AnubisGuard
Master Member
The proportions look more like the old Playmates toy.
Which, hey, I loved that toy as a kid, so cool. Too bad it costs $800.
Factory Entertainment Tricorder
- Thread starter JiminSTLouis
- Start date
The proportions look more like the old Playmates toy.
Which, hey, I loved that toy as a kid, so cool. Too bad it costs $800.
messfx
New Member
Yes, I was thinking a little bit Playmates too. The chamfers are crisp similar to that toy
Thank you for posting that side by side picture. I've had people say "I can't see the difference" when I've previously described how far off the mark the FE interpretation is compared to the actual prop.
Hopefully those people can now see that FE aren't making accurate replicas but their version of the prop, which is basically like a poorly researched version you'd see knocked up on Etsy in terms of the body accuracy.
It certainly doesn't satisfy that "this is what they looked like on set" craving, but the child in me still loves it. If anyone is regretting their purchase, the PM-button is right to your left, haha.
WinstonWolf359
Master Member
I don't want to come across as a "puppy kicker" because I understand the appeal of the item as-is, but seeing one side-by-side with an accurate tricorder really shows that there isn't a single detail on the Factory tricorder that matches the originals.
It's doubly frustrating that I can't think of a single good reason why Factory chose not to produce a more accurate replica, and triply frustrating that their stance on the accuracy of each and every one of their inaccurate pieces is that we're just wrong about how inaccurate it is.
So for me it isn't just that the tricorder could have been more accurate, it's that after an unending stream of inaccurate products I no longer trust Factory can make any accurate replicas. So no matter how enthusiastic I might be about something they are or might be producing, I know it won't meet my standards. Which is kinda crazy, because everything they've attempted so far has incredible levels of documentation, reference materials, a large number of screen-used props still in existence, and in most cases the original prop makers are still alive and available to consult. And yet from something as complex as the tricorder to as simple as Kirk's TMP insignia badge Factory has been unable to produce a replica that looks like the original item.
Last edited:
messfx
New Member
One thing that is hard to see from the photos is that Ed embossed each button with a separate layer. Enormous amount of careful work went into these. I was very lucky that Greg Jein introduced me to him years ago. It is one of my all time favorite prop designs.
Oh yeah Eds work is top notch, I have known him for years
Is getting one from him a possibility? I have to claim extreme ignorance on Trek props. For some reason, I never managed to delve deeply into them despite Trek being more dear to me than anything Star Wars! (I was probably more obsessed with the uniforms, haha.)
What's the consensus on the dustbuster and cricket? At a glance they looked pretty good.
I think Ed is retired now he had a major stroke a while back
WinstonWolf359
Master Member
There's an RPF thread on the Dustbuster that shows some good comparisons.
I'm not sure if there's a thread on the cricket that has any side by sides, but the Factory cricket has a lot of unnecessary seams and like the rest of their replicas seem to have some questionable paint color choices.
The Dustbuster phaser was inaccurately sized as seems to be standard with all FE replicas. The Cricket was ok from what I gather but had poor seam lines.
I don't have either of those FE replicas because of their horrible inaccuracies, but I do have a Rodd.com Dustbuster and a Stapleton Cricket.
Thanks, I looked them up. Cricket seems OK... nice that it's metal, even if the paint isn't exact. (It's crazy expensive though... on this side of the pond, around $500!) I love the idea of a metal dustbuster.... size doesn't seem too bad to me, but I'm more concerned about the incorrect angle of the grip.
czechplastik
New Member
I think it holds up pretty well.
I'm normally big on accuracy but I think it's a solid effort. The metal makes a difference to me.
For tiny screens for tricorders
hackaday.com
hackaday.com
For bridges
hackaday.com
Moire patterns
More
www.trekbbs.com
A Web-Based Graphics Editor For Tiny Screens
These days, adding a little LCD or OLED to your project is so cheap and easy that you can do it on a whim. Even if your original idea didn’t call for a display, if you’ve got I2C and a …
hackaday.com
A Cheap Yellow Display Makes A Video Walkie Talkie
The ESP32 series of microprocessors with their cheap high-power cores and built-in wireless networking have brought us a wide variety of impressive projects over the years. We’re not sure we&…
hackaday.com
For bridges
Build A Starship Bridge Simulator With EmptyEpsilon
Who hasn’t dreamed of serving on the bridge of a Star Trek starship? Although the EmptyEpsilon project isn’t adorned with the Universe-famous LCARS user interface, it does provide a com…
hackaday.com
Moire patterns
More
What's Going On
=" One actor withdrew two hours before the premiere. As a result, they had to put up a disclaimer in the comments section and post to Avalon's YT channel instead of their own. They leave out quite a bit.......that wasn't just an "actor" it was Paul Jenkins who was going to direct the Axanar...
www.trekbbs.com
Last edited:
TM2Megatron
New Member
Original on-set props are often a little on the crude side, anyway... I really do prefer replicas like this to be more in the style of "what would it look like if this had been a real world, manufactured object?" and in that sense I think Factory Entertainment did a good job. It's a lot like their dustbuster and cricket phasers, which I do own.
I wish I'd ordered one of these.
Perhaps they'll do a non-medial Tricorder in the future.
messfx
New Member
The original screen-used Mark VII versions are not crude. They are very detailed and there is a history to their craftsmanship. I have several versions of screen-used, production made and replica trics. The factory ent is the least accurate by far. It looks like the factory took one CAD pass and engineered molds without paying much attention. EFX and Roddenberry have released accurate Mark X era pieces. There’s really no excuse here. For me it is an expensive toy and not a carefully studied replica.
TM2Megatron
New Member
I'm just going by the version it was pictured beside a few pages ago, which had a very handmade, rough look.
I know everyone has different priorities when it comes to buying props, but for me I like "idealized" versions that look like machined products and are made from metal and other high-quality material wherever possible.
I loved the old MMPR Legacy Morphers, for instance, even though they were nothing like the plastic toys used during filming.
I know everyone has different priorities when it comes to buying props, but for me I like "idealized" versions that look like machined products and are made from metal and other high-quality material wherever possible.
I loved the old MMPR Legacy Morphers, for instance, even though they were nothing like the plastic toys used during filming.
I think I found the "research" that FE did for this Tricorder. 
From the Star Trek Fact Files.
From the Star Trek Fact Files.
Similar threads
