Using the d-ring bracket as a reference point, that does indeed seem to be the case. The two sets of rivets on the side of the flash tube are aligned with the two rivets that hold the d-ring bracket in place, which themselves line up with the spaces-between-grips that are aligned with the “A” and “L” in the “G R A F L E X” stamping on the clamp. Symmetrical and simple, since that side of the prop was clearly not the “beauty” side, and so the rivets could stay off-camera. Except for that one day of shooting in Tunisia, early on, when Hamill wore the prop on his belt backwards. Luckily for us.
New Elstree Studio documentary with discarded Graflex.
- Thread starter Skelatorious
- Start date
Using the d-ring bracket as a reference point, that does indeed seem to be the case. The two sets of rivets on the side of the flash tube are aligned with the two rivets that hold the d-ring bracket in place, which themselves line up with the spaces-between-grips that are aligned with the “A” and “L” in the “G R A F L E X” stamping on the clamp. Symmetrical and simple, since that side of the prop was clearly not the “beauty” side, and so the rivets could stay off-camera. Except for that one day of shooting in Tunisia, early on, when Hamill wore the prop on his belt backwards. Luckily for us.
We have always said the clamp changes position between Tunisia, Elstree, and promo images-- but if the clamp is staying relative to the bottom, it's the top that's moving.
Can we confirm that too you think?
Yep. Due to the seven (instead of a symmetrical six) grips, if the bottom WAS rotated 180 degrees, then the grips would line up differently in relation to the clamp box. Yet, in all reference materials, one of the spaces between two grips is always directly centered under the clamp box. It could only be the upper half which was rotated between filming and the publicity stills.
Also, as we who have built replicas will note, it’s difficult to take the clamp off of the bottom half when the grips butt up against the bottom edge of the clamp band. You have to actually disassemble the clamp to remove it from the tube.
R5D4
Active Member
Are you saying the grips for the Luke ANH lightsaber were symmetrical?
AnubisGuard
Master Member
No, I’m saying that, due to the uneven number of grips, they are not symmetrically spaced on the tube in relation to the clamp, depending on how the clamp is positioned. If you turned the clamp around 180 degrees, you’d have a grip lined up with the box (as with ESB, which only has six grips), whereas in the reference photos and screencaps, the box is instead lined up with the space between two grips.
Last edited:
Holy sh*'t!!
I wake up and this whole thread exploded!!
Yesterday I didn't even SEE this second set of rivets! WOW!
Guys, I've got work to do!
But now here's something: it looks like 3 on the right side?! A third one almost completely covered by the track? Or am I going crazy? Probably.
But I also wonder about the rivet sizes. The left side rivets are smaller than on the Elstree saber D-ring. I guess so they fit in between the grips. I'm not sure yet if the four rivets are equal size or that the right side rivets are larger. It might be the flaring of the brighter light. I hope that some 3D overlays will clear this up (later today hopefully).
But why are there two x two rivets? So close next to each other. It is weird. Anyway, to me it's now obvious that it was done intentionally and probably to hold something related to the D-ring.
I also see this as proof that it's one and the same saber (promo shots and tunesia shots). The left side rivets fit perfectly and are slightly covered by the track on one side. I have no doubt it's the same Graflex. Like said before, we have never seen the other set of rivets before: they were JUST out of sight in all the other images. (I better study this again though).
About the rotating of the clamp relative to the grips positioning: the clamp always has some free space, some slack. Doesn't it have enough slack to move half a track position? I don't have my vintage saber here but I doubt if that proofs whether it was the bottom or top rotated. One thing though: if the T-tracks were mounted just a tiny bit too long and the clamp would not be removable at all. I bet this has happened to many of you, like it did with me the first time.
One last thing for now:
DOESN'T THIS DISCOVERY DESERVE IT'S OWN THREAD?!!
I wake up and this whole thread exploded!!
Yesterday I didn't even SEE this second set of rivets! WOW!
Guys, I've got work to do!
But now here's something: it looks like 3 on the right side?! A third one almost completely covered by the track? Or am I going crazy? Probably.
But I also wonder about the rivet sizes. The left side rivets are smaller than on the Elstree saber D-ring. I guess so they fit in between the grips. I'm not sure yet if the four rivets are equal size or that the right side rivets are larger. It might be the flaring of the brighter light. I hope that some 3D overlays will clear this up (later today hopefully).
But why are there two x two rivets? So close next to each other. It is weird. Anyway, to me it's now obvious that it was done intentionally and probably to hold something related to the D-ring.
I also see this as proof that it's one and the same saber (promo shots and tunesia shots). The left side rivets fit perfectly and are slightly covered by the track on one side. I have no doubt it's the same Graflex. Like said before, we have never seen the other set of rivets before: they were JUST out of sight in all the other images. (I better study this again though).
About the rotating of the clamp relative to the grips positioning: the clamp always has some free space, some slack. Doesn't it have enough slack to move half a track position? I don't have my vintage saber here but I doubt if that proofs whether it was the bottom or top rotated. One thing though: if the T-tracks were mounted just a tiny bit too long and the clamp would not be removable at all. I bet this has happened to many of you, like it did with me the first time.
One last thing for now:
DOESN'T THIS DISCOVERY DESERVE IT'S OWN THREAD?!!
Last edited:
lonepigeon where did you get this hires image from? And do you have the whole uncropped picture and would you be willing to share it?
I totally agree with that!! (Thanks for your compliment by the way.)
I’m glad you guys sorted that out while I was sleeping and came to the same conclusion I had made as far as it being the same saber. I was too tired to debate it last night.
Greg, as for the bunny ears, they most definitely move and are not glued in place. We see then shift to one side in the hut scenes.
Greg, as for the bunny ears, they most definitely move and are not glued in place. We see then shift to one side in the hut scenes.
Last edited:
Also, I believe the pairs of rivets are the same size. The right pair is almost entirely visible. The left pair is partially covered by the grip between the pairs. This grip might even be a little crooked with the space to the right being larger. Model away!
It seems to me now that they are indeed different in size: on the left 2x small 2.4mm rivets, on the right 2x 3mm rivets. The grip on the right from them leaves a wide enough gap available for them. The grips are definitely not spaced equally!!
It is still weird that they used 2 different sizes rivets but I'm quite certain the ones on the left are smaller than the 3mm rivets.
Mine are obviously more accurate. [emoji23]
AnubisGuard
Master Member
Yeah, there's no way I'm putting asymmetrical rivets in my ANH saber.
Sorry Roy.
Sorry Roy.
Roy thank you for doing this! I had a feeling they were bigger and angled weirdly (this new second set)
So I may be asking a dumb question, but has this toe pic/Tunisia graflex been seen on screen yet? (Now that we have very big tells) or is that shot lonepidgeon posted not a BTS shot and from the film?
So I may be asking a dumb question, but has this toe pic/Tunisia graflex been seen on screen yet? (Now that we have very big tells) or is that shot lonepidgeon posted not a BTS shot and from the film?
Similar threads
