DISCUSSION OF VARIOUS STUDIO SCALE AT-ATs

Discussion in 'Studio Scale Models' started by swpropmaker, Feb 16, 2004.

  1. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Yeah I saw it... I only wish some of us could of had access to the real filming minature. OF the 4 ATATs I have reference on the details are all the same. This one has many that are different. The neck being to long and the wrong material is the most obvious. (My 2 cents)

    I will get one I think.. or wait till we see how real kit parts match up... if the size is right at least we have proper measuremnts to make our own better. I could have the legs machined in Alluminum and fitted with pressure armature for movment and re positioning, replace the neck with proper material and have a gimble to allow rotation and up down side to side positions.

    The ATAT is my favorite vehicle.. Ive studied it for about 6 years now.. If the MR ATAT can be made to pose and missing detail replaced it may be worth it... Sweede.. they should of gotten with you on the paint job!!

    Steve
     
  2. STEVE THE SWEDE

    STEVE THE SWEDE Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,241
    Thanks for the comment Steve![​IMG]

    IMO, it looks good though, I'm with you with most of the details, still can't figure out what the phillips screws are doing on the lower legs. However, it looks like an awesome base for an upgrade, much better then the kit were all converting. The price is probably fair if the sucker can be articulated, if not it's to * much.

    Steve.
     
  3. Aegis159

    Aegis159 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,242
    I don't see it being made to articulate very easily. More than likely the legs are cast in those positions.

    You guys keep talking like the RG ATAT is waaaay off... other than the underside and the rear area on the older versions of the kit, what else is "way off"?? Like I said in the other thread on the regular board, I pulled mine out and things were pretty much the same between the two.
     
  4. TomSpinaDesigns

    TomSpinaDesigns Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,781
    </SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    swpropmaker wrote:
    <HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    Im not buying that it was designed from a hybrid or some crap like that. Easy pieces that are uniform on all are missing. Got blasted pretty hard on the other thread we probally need to keep our "crazy details" to this forum!

    </TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

    Steve,

    Um, this is all part of one forum dude... so simply moving the fight over here isn't gonna fly.

    My suggestion was to start a new thread (in the main forum, as it seemed current) to present your pics, so that the original thread would remain clear of this, not to simply hide it away in the SSM forum. No offense, but the blasting wasn't because of your (and others) pointing out of details... it was the presentation.

    You went off pretty hard (and just have again) without all the facts and several others joined in. If you guys want to talk about the product and compare pics and details to the refs you have, knock yourselves out.

    If you wanna go on talking crap about MR, this drama's just going to drag on (and there's no need)

    Discussion of details is what we're here for. Demanding answers from a company that doesn't post on this board is not.

    Consideration is all we are requesting.

    -Consider that the replica makers have to go by the refs provided by the copywrite holder (LFL) and that those refs may be different from ours.

    -Consider that there were multiples used in filming and while most we've seen seem identical in photos, until we've seen all of them in person, we can't speak in absolutes.

    -Consider that some details will be left off for the sake of "cleaning up" an original piece to give it more mass-market appeal in the eyes of that same copywrite holder.

    -Consider that the copywrite holder can make requests for changes to minute details to better fit their image of the piece.

    -Consider that the AT-AT we've seen pics of from Toy Fair may be a prototype.

    -Consider the restraints of producing 1000 of these and that changes (or even mistakes) may have been made in production.

    And most importantly, consider that it took less than 20 posts for someone to start * about what "should and shouldn't be" on the replicas.

    I'm sorry, but that's not our call. It's a replica made for collectors, not for studio scale model builders. You said yourself it was the best out there and that's fine, but one compliment doesn't buy you any leeway when it comes to showing respect for a company's work.

    This isn't just you, so i apologize if it seems i'm singling you out. I've pm'd those on both sides of the argument and it's time for all of us to move on from this.

    All that we ask is that people stick to discussing details and leave off the "MR sucks cus it's not exactly how i wanted it" sentiment...

    Tom

    (i'll also split this off from the original AT AT thread so that it doesn't muddy up all the work you guys have done...)
     
  5. Aegis159

    Aegis159 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,242
    Hehehe wondered what had happened to my previous post. I'll put this over here instead of there since it makes more sense here...

    "And I'm positive that ~$300 of that price is the silly case... which half of them will be broken by the time it gets to where it's suppose to be going. I can't believe that they would try and ship a case that size!! Do they not know how rough ALL of the postal services are, especially if you put "Fragile" on the box???" I see them eating ALOT of the cases and having to replace them.
     
  6. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    I conseed Wampa.. points taken. I will buy it and do what I want with it anyway. I will make it match the 4 film used ATATs I have reference of.

    If folks read carefully my posts I say it could be a varient..a prototype ... Tom, sorry to have made this such a big topic.

    I think MR did a great job... with that said to each there own and I never made a "MR sucks" comment so I hope that wasnt directed towards me..

    Im just a passionate ATAT fan.. that hoped to add a 100% accurate minature to my collection. I just pointed out it doesnt match 4 of the film used ATATs that we have seen. Maybe do to the points that you mentioned in your post.

    Also my reference pictures are not just from the MOM. They are from reference books (Chronicals) ILM books and pictures of behind the scenes weve gathered over the years. Plus Screen Caps from the movie. All film used..

    My point is I cannot find the detail missing or different on any of those so why is it different or missing on this one?

    I was just pointing out what I saw.. never meant it to turn into a us vs them. Wampa I apologize for that.

    I understand this is one forum I meant "thread" but typed wrong. Studio Scalers are a strange group.. our attention to detail is crazy sometimes and we love our passion for these minatures.. just like the prop guys like thier blasters and sabers.. thats all Tom no hard feelings...

    What will happen if MR releases a Blaster with the wrong parts on it?? If that occured wouldnt the blaster pros sound off with whats wrong ? I heard someone say the same thing happened when they released the Paser I.

    No harm intended.. when I get mine I will compare to all known kitparts.. take measurements for fellow builders and provide any input to the forum for making it match the filming minatures we have grown to know and love over the past years.

    Steve
     
  7. aliensarchive

    aliensarchive Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    931
    Please go ahead and show picture comparisons to back up these claims noted above.
     
  8. Ketzer.com

    Ketzer.com Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,231
    Is anybody going to Toy Fair?

    Maybe someone could ask MR some simple questions:
    -is the price with or without the case
    -is the model available without the case
    -is this a prototype or not

    Another thought: The Flakvierling parts missing on the legs: if that model at ToyFair is a prototype, it would be easy for them to exchange those parts. Who knows, maybe they are even reading this forum because thy still need to find some parts.

    When is the model coming out anyway? I heard in the fall?! That would still give them lots of time to make changes.

    If that thing is built from scratch, they did a GREAT job on it. So I do not understand why they would "screw up" on "obvious" things like the neck being too long, too thick or not having enough rings.

    This maybe a prototype after all. So if anybody goes to ToyFair, maybe they can ask MR.

    Tim
     
  9. TomSpinaDesigns

    TomSpinaDesigns Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,781
    </SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    swpropmaker wrote:
    <HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    My point is I cannot find the detail missing or different on any of those so why is it different or missing on this one?</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

    Again, see my post above. Plenty of possible reasons. Discuss the details all you like, but questioning over and over of a company that doesn't post here starts to sound accusatory.


    <TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    swpropmaker wrote:
    <HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    What will happen if MR releases a Blaster with the wrong parts on it?? If that occured wouldnt the blaster pros sound off with whats wrong ? I heard someone say the same thing happened when they released the Paser I.
    </TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

    Unfortunately Steve, the same thing seems to happen over and over (and that's not good). We expect the same respect and consideration be given ANY licensed piece from ANY company.

    As i've said, discussing details is what we're here for, let's just do it with a little more respect and a little less drama and i think things will go well.

    If you can, please post up your points/pics from the other thread about the details as i'd like to clean that thread up of a bit of the back and forth. (i'd merge them, but since they were made before this thread, they'd throw things out of whack)

    Tom
     
  10. TomSpinaDesigns

    TomSpinaDesigns Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,781
    OK, here are the comparisoon shots from that other thread....

    </SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    swpropmaker wrote:
    <HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    Ok lets first remember if you read my previous post "I THINK ITS THE BEST AVAIABLE" Since I was called to prove my point I will talk on the head and neck alone... here goes a easy 11 whats wrong with the MR version.. hey I was called out here it goes...

    Check reference picture below:

    1-4 There are an additonal raised detail that is on all 24 X 53 X 48 cm ATATs .. ok thats 8 details wrong on the MR head ( dont forget the other side..)

    5-6 After further review 5 and 6 are the kit pieces..got better pics! Way to go MR!!!!

    7 there is a gun shroud missing. It is on most of the ATATs the one you commonly see on tour has been handled and lost.

    8 The neck material should be 20 lines per inch the MR is
    10-15 lines per inch at best.. not acurate.. without proper measurment access Id say its to long as well but I cant prove that.. who knows maybe one day I can measure it

    [​IMG]


    Like I said before... its the best you can buy. I just wanted to point out its not exact to the reference photos I have.
    </TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>


    <TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    EchoLeader wrote:
    <HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    Here's another item Steve mentioned. Not sure if it was omitted from the study reference that MR had but the AT-AT seen in the MoM tour had this part shown with the arrow point. This is the seatback off a 1/35 scale Tamiya Flakverling Gun which was also used on the studio scale TIE Bomber.

    [​IMG]
    </TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

    <TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    swpropmaker wrote:
    <HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>

    What ever the reason the details are different than thee of the film used ATATs I have photographed or have seen photos of. In some instances it looks like they were replicating the large 4 ft ATAT rather than the 48 cm version theyre selling. See below....

    [​IMG]

    The 8 parts on the MR version are made up... they should of used the FLAK 38 kitparts.. it has more detail than just flat styrene strips as the pictures of the MR ATAT show.

    Am I gonna buy it?? Heck yeah! Am I gonna add real kit detail?? Heck yeah!!! Will I repose it it?? Heck yeah!

    It is the best thing out there and Im glad they made it.. I can fix it and make it studio accurate...for me ...more acurate... what can I say Ive spent twice the cost of the MR AT-AT on vintage kits anyway.. this is just more to work with!!

    Steve
    </TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
     
  11. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Thanks Wampa...

    Let this thread stay on track.. It IS NOT a MR bashing thread!!

    Lets talk of the differences to the studio models we have reference of (4 different film used versions)

    So what have you guys seen?
     
  12. STEVE THE SWEDE

    STEVE THE SWEDE Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,241
    Well first of all I would like to know why there's two Philip head screws under the leg joint!? Please see the pic:

    [​IMG]

    Trust me people, they are NOT present on any of the studio models I've seen.

    Second, does anybody know for sure that the model isn't articulated? I find it hard to believe that they are going to release a static model.

    Any thoughts?

    Steve.
     
  13. Ketzer.com

    Ketzer.com Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,231
    well, if those srews are there, they must be there for a reason. I doubt they "accidentally" added some screws there.

    Maybe the modesl in the MOM exhibitions etc were just resin copies? And not the original walkers made from aluminum?

    Tim
     
  14. EchoLeader

    EchoLeader Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    941
  15. Treadwell

    Treadwell Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,325
    Someone on the other thread, supposedly in the know, said that the three feet on the ground are depicted as compressed, and the faux hydrolics for the raised foot are shown extended. I took this to mean this was permanent for all feet, and thus the AT-AT would not be posable.
     
  16. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    SCHUUUUUUUULTZ!!!!!!!

    GEENERALL BOOOOCARRRRTER!!!!!!


    HOOOOOOGANNNNNNNNN!!!!!


    :) my best Clink
     
  17. BobFett

    BobFett Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    817
    Neisen's been using the Kenner ATAT for reference. [​IMG]
     
  18. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    ouch.. that hurt....
     
  19. Ketzer.com

    Ketzer.com Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,231
    The walker is not posable. If it was made from resin, it would not last very long if it was posable.

    Tim
     
  20. STEVE THE SWEDE

    STEVE THE SWEDE Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,241
    </SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    uzth4s wrote:
    <HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    well, if those srews are there, they must be there for a reason. I doubt they "accidentally" added some screws there.

    Maybe the models in the MOM exhibitions etc were just resin copies? And not the original walkers made from aluminum?

    Tim
    </TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

    No, I don't think that's the case. I have several pics of the one at MoM and it has a lot of the kit bashed details missing/fallen off. If it was a casted copy they most likely would have casted the legs with the details on.

    Steve.
     
  21. Aegis159

    Aegis159 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,242
    I doubt that it will be posable as I said before. I can just imagine the CS department going nuts over phone calls and complaints like " I only moved the leg a little and it completely came off!!"... hehehe of course they might still get those kind of calls depending on who purchases these...[​IMG]

    I still can't see them trying to ship a display case of that size. besides what Tim brought up on the cost of shipping it, the case wouldn't even reach me in one piece and I'm only in Florida... forget trying to have it shipped overseas.
    If they DO try to ship it, I can only imagine the size of the shipping box.... it would have to be HUGE!!
    And that's not even thinking about he size of the box for the AT-AT alone!!
     
  22. TomSpinaDesigns

    TomSpinaDesigns Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,781
    I've had some very large cases shipped to me without incident (so far) so it's certainly possible.

    just 2 cents

    Tom
     
  23. eFXBarry

    eFXBarry Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    930
    Okay, guys.

    As one of the team who worked on the AT-AT, I can share some answers to your questions.

    There were FIVE AT-ATs at the LFL ARCHIVE, not counting the ones that are out on tour. None of the screen used pieces exist in the condition they were first built. Time has done what the Rebel Forces couldn't. That and crappy resins of the day, leeching, and sheer entropy have taken their toll on the AT-ATs.

    MR chose the one that was in the best condition, and most representative of how the vehicle looked on screen.

    They all differ slighty. It's true that the heads, undercarriage and body shell were cast from a master pattern and therefore SHOULD have all been the same. However their profiles and symmetry are all wonky in different ways - so asserting that the three/four filming miniatures are identical is way off, they're not. Each is a facsimilie (copy) of the original master pattern.

    The legs of the animation miniatures were hand machined, assembled and then kit dressing, U-beams etc., was applied individually for detailing. Again, each differs slightly when measured - due to the individual modeler's hand and eye.

    There are no additional four panels on the side of the head of the stop motion miniature. There are on the four foot model and they are on the Ertl kit, but not on the armatured AT-AT we followed, sorry.

    Paint jobs differ wildly, so does some of the kit bashing that was used to dress in the cast parts on the underside. Some of what people have perceived to be detailing are in fact air bubbles and holes in the castings.

    The body was digitized and output by SLA. The wild assymetry from left to right was cleaned up. We sourced original kit parts for detailing.

    The AT-AT on display at the New York Fair is the prototype.

    There are a few minor discrepancies that have been altered for the production version, including the neck, and the paint job will be addressed. But until that's done and out it is pointless to debate the final piece.

    The price includes the case. Yes it's big and yes the case is expensive, but to offer an expensive, museum quality model without some form of dust protection - a killer to models - is crazy.

    As for the reasonability of the price? That's up to the individual to decide. However a member here quoted me MORE for a built up and painted unlicenced kit last year which I thought fair then, so I naturally think the MR price is more than reasonable.

    I hope I've addressed some of your concerns. I know you guys are passionate about your AT-AT's. I am too. There's still a little while to wait before the final piece is available.

    Barry
     
  24. BobFett

    BobFett Well-Known Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    817
    Thanks for the insight on the development of this. I will definitely get one of these. What is the tentative release date?
     
  25. Ketzer.com

    Ketzer.com Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,231
    Thanks for the update Barry!

    So, what do I need to do to work on any future projects?

    Tim
     
  26. SSRN Seaview

    SSRN Seaview Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    705
    What's the size of this replica? LWH
     
  27. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Barry,

    PM sent. Thanks for the insight!! Im glad your going to address the neck issue thanks!. Understanding this is a prototype now and everything has calmed a bit.

    Please understand the folks on this thread have poured over every detail of "the avaiable" and "not so avaiable" pics of the filming minatures. So the 4 ATATs we have reference of is what we know best.

    I did find the reference pics page 171 SW Chronicals of the ATAT your team must of used as it DOES NOT have the extra side details so I do conseed that point.

    I have reference that the majority 24 x 53 x 48 cm ATATs have the extra detail to include the 4 fter. Thats why it stuck out to me. Both are correct! Thanks for giving us a insiders look at the building of the beast!

    Please chime in with any updates on the fianl product! Were all dying here!

    Lastly.. Can you guys add the FLAK 38 parts to the inside ankles? Same details apear on the 4 reference ATATs we have plus it looks cooler more detail that flat styrene!! Please let us know!

    Pass on to the ATAT build crew we thank them for this endevour! What a cool piece this will be! Well worth the asking price I think. Christmas is comming early this year my friends! (I hear they work well in the snow too!)

    Steve
     
  28. Aegis159

    Aegis159 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,242
    Now if only the dealers knew what the cost was going to be so we could start figuring out how much we need to start saving..... and what kind of discount we might be able to get on it, hehehe!!

    ugg listen to me, I told myself I wouldn't break down and get this one..... but it IS really nice, and even though I won't use the case it comes with for it I can put the case to use for some other pieces....
     
  29. STEVE THE SWEDE

    STEVE THE SWEDE Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,241
    I think the MR walker looks VERY nice but there's no way I'll have another grand to invest in this project. Sure, I would love to own one but that just won't happen. I'm sticking to my fan kit, I got so much time and money invested in it that I just can't quit now. Besides, I think it will look pretty smashing when it's all converted and properly finished. Also, it will be fully articulated.[​IMG]

    Am I the only one planning to finish it!?

    Steve.
     
  30. Lynn TXP 0369

    Lynn TXP 0369 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    </SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    swpropmaker wrote:
    <HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
    Check reference picture below:
    1-4 There are an additonal raised detail that is on all 24 X 53 X 48 cm ATATs .. ok thats 8 details wrong on the MR head ( dont forget the other side..)
    [​IMG].
    </TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

    Forgive me on my lack of knowledge on this...
    Is the 1-4 he is refering too missing on the other side of MR's ATAT head? I'm not quit understanding what is he is saying as "8" details wrong on the MR head when refering to 1-4...
    I found this pic in another thread of those details missing on a MoM pic...
    [​IMG]

    Lynn



    edit- fixed yer quote tag
     
  31. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Ok...here you go.... this photo is one of four different reference ATATs we are working from. The area I am talking about is directly behind the cheek gun turret. Do you see the 4 panels. Smaller on top then get larger towards the middle of the head..

    This photo clearly shows the extra raised details there and the ATAT in the photo is not the 4 ft model.

    Though Barry said the one they used didnt have these details and I did find reference of the ATAT they must have used. of the 7 medium sized ATATs I have visual evidence that at least four of the had the details. (We have identified the ATATs by thier unique paint jobs.) So after Barry pointed it out I researched and found both are correct. I hope that helped.

    [​IMG]

    Here is a pic of the ATAT from the Art OF SW tour... it looks like a replacement head first one may have been damaged.. note the raised panels.
    [​IMG]

    Here is ATAT #3 I call Stripe.. dark marking on the drivers visor.. well you get the idea. Is medium scale ATAT see toy army guy (has raised details)
    [​IMG]

    Here is Ref Pic ATAT#3 Stripe close up..this ATAT is shot up dark blotches mar the hull must of been leading the charge also a medium sized ATAT (has Raised details)
    [​IMG]

    Here is ATAT Ref pic #4 I call it Barry. It is the ATAT without the raised Details..
    [​IMG]

    Here is ATAT ref Head pic #5 I call 4fter. The big one! There a three photos of this one and the overall painting is very "white" very blotchy. The cheek guns have muzzle brakes that dont match thier smaller medium sized brothers, also note the lower detail on the bottom right of the head is different that all the smallers ones.
    [​IMG]

    I know Im sick.. I named my ATATs .. hey the Y Wing modelers do it too! The Red one.. The Yellow one.
     
  32. staermose

    staermose Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,115
    As you pointed out, the y-wing builders named them after the colors they had. And the falcon builders named theirs after the size, the 32'', the 5'. But you called one "Barry". Where did that come from?
     
  33. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Hey... the reason I call that one "Barry" is he worked on the MR AT-AT and identified it as a version without the raised details. I always assumed that picture was of a unfinihsed atat becuase you can see the side hull plug missing in the larger photo and the weathering is not as heavy as most of the other filming AT-ATs.

    So Barry I dentified one in the archives that they used as reference hense the name given.

    Both are correct.

    After all the disscussion and debate the only thing I see needing addressed is the neck material (out of scale) and overall length of the neck (to long). Other than that the Flak 38 parts can be added easliy enough on the inside ankle. The phillip screw holes the Sweede pointed out can be filled in.

    Barry did say they are going to address the neck in this thread that the one at the show was a prototype and not the final product.

    S
     
  34. eFXBarry

    eFXBarry Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    930
    My bad...

    I forgot to mention that the phillips screw on the inside of the lower legs will not be on the production model.

    They are only on the prototype model so MR/LFL could decide on the pose and lock the legs into position.

    Barry
     
  35. swpropmaker

    swpropmaker Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Thanks again Barry! Can you tell us how you got the opportunity to work on the MR AT-AT project? Were all extreamley envious... you guys did a great job.

    Do you think MR or LF would ever release the ATAT reference pictures? Kind of like the "walk around armor" books seen for 1/35 armor. I think we have all worn out our Chronicals book. Id love to see the 300 or so pictures you guys used as would every other ATAT fan here.. that must of been an awsome project to work on. (got any behind the scenes photos you can share?)

    Once again we appreciate you for filling us in on the MR AT-AT future Im shure we all look forward to your next post.

    S
     
  36. eFXBarry

    eFXBarry Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    930
    I've been lucky enough to consult for MR on many projects for the past year.

    How did I get the AT-AT job? Steve Dymszo is a friend, and having owned Halcyon Models - a plastic model kit company that specialized in licensed model kits from movies - he asked me to lend my talents to the first Studio Scale project. That and the fact that the Walker is my second favorite Star Wars model after the Millennium Falcon. [​IMG]

    But I'm only one of a team of people working on the AT-AT which includes not only Steve, but many departments - Product Design, Product Development, and Marketing. Each bringing their considerable talents to the table.

    Production methods to ensure consistency for 1000 piece runs have to be devised; armatures to ensure no sagging in the years to come; specialist packaging designed and drop-tested, so each AT-AT can survive not only an ocean crossing, but FED-EX delivery to your door. Then there is the collateral and outer packaging so that your collectible looks, well collectible.

    Believe me, it is A LOT of hard work by a team of dedicated people to deliver Master Replicas products. I know it's not always appreciated, especially among some prop collectors who ask "Why so many people when artisans do it themselves out of a garage?" - but it's a whole different ball game when licenses, manufacturing, distribution, packaging etc...are involved.

    As for ever seeing the Archive pictures? I doubt they will be released for reasons of confidentiality agreements.

    Barry
     

Share This Page