Origins of the AA/SDS Armor

[vaderdarth]

TK765, you can't say obviously recast with pics like that............what if AA used missing pieces off a used Jedi suit???? He might not realize the subtle differences that we do.....it has been 30 years. It sure doesn't match up with the GF suit in those pics in my estimate. (ridge is wider, yet other areas of the same section of armor are thinner)......so not necessarily related to a TE derivative. Just something to think about.

Peace,
Dave

 

[exoray]

Originally posted by vaderdarth@Nov 9 2005, 05:01 PM
what if AA used missing pieces off a used Jedi suit????

Then it could be said he lied in his emails where he stated that ALL the original molds where there... Just food for thought and what this topic is about as once again we have conflicting statements from SDS...

I believe the first priority it appears is to see where the SDS suit differs from the real deal and then search for a reason since it's claimed to be from the original ANH molds...

 

[vaderdarth]

Exoray, I see your point, but again, I'm not gonna speculate Andrew's motives for what he puts in an email.........nor do I find it constructive to compare suits using blurry pics.

I do agree that it will be refreshing to see both suits side by side in the same pics. That will answer several questions. It won't, however prove that his motives were ill concieved... He might have just goofed. What if the "all moulds present" includes original moulds and reverse engineered moulds from other suits???? What if in his mind, it's the same thing??? He obviously doesn't have the keen eye for details from each of the different movie suits. For all we know a stormtrooper is a stormtrooper is a stormtrooper. In the email I saw.......he said all the "mouldings" were there. He has specifically used the word mouldings in the past when talking about the physical armor pieces made off the moulds. I saw it in an email myself.

Speculation aside.........side by side pics will provide all the information each member here needs to draw his or her own conclusion. Some will ultimately decide to buy one......some will decide not to. That's human nature. We still shouldn't expect the opposition to agree with us even after this is all said and done. Agreed???

Dave

 

[Obi Sean Kenobi]

For the sake of posterity and completeness, several e-mails from AA are being referred to wherein he allegedly made statements regarding the provenance of the armor.

If anyone is in possession of these e-mails, can we see them in their entirety?

OSK

 

[exoray]

Originally posted by Obi Sean Kenobi@Nov 9 2005, 08:16 PM
For the sake of posterity and completeness, several e-mails from AA are being referred to wherein he allegedly made statements regarding the provenance of the armor.

If anyone is in possession of these e-mails, can we see them in their entirety?

OSK

[snapback]1113309[/snapback]​

You can read the locked thread refered on the second page of this thread but I will bring them over her for reference... They were posted by xmart, when he posted the prototype armor pictures...

The Stormtrooper Armour and `Battle Spec` helmet is now out.

The helmet specs can be found on our web site www.sdsprops.com and although the helmet is not from the original moulds, I have re-sculpted it from scratch to accommodate all the popular aspects that some collectors love.

In reality, I made 56 Storm Trooper helmets and every one was different, and so there is no definitive style. Our existing STUNT helmet is pulled accurately off the original moulds and hand finished.

The new `Battle Spec ` helmet differs in as much as the moulds have been squared up, the face is more vertical, the back is belled out and the hand painted sections are replaced by mouldings or stickers - nevertheless it still looks the business and retains all the soul and character of the 1976 Storm Troopers.

Using modern materials and manufacturing methods, I think the build quality breaks new ground in offering a superb piece that can be used for `Trooping` with a real sense of authenticity.


The armour is made from acrylic capped ABS, a tough milky white plastic just like the original. This comes complete and ready to wear with a full back up service and spare parts. It fits a large range of sizes, but if you are particularly large in certain areas, e.g.: thighs, calves, forearms & biceps, we have made the facility in the moulds to increase the overlap at the joints. This has been possible by rebuilding some of the old moulds to withstand the rigours of continual production and sharpen up the quality to the standard of the early mouldings in the movie.

The armour and helmet can be purchased separately, and you have to supply the black body stocking, boots & mannequin (if required)...all can be sourced on numerous web pages offering free info, or just ask if you get stuck.


` Battle Spec` (Stunt) helmet.Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…....£250 US $450
A helmet stand as optional extraÂ…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…...£25 US $45
Armour without helmet Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…£600 US $1080

We look forward to hearing from you.

Kind Regards

Andrew Ainsworth

Armour Moulds update.

All the moulds are there, but some have degraded with porosity in the surfaces and broken down with the pressure of moulding.- typically at the tops of the thighs. The early mouldings were crisp, but as we got nearer the 50 sets that we made for ANH, they were getting a little ropey. I have dug out problems like this and rebuilt the surface with modern durable mouldmaking materials.

Other areas, are the belt and knee mouldings, which were only made from softwoodÂ…. And so it was much easier to remake them in hardwood and retain the crisp appearance of the early sets of armour. The better, crisper, sets of armour were also used for the Hero`s ,and so all in all I think the level of refurbishment that we have done has resulted in a truly authentic looking set or armour which is as near the originals as it is possible to get.

 

[jeezycreezy]

More or less the same as above, this is what Andrew wrote to me. I'm not one to share personal correspondance without asking, so I did. I asked him if he'd mind my sharing this information with interested parties, including online forums, and he didn't have a problem with it.

Dear TJ
The armour moulds did not hold up as well as the helmet moulds over the past 30 years, and so I have rebuilt some of it to get the mouldings back to the accuracy of the first pullings, and also to accomodate [sic] a extra overlap in the limbs. for larger people. The armour was originally made for actors of 5`8" - 5`10" tall  and in general ,people are larger and fatter than that now.

Other than that, it is very accurate and made from a milky white  ABS just as the originals. The ABS is now Acrylic capped, which was not invented 30 years ago, and so all the new armour will retain the white colour.
Hope this answers your questions..
Kind Regards
Andrew Ainsworth

Dear TJ

Armour Moulds update.

All the moulds are there, but some have degraded with porosity in the surfaces and broken down with the pressure of moulding.- typically at the tops of the thighs. The early mouldings were crisp, but as we got nearer the 50 sets that we made for ANH, they were getting a little ropey. I have dug out problems like this and rebuilt the surface with modern durable mouldmaking materials.

Other areas, are the belt and knee mouldings, which were only made from softwood.. And so it was much easier to remake them in hardwood and retain the crisp appearance of the early sets of armour. The better, crisper, sets of armour were also used for the Hero`s ,and so all in all I think the level of refurbishment that we have done has resulted in a truly authentic looking set or armour which is as near the originals as it is possible to get.

Is this the sort of info you are looking for...

Kind Regards

Andrew Ainsworth

 

[TK765]

Originally posted by vaderdarth@Nov 9 2005, 10:01 PM
TK765,  you can't say obviously recast with pics like that............what if AA used missing pieces off a used Jedi suit????  He might not realize the subtle differences that we do.....it has been 30 years.  It sure doesn't match up with the GF suit in those pics in my estimate.  (ridge is wider,  yet other areas of the same section of armor are thinner)......so not necessarily related to a TE derivative.    Just something to think about.

Peace,
Dave

[snapback]1113161[/snapback]​

If its off a Jedi Suit its still a recast, I could care less what he recast it from or what he used. I didn't specify it was from this or that suit.

All the pics I have seen of his suits there is loss of sharpness everywhere.
You can only use the "the molds were damaged" excuse so far, then it just becomes a cop out. Especially when your not talking about just sharpness but also the general shape of the parts.

Of all the bucks the chest and ab should have held up the best. The fact that its lost alot of sharpness, has ribs that don't match and has shape similarities to lots of the replica suits throw up lots of red lights.

Like I said the only true comparison will be measurements.

 

[vaderdarth]

TK765, I've seen photos, on the other hand, suggesting AA parts are sharper in certain details than fan suits. So I have to respectfully disagree. I have already mentioned that some of the details don't seem to match the fan stuff. Gino should have some photos readily available of his Gino/CRProps armor.......lets throw it into the mix as well.

And I totally disagree about if moulds came from reverse engineering off a screen suit that it's still a recast.... Half the people here would expect him to try to get it as accurate as possible were some pieces lost. That is just a matter of opinion. Using that analogy, every suit out there short of screen suits is a recast. That will get us nowhere.

Peace,
Dave

 

[jeezycreezy]

Originally posted by vaderdarth@Nov 10 2005, 12:39 PM
TK765, I've seen photos,  on the other hand,  suggesting AA parts are sharper in certain details than fan suits.

Gino/CRProps armor.......lets throw it into the mix as well.

Focus people..

I think a better approach would be to post some nice, high rez shots of various SDS armour components first.

Then, if people think it looks like an original they could say so or, even better, do some sort of photo comparison and it could be discussed.

Or if people think it reminds them of other armour, they could do photo comparisons and compare measurements and pursue that course of action.

This falls in with Brak's excellent suggestion of studying this suit as the primary goal here. What results from that, well, who knows? What if, hypothetically speaking, AA's shoulders turn out to be from original molds. That to me would be more rewarding than the disappointment of finding that something might have been recast from another suit.

And I totally disagree about if moulds came from reverse engineering off a screen suit that it's still a recast....

I guess this might be a philosophical thing, or a "from a certain point of view" thing, and one we could debate in another thread if you like.

This thread is to come to a better understanding of the SDS armour and where it came from. All original moulds? Some original moulds and some rebuilt moulds? Were existing moulds refurbished and if so, how much? If AA did fill in any blanks from other sources, what were they and so on and so forth.

Once we've exhausted that avenue then, if people want to start pointing fingers and making accusations in another thread, then hey. Knock yourselves out.

Cheers.
TJ

 

[SithLord]

It's relevant because someone thought it was important to pursue the point that AA claims to have casted the suit from original molds.

I don't see any such claim in the emails. He states to have the molds, but that doesn't mean he used them all or could use them all. In fact it's pretty obvious from what he writes that he had to either refurbish some or make new ones and he refers to using mouldings in addition to molds.

Nowhere in those emails does it say "these suits were created from the original molds". Just that the original molds are "all there". And if his webpage uses the same title on each header then one need only read the information about the suit to see that it is a replica and not from the original molds.

I suppose there are some that will read into it what they want to... :unsure

:cheers,

T

 

[vaderdarth]

Good point Jeezy, measurements are the best tool we have. That will give us a much more firm foundation than photo comparisons. Again, comparisons aren't as usefull unless both sets of armor are photo'd together anyway. Hopefully someone will be able to do just that soon. The "points of view" stuff should probably be reserved for each individual person, for after we get all the information we need.

Dave

 

[vaderdarth]

Sithlord, I'd like to correct one thing you said..........he never said all "original" moulds are there......just all 18 moulds are there (from reading I assumed he was referring to ALL sources he used to get a full set since he elaborates on a couple of examples of refurbishment). Just so noone reads something into the quotes that might not have been intended by AA.

Dave

 

[GINO]

Originally posted by vaderdarth@Nov 10 2005, 09:00 AM
....he never said all "original" moulds are there......just all 18 moulds are there (from reading I assumed he was referring to ALL sources he used to get a full set since he elaborates on a couple of examples of refurbishment).

How could anyone read that and NOT think that he implys all "original" molds. To simply say all molds are there is like saying "I have a vac former in the back". It's already a given.

 

[vaderdarth]

I didn't......because he elaborates as to what had to be done and I read one similar email where he even describes re-creating the belt mould in hardwood. How can that be an original mould??? Some members here already think that if he even alters an original mould it's no longer an original mould. It's just how each of us percieve the information. Its hard to guage meaning in an email.....even harder to guage intent... Just something to think about.

Peace,
Dave

 

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

Original Mold means The same exact mold used to make the real suits in the film.

Damage or not is irrelevant when the features of the "new" items are far different than that of the originals in the film.

With that said, i still like my SDS helmet. I just want the whole TRUTHFULL story behind it.

 

[Obi Sean Kenobi]

Has anyone ever invited AA to join the RPF and answer some of these questions himself?
I seem to recall that happening at one point last year.
My thinking is it would avoid all this hearsay, and put to rest a TON of these issues, thus avoiding rampant speculation, etc. etc.

Sean

 

[Ghost Host]

I agree with the quote below from Jackie Chan fan.

Additionally, I also agree that mentioning he has the molds means original molds. Especially when you put it in the context of my direct question to him:

"As I understand it, like the first helmets you offered, this armor is also from your original Star Wars "buck" forms ...with a few "missing" pieces being fabricated? Is this correct?"

To this he responded:

Thanks for the order...delivery about 4 weeks or maybe sooner...
There were 27 mouldings in the armour and the studios were pushing us for instant results, and so we did not make some of the moulds as sturdy as the helmet moulds. All the moulds are there, but some had degraded with pourosity in the surfaces and broken down with the pressure of moulding. Typically at the tops of the thighs, the early mouIdings were crisp but as we got nearer the 50, they were getting a little ropey.I have dug out problems like
this and rebuilt the surface with modern durable mouldmaking materials. Other areas are the belt and knee mouldings, which were only made from softwood., and so it was much easier to remake them in hardwood and retain the crisp appearance of the early sets of armour. The better sets were also used for the hero`s, and so all in all, I think everone should be
pleased with this armour - I know I am.

Kind Regards
Andrew Ainsworth

In the end, I will be very pleased with having this armor made by the original maker. I have not yet seen anything to show that he used any fan suits to make new bucks, but I would be disappointed if he did, mainly because he originally had indicated differently to me. But having to repair an original buck is a non-issue to me, especially if he is admitting this up front. It happens on real productions. Similarly, if he had to make new bucks from an existing screen suit that he originally made, that would be a grey area and I'd cut him some slack.

Originally posted by Jackie_Chan_Fan@Nov 10 2005, 07:35 AM
Original Mold means The same exact mold used to make the real suits in the film.

With that said, i still like my SDS helmet. I just want the whole TRUTHFULL story behind it.

[snapback]1113642[/snapback]​

 

[gobler]

OK I will bring up one thing. Some people mentioned the "crispness" of the pulls. Remember he is not using Styreen like he did in 75-76, he is using ABS and thicker at that. That alone will cause some softening of the pulls. Don't belive me take a Styreen pull and an ABS pull off the same mold and judge for yor self. I don't have a Vac-former but I will ask any one here that does could you do this test? Not going to comment on the origin of the AA suit just thought I'd bring up something that was bugging me.

Cheer,
Jeff

 

[vaderdarth]

That is certainly true Jeff. I see that in my office daily. Doesn't even have to be styrene versus ABS, but different thicknesses of the same material will produce differing sharpness of the pulls. Good point.

Dave

 

[Clutch]

I've even seen differences between abs pulls as far as sharpness goes.