New Elstree Studio documentary with discarded Graflex.

[Gregatron]

It's not a stretch to guess that:

A) The rivets were added to the flashgun during the original construction of the prop, and then the grips were laid on either side, just overlapping them. Sticking the grips over the rivets to hide them would not have been feasible, unless they reamed out the undersides of the grips to accommodate the rivets, so that the grips would fit flush to the tube.

...or...

B) After it was determined during filming that the d-ring needed reinforcement, the three grips closest to the rivet-end of the d-ring were stripped off, the side rivets added, and then the grips reinstalled.

 

[NeoRutty]

I wish I never saw this thread!

Well lucky I still have an undrilled graflex. I was going to use for Rey, but now I can just pull the ring off the bottom of my ANH version, cover it with Roy’s cover, and add the kobold style holder and make it Rey’s... fixed!

Still... not cool guys. Not cool.


Still don’t quite get what’s going on cuz I haven’t read it all... but man

 

[AnubisGuard]

Well lucky I still have an undrilled graflex

You have no idea how glad I am that I kept procrastinating converting my all-vintage patent Folmer, which I picked up like six months before this thread happened. Imagine the regret that would have been!

 

[Aison]

If this bottom plate had grime or something on it from factory that created a bad earth, this might explain the rivets going in through the side and touching the spring, which should be able to be twisted to lock in between the rivets, thus earthing the spring to the sides.
The rivets as to how high they are up on the tube should not effect the batteries which compress on the spring. A loose, or grime effected bottom plate might mess with earthing? If this was the case it would make sense the rivets are a photographic equipment repair. Which I think has already been suggested.

 

[Aison]

Just done some measurements. Vintage batteries = 60mm x 3 = 180mm. Inside of the tubes touching = 197.6mm this give 17.6mm gap at the bottom of the compressed batteries. Those rivets probably would not interfere with the batteries. Someone please double check me in case I made an error.

 

[Aison]

The bottom plate is able to twist since it is only friction fit into the bottom tube, so it would make sense if the prop department was attempting to reinforce the bottom on the ANH hero.

It is interesting to note the Elstree hilt has a significant dented-in bottom plate which may explain why they seemed to reinforce the hero belt-hanger with extra rivets by the grips.

Just been thinking more on how the bottom plate is fixed. From what you said this is what I am now understanding. Correct me if I wrong. So the bottom of the tube has a small seat, the plate drops in, then they roll/stamp the excess lip down, and it is friction fit/sandwiched in?

 

[Aison]

Last thing I can think of if it was photographic repair. The spring was lost. Someone then riveted a bracket inside to make up for the gap with the loss of the spring height?

 

[IronDestinyProps]

Just been thinking more on how the bottom plate is fixed. From what you said this is what I am now understanding. Correct me if I wrong. So the bottom of the tube has a small seat, the plate drops in, then they roll/stamp the excess lip down, and it is friction fit/sandwiched in?

I am not familiar with the actual process of how the Graflex bottom tubes are made. I just know from experience that the bottom plate is friction fit into the tube base and can be twisted if necessary to obtain wampa cave stamp alignment, but that topic would be better suited in a different thread. This is the Elstree thread.

 

[Halliwax]

Do we know how the motor/wires were held in place on the screen-used stunt? If there's rivets, then it's a possibility.

Good chance the motor is held in with set screws under the clamp. I don’t know how the graflex stunt (which was just pipe) motor was held in. But that’s at least how the V2’s motor was held in place

 

[Halliwax]

A don't know why a photographer would do that, you wouldn't be able to load batteries. I think that's out... and I don't think it was a design design from Roger-- which keeps bringing me back to it either also being fiddled with as a possible stunt at some point, or it was a fix during production for the d-ring.

That’s a good argument Seth, but is the spring collapsed all the way with the 3 d-cells in it?

I’ve never had batteries in any of mine so I don’t know

 

[CAKComedyProps]

That’s a good argument Seth, but is the spring collapsed all the way with the 3 d-cells in it?

I’ve never had batteries in any of mine so I don’t know

The spring compresses a bit when I put batteries in mine, but I don’t know exactly how much it’s compressed. The spring in mine was also very hard to actually compress, so I doubt they’re fully compressed when the tube is locked.

I think it was done by production, the only reason someone would put rivets in it as a camera function is to keep the batteries from compressing the spring when it’s put together, or maybe there’s no spring and the rivets hold the batteries to the right height? I’m not exactly sure how the negative side of the batteries connect to active the light, so maybe the rivets are a replacement for the spring?

I don’t know.

 

[Gregatron]

C'mon, guys, the rivets all being located in the same vicinity--and most (or all) of them being the same size and style--indicates that they were added for the production, and to reinforce the bottom plate. If they HAD been on the flash in its first life, then why didn't they just drill the rivets out and cover the holes with the grips?

 

[SethS]

C'mon, guys, the rivets all being located in the same vicinity--and most (or all) of them being the same size and style--indicates that they were added for the production, and to reinforce the bottom plate. If they HAD been on the flash in its first life, then why didn't they just drill the rivets out and cover the holes with the grips?

This is why I feel like it happened after Christian did his part...

Maybe he's not lying. Maybe his Robertson screw jacked up the endcap and the prop team had to make a fix on set...

 

[Gregatron]

This is why I feel like it happened after Christian did his part...

Maybe he's not lying. Maybe his Robertson screw jacked up the endcap and the prop team had to make a fix on set...

Let's look at this logically. For years, we all thought that the d-ring bracket only had one screw/rivet, but ONLY because we didn't know until very recently that there were actually two. Then, Christian and his Robertson screw came along, just a few years back, and he didn't contest the number of screws/rivets. If his memory was correct and his motives pure, he would have immediately corrected our supposition that there was one screw/rivet instead of two.

And I find it highly unlikely that he started with a single Robertson screw and then they went with six rivets instead to reinforce the endcap. I agree more with the idea that they were either thinking ahead toward the inevitable rigors of production when initially constructing the prop, or that either the Elstree prop or some early, on-set damage to the hero proved that reinforcement would be needed. Especially if the bottom really was hammered and crimped on the Elstree so as to reinstall a loose endcap.

 

[SethS]

I was joking-- but your line of thought is spot on

 

[Aison]

This is just my line of thinking, and I understand the other points being made by others. The rivets are there for two possible reasons. 1. They are for a reason. 2. They are cosmetic.

Now where the rivets are, and the space at the bottom left over, they could be a repair solution for a lost spring. This is a logical possibility. Two rivets of the four on the side tube look smaller. It is possible that the original fix may have been two rivets, then the prop person did not have that exact same size, but some that were close enough. That could explain why the rivet size alternates. The prop builder stuck on the tracks, liked the look of the rivets, and decided they would go all round the bottom with this design, two rivets in each space. They did one set of two which was really time consuming, and then abandoned that idea. In ESB we do see this idea of screws/rivets in each grip all way round.

As for reinforcing the plate, I can't see them being this worried about it in the first place. (But who knows maybe they did.) They work fast, and slap props together without much care. If they break, they either repair of replace. If it needed a repair, I would rather glue on 7 strips to another bottom, and rivet a new d ring on, than make a reinforcing bracket and put rivets into a side of a tube, which is not a quick and easy thing to do.

Lastly, they could just be purely cosmetic, they did four and also gave up as it was wasting time and a PITA to do.

We are never going to know exactly why they are there, and we should not just limit ourselves to only one possibility of why they are there.

 

[Halliwax]

This is just my line of thinking, and I understand the other points being made by others. The rivets are there for two possible reasons. 1. They are for a reason. 2. They are cosmetic.

Now where the rivets are, and the space at the bottom left over, they could be a repair solution for a lost spring. This is a logical possibility. Two rivets of the four on the side tube look smaller. It is possible that the original fix may have been two rivets, then the prop person did not have that exact same size, but some that were close enough. That could explain why the rivet size alternates. The prop builder stuck on the tracks, liked the look of the rivets, and decided they would go all round the bottom with this design, two rivets in each space. They did one set of two which was really time consuming, and then abandoned that idea. In ESB we do see this idea of screws/rivets in each grip all way round.

As for reinforcing the plate, I can't see them being this worried about it in the first place. (But who knows maybe they did.) They work fast, and slap props together without much care. If they break, they either repair of replace. If it needed a repair, I would rather glue on 7 strips to another bottom, and rivet a new d ring on, than make a reinforcing bracket and put rivets into a side of a tube, which is not a quick and easy thing to do.

Lastly, they could just be purely cosmetic, they did four and also gave up as it was wasting time and a PITA to do.

We are never going to know exactly why they are there, and we should not just limit ourselves to only one possibility of why they are there.

View attachment 1060955

Thank you, really appreciate it. I still believe they were there before production. Probably to hold the spring in place

Call me a weirdo

 

[Halliwax]

C'mon, guys, the rivets all being located in the same vicinity--and most (or all) of them being the same size and style--indicates that they were added for the production, and to reinforce the bottom plate. If they HAD been on the flash in its first life, then why didn't they just drill the rivets out and cover the holes with the grips?

They didn’t do that with the DV6? the tracks are all over the place and you can see the holes from where they were previously

We have to put our selfs in the prop makers mind. They don’t give a damn, throw it together and get it out the door.

I can’t seem them drilling the rivets out, just throw some grips on there

Nothing has to be straight, rush, get it out, get paid, move to the next project

 

[roygilsing]

Thank you, really appreciate it. I still believe they were there before production. Probably to hold the spring in place

Call me a weirdo

I disagree! They are too perfectly located near the D-ring and perfectly left and right of the T-track.

 

[Halliwax]

I disagree! They are too perfectly located near the D-ring and perfectly left and right of the T-track.