eFX A New Hope Darth Vader Helmet

[teecrooz]

I'd say it was actually a pretty productive day. I learned a lot and saw some new things. Thanks to everyone who contributed.

 

[Wes]

Wes I don't think you understand the people who have sourced and supplied people with Vader helmets aren't nameless faceless cold hearted killers - they are board members who are also our friends.

Sending images anonymously is effectively betraying their trust and breaking gentlemens agreements.

Chris

It was worth a try I guess. At least I got the ball rolling and actually learned a few things.

Your all still nuts though

 

[RBJ]

I'm really not sure where all this C scar madness comes from..the original ANH helmet was molded several times..

 

[Zenwalker]

I am just going to skip the whole C-scratch argument, because I simply don't know enough about it (nor do I care). However, in looking at the surface texturing of the pic on the right... I am just trying to imagine how many returns eFX would have gotten had they put something out that looked just like that. People like us would be thrilled, but I can't imagine the average fan would find that acceptable.

But that was the point of making the 'Legend' edition, to have most of that stuff on there for us fanatics, which is what I guess they tried to do but for mass production reasons couldn't leave it ALL on there.

Well, I must also say it has been an educational day for me as well. Thanks for all the great info. and photos everyone.

 

[Wes]

Bryan, if you are listening, I sure would love to see a pic of the Baker mould of the dome in the area of the brow on vader's left. Again, thank you kindly for sharing with us. We are all truly in your debt for doing so. If you cannot share that part of the mould photo, I for one understand. Peace,

Dave

Dave,

I lost faith in your argument man. I've tried to keep an open mind and see from both sides because I have no loyalty to anyone, but you're failing dude.

Once Gino threw up some pics you jumped right to another area of the helmet....

 

[Zombie Killer]

My posts may be harsh but i try not to get personal. I may be wrong and his marks go to the edge but WTF, post a pic big enough so we don't have to squint , or pic up the helmet and take a pic with the helmet so it's at the same angle so i can see where i am wrong. These newbies want to learn but they treat us like we are the same know it alls they are mad at.

 

[Juansith]

I'd say it was actually a pretty productive day. I learned a lot and saw some new things. Thanks to everyone who contributed.

Yeah this was a great day.
Again thank you EFX and Gino.

 

[Juansith]

My posts may be harsh but i try not to get personal. I may be wrong and his marks go to the edge but WTF, post a pic big enough so we don't have to squint , or pic up the helmet and take a pic with the helmet so it's at the same angle so i can see where i am wrong. These newbies want to learn but they treat us like we are the same know it alls they are mad at.

You know, i dont think theres the need to see a bigger pic, its very clear that the scar, though nicely rendered, it was added.
The main evidence is not even the gif, but The RB mold pics,and i dont see a C scar there.

I would say this is done deal.

 

[Wes]

You are. You do realize that the pic of the original is angled down more than my pic which will throw that off a bit. As I stated before, I DID NOT ANGLE THE PIC PEREFECTLY!

Also, see that little hash mark where the black meets the gunmetal that runs along the cheekline? It looks live a slanted Z sort of. That's a paint division line and guess what? It's on the TM, but not on the Baker mold. I could go on all day and match up details, but why bother when I'm dealing with someone who doesn't really understand what they are seeing.

Just let it go bro.

In addition, the lighting direction of the TM is different than the screen shot. There is a difference between a shadow versus a surface catching light.

Lambo & CS

I have to agree there is something there. To me it's almost like the top layer of paint chipped off and it was covered up.

Like when you chip the paint on your car. You can fill it in with touch up, but it won't match the depth because of the clear cloat.

 

[KaanE]

Have you guys noticed this is page 86 and we have read everything from page 1 to the future ones? Awesome I must say.

About the topic in question, thank you very much for the pics again eFX and Gino.

 

[ArtisanProps]

Yeah this was a great day.
Again thank you EFX and Gino.

+1 :thumbsup

 

[Art Andrews]

Have you guys noticed this is page 86 and we have read everything from page 1 to the future ones? Awesome I must say.

6th most viewed thread of all time in the prop forum and #1 for replies!

If nothing else, eFX is getting massive exposure out of this and a lot of praise and appreciation for taking their Vader helmets to the level they have!

 

[vaderdarth]

Wes, I actually returned to my original unanswered point about the divot, not because I wanted to re-direct, but for me, my questions had been answered nicely by both gino and Pete. No harm no foul. There is no argument where I am concerned, I'm struggling to learn what needs to be learned, and aside from the mighty divot, I'm batting 1000 in the learning dept. gino/eFX has been so kind to provide that which I asked for and now so has Pete which was an unexpected suprise!.

I can't thank either of them enough for the effort. Both were asked to provide, and provide they did. Except for the pesky divot information. I suppose that is an unknown in the eFX camp, but never to worry, it's on the Screen helmet and it's on the UK helmets and once I get a physical eFX ANH helmet, I can see if it's on that too. It's not the same as seeing the mould, but it's the next best thing my friend. Until then, I bid you all good wishes. Someone please pm me if eFX or gino show up with Divot information for the eFX/Baker mould.

I hope all you guys enjoy your absolutely flawless eFX helmets and their respective factory paint jobs. Kudos to both eFX and gino for their part.

Peace,

Dave

PS, same goes for other Baker mould helmet recipients, if you can show the brow portion of the mould or the casting from the mould, I'd be forever in your debt gentlemen. PM me if you would like to assist me in private as I suppose I understand your hesitation to touch this thread with a 10ft pole. It's been exhausting.

Art, you nailed it, this has been the most informative Vader helmet thread in the history of Vader helmet threads. I've personally learned more about all the helmets than I thought possible. Are u kidding, the eFX was sold out before we got to the good stuff and that's impressive all by itself.

 

[Juansith]

:thumbsup at last...the voice of reason. I totally agree with you...and Juansith, i think you are a latino blood am i wrong???

Yes, Spain and Italy and French blood runs through my veins, my main language is Spanish.

Cheers.

 

[cayman shen]

I wish I had the patience to read this whole thread, because every now and then when I pop on it's always interesting! Nothing like a little old school Star Wars education.

 

[OldKen]

I think the one thing we can ALL agree on after reading all of this. No matter what you still believe about this certain detail or that. Even if it isn't 100% PERFECTION...

This...

IS...

The absoloute, without a shadow of a doubt, single best, and MOST accurate, LISCENSED Star Wars piece....

EVER.

 

[CSMacLaren]

Lambo & CS

I have to agree there is something there. To me it's almost like the top layer of paint chipped off and it was covered up.

Like when you chip the paint on your car. You can fill it in with touch up, but it won't match the depth because of the clear cloat.

Thanks, Wes. It's amusing to see newcomers make such conclusive factual statements based on a screen capture and not taking on a more methodical or scientific approach. To be honest, we've made those mistakes early on - and as I've explained before, people have seen white specs on a screen capture and have misinterpreted it, not distinguishing it from paint, light reflection, structure, or something else. When studying 2D images, sometimes the brain erroneously locks in on black/dark colors, and sometimes on white colors. A prop is a sculpture and should be studied accordingly as a 3D object. That means that any feature - obvious or subtle - will exist in three dimensional space, and reflect or refract light accordingly, and cast shadows depending on the light source.

Again, I would like to draw everyone's attention to the "Mars Face" (Cydonia region of Mars) phenomenon that has been debated by professional scientists for many years - and there is remarkable similarity between what they've debated and the C-scar.

The inset (bottom right) image is the famous "Mars Face" which convinced people for many years of the facial structure of the rock. A different illumination gives a far more enlightening view. Combine what you learn from the two, and you get a more comprehensive understanding of the area in question.

Wikipedia writes, "After analysis of the higher resolution Mars Global Surveyor data NASA stated that "a detailed analysis of multiple images of this feature reveals a natural looking Martian hill whose illusory face-like appearance depends on the viewing angle and angle of illumination."

Further reading: Cydonia (region of Mars) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Juansith]

Thanks, Wes. It's amusing to see newcomers make such conclusive factual statements based on a screen capture and not taking on a more methodical or scientific approach. To be honest, we've made those mistakes early on - and as I've explained before, people have seen white specs on a screen capture and have misinterpreted it, not distinguishing it from paint, light reflection, structure, or something else. When studying 2D images, sometimes the brain erroneously locks in on black/dark colors, and sometimes on white colors. A prop is a sculpture and should be studied accordingly as a 3D object. That means that any feature - obvious or subtle - will exist in three dimensional space, and reflect or refract light accordingly, and cast shadows depending on the light source.

Again, I would like to draw everyone's attention to the "Mars Face" (Cydonia region of Mars) phenomenon that has been debated by professional scientists for many years - and there is remarkable similarity between what they've debated and the C-scar.

The inset (bottom right) image is the famous "Mars Face" which convinced people for many years of the facial structure of the rock. A different illumination gives a far more enlightening view. Combine what you learn from the two, and you get a more comprehensive understanding of the area in question.

Wikipedia writes, "After analysis of the higher resolution Mars Global Surveyor data NASA stated that "a detailed analysis of multiple images of this feature reveals a natural looking Martian hill whose illusory face-like appearance depends on the viewing angle and angle of illumination."

Further reading: Cydonia (region of Mars) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well, being very familiar with the Cydonia face and Jaime Maussan and other Ufologists, i agree with you only in one thing.

The Ufologists were so sure about this being an intelligent structure when in reality they only had this picture.
Nasa gave them first 3d renders of how it wasnt a face but a mount on Mars.
THE FANATICS didnt accept this, and after the mars surveyor and the mars rover were lauched, they showed evidence that proves without a shadow of a doubt that it wasnt a face carved by martians.

THE FANATICS, tore the evidence saying it was all a conspiracy, and that THE PICS WERE PHOTOSHOPED AND FALSE.

So i agree with you, i see the same here, people with real evidence that shows it and then you have fanatics that only show slim to none evidence and the evidence they show is false.

I let you decide who is what.

 

[vaderdarth]

I think everyone already has Juan, they already have. Thank you for your input today too Juan. I don't think I've had the pleasure before.

Ken, I think everyone agrees 100% with you man!!!

Dave

 

[AJK001]

I'm glad to see someone finally posted some pictures. Thanks Gino. I'm not sorry I've bought one of these and I still don't understand why some people feel they need to slam this when it is already sold out.

I really hate it when someone says, I have all the proof I need to prove you wrong, but since you are not one of chosen, I can't show it to you.

If you can't post it, then it isn't proof, so why bother even talking about it.