original trooper face mould?
- Thread starter PMTrooper
- Start date
- Status
Obi Sean Kenobi
Well-Known Member
Links to live auctions is a no-no, bud.
OSK
OSK
I thought Live links were allowed if you were questioning the authenticy of an item (ie, possible fraud?)
-Gary
-Gary
franz bolo
Sr Member
I would PM the resident experts first and ask them. Ask BingoBongo. He has the best helmet site at http://www.starwarshelmets.com/
Then if you find no answer, post a link. If it is legit, you just tipped off a bunch of bidders..
FB
Then if you find no answer, post a link. If it is legit, you just tipped off a bunch of bidders..
FB
HDPE
Well-Known Member
There's no way these are the original moulds used to make the helmets we see in ANH or TESB, you'd expect them to be much sharper.
Even with multiple coats of paint , helmets in TESB looks sharper than these.
But they could very well be 20 years old moulds made from an existing helmet and used to make some tour suits helmets or whatever.
Even with multiple coats of paint , helmets in TESB looks sharper than these.
But they could very well be 20 years old moulds made from an existing helmet and used to make some tour suits helmets or whatever.
TK1536
Sr Member
Here's the same thing I posted on the MEPD board...
Not buying it. The fifth and sixth teeth are non-existent. The original buck would have those CLEARLY defined. And, there are to few to no air holes. In order to pull what we've seen made from real molds, it has to have many airholes pre-drilled in all the traps, eyes, teeth, etc.
Another tell is that the teeth insets are tapered. those would/should be much deeper and not curved-in, an obvious tell of a recast as it's taking the shape of a pull that never trully takes the exact shape of such a small detail like the smaller teeth. That whole frown should be super sharp and the fifth and sixth teeth clear as day, but they're not there.
Nice forgery, though. It certainly looks old.
Not buying it. The fifth and sixth teeth are non-existent. The original buck would have those CLEARLY defined. And, there are to few to no air holes. In order to pull what we've seen made from real molds, it has to have many airholes pre-drilled in all the traps, eyes, teeth, etc.
Another tell is that the teeth insets are tapered. those would/should be much deeper and not curved-in, an obvious tell of a recast as it's taking the shape of a pull that never trully takes the exact shape of such a small detail like the smaller teeth. That whole frown should be super sharp and the fifth and sixth teeth clear as day, but they're not there.
Nice forgery, though. It certainly looks old.
Star Wars Helmets
Sr Member
Exactly my thoughts.
Only having 3 teeth means they cant have been used for the Stunts and there are imo way too few air holes
Cheers
Jez
Only having 3 teeth means they cant have been used for the Stunts and there are imo way too few air holes
Cheers
Jez
AnsonJames
Sr Member
There's not enough undercut at the front of the bottom of the helmet - the moulds should go a lot further back, Definately not real. Looks similar to the J Joiner helmet.
GINO
Sr Member
Either the original face molds started out as stunt version and then were altered to forever become hero molds with filled in teeth (can't go back and use them for stunts), or..
There was an alternate set for hero faceplates.
We all know that the hero style faceplate mold was used for hero troopers and tie pilots faces.
Having 3 teeth on each side doesn't rule them out as being authentic.
However the lack of undercut raises questions. Maybe these did originate from Joiner. Raises questions in regard to what AA used seeing as he had a relationship with Joiner at one time back when discussing the helmet making venture. Is it possible that all of what AA uses comes from Joiner swag? Something to ponder.
There was an alternate set for hero faceplates.
We all know that the hero style faceplate mold was used for hero troopers and tie pilots faces.
Having 3 teeth on each side doesn't rule them out as being authentic.
However the lack of undercut raises questions. Maybe these did originate from Joiner. Raises questions in regard to what AA used seeing as he had a relationship with Joiner at one time back when discussing the helmet making venture. Is it possible that all of what AA uses comes from Joiner swag? Something to ponder.
voice in the crowd
Sr Member
<div class='quotetop'>(AnsonJames @ Sep 21 2006, 05:52 PM) [snapback]1323980[/snapback]</div>
Agreed under the cheek tubes isn't even close.
The teeth are a give away. Wasn't the same original mould used for the TIE pilot helmets faceplate. If that is the case the depth and width are wrong and no bump on the first tooth cut out on the right like this mould (looking on to the faceplate). Check www.starwarshelmets.com real TIE pilot photos it is really great reference to show this is wrong.
Nice idea with the two faceplates getting done at once
.
Shame he had all the other original moulds for the stormtrooper thrown out by his mum and dad when he moved house :rolleyes
Well at least he still has all the original ANH R2D2 moulds wonder if he left them in his back garden to make them look old as well
Agreed under the cheek tubes isn't even close.
The teeth are a give away. Wasn't the same original mould used for the TIE pilot helmets faceplate. If that is the case the depth and width are wrong and no bump on the first tooth cut out on the right like this mould (looking on to the faceplate). Check www.starwarshelmets.com real TIE pilot photos it is really great reference to show this is wrong.
Nice idea with the two faceplates getting done at once
.Shame he had all the other original moulds for the stormtrooper thrown out by his mum and dad when he moved house :rolleyes
Well at least he still has all the original ANH R2D2 moulds wonder if he left them in his back garden to make them look old as well
TK1536
Sr Member
my thought on the teeth issue on hero vs. stunt, was that the Hero was made of ABS and didn't pull as tightly as the Stunts. Whoever painted the hero helmets just didnt bother to paint the full frown because the teeth were less present. Just a thought.
Is there any evidence of two distinctly different molds for Hero and Stunt helmets?
Is there any evidence of two distinctly different molds for Hero and Stunt helmets?
voice in the crowd
Sr Member
<div class='quotetop'>(GINO @ Sep 21 2006, 06:01 PM) [snapback]1323986[/snapback]</div>
I don't think so the JJ helmet castings have the same features as most of the screen used helmets. Basically the JJ has all the qualities that the SDS has been critised for lacking like the cheek tubes and swoop at the back of the helmet. They just don't look like the SDS.
Chris.
I don't think so the JJ helmet castings have the same features as most of the screen used helmets. Basically the JJ has all the qualities that the SDS has been critised for lacking like the cheek tubes and swoop at the back of the helmet. They just don't look like the SDS.
Chris.
GINO
Sr Member
<div class='quotetop'>(voice in the crowd @ Sep 21 2006, 01:14 PM) [snapback]1323996[/snapback]</div>
Exactly. You are saying that the JJ stuff closely resembles the SDS stuff. I was raising the question is it possible that the molds SDS used for his helmets originated from JJ stuff all along? I know for a fact that he had a relationship with him and planned to source "missing" parts from him. This was told to me on the phone during a conference call with 2 other rpf members. Could these new molds in question be related to JJ. Could it all be related to each other?
Exactly. You are saying that the JJ stuff closely resembles the SDS stuff. I was raising the question is it possible that the molds SDS used for his helmets originated from JJ stuff all along? I know for a fact that he had a relationship with him and planned to source "missing" parts from him. This was told to me on the phone during a conference call with 2 other rpf members. Could these new molds in question be related to JJ. Could it all be related to each other?
- Status
Similar threads
