butt-noses... Bear with me - a lot of pics and explaining to do... I'm currently working on bringing the trench down from 9mm to 8mm, but am wondeirng if 7mm may be even better.



Pretty much where I stand as of now. The overall gap is now set at 8mm (from the dish over to the right in the image)...
060709002.jpg


And a closer look...
0607090025.jpg


No, I did NOT cut off my finger in my work shop. This is what it would look like at 7mm
060709005.jpg


Same thing; cleaner look...
060709007.jpg


In this shot, it is 9mm at the far left, then a bit at 8mm, then at 7mm under my hand, then back to 8mm off to the right.
060709006.jpg


These two show looking down the gap if it were at 7mm
060709010.jpg


060709011.jpg


The next four shots are simply taken with a strip of plastic laid in making it again 7mm where the extra strip is; essentially, just another way of looking at it as 7mm versus 8mm
0607090125.jpg


060709014.jpg


0607090145.jpg


9mm on the far left, then 8mm, then 7mm, then 8mm again
060709015.jpg


Another "overall shot" of the 8mm I'm at now
060709019.jpg


And a closer look, same shot as above.
0607090195.jpg
 
Last edited:
I wish I could get Gus to measure it for you :^)

I think 7mm might be it. It's so hard to tell with those shadows on the photos of the original. I agree with the other guy who said how the smaller trench adds a bigger degree of scale though. 7mm really looks good, I think.
 
Well Rob. let me be the first to say that I think you have obsessed enough over the trench width for far too long and I for one am sick and tired of your OCD taking over. My advice...Fill the whole damn trench in with bondo and make it trenchless!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just kidding buddy! Looks great at 8mm. I am think I can get down to see it, oh and of course your terminator bust :love , early in July.
 
I wish I could get Gus to measure it for you :^)

Wouldn't make any difference - remember; the trench on the original today is far too wide since the pieces that formed the notches/gaps on the upper edge are long gone...

Cruelly ironic - the two most prominent features (the trench and the dish) have both, in one way or another, been lost to history.
 
Back
Top