Prop and Model Restoration

Discussion in 'Replica Props' started by nick daring, Apr 10, 2006.

  1. nick daring

    nick daring Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,455
    I recently saw a prop restoration that broke my heart and would love to see and hear of other "restorations" gone wrong, with bad taste or just didn't need to be done.


    Here is the article that got me thinking about the subject.

    It's a rocket from the 50's sci fi TV series "Space Patrol"
    http://www.solarguard.com/t5restore1.htm

    I Truley feel that it didn't need a restoration job. A couple cracks isn't enough in my book to to completely refinish the entire wooden rocket.

    Even worse is using a final finish that wasn't on the the original. The putty layer completely removes the piece from it classic low budget origins. It's refinishing also forced the removal of the original markings with were in primo condition and should have been salvaged.

    Nick
     
  2. ob1al

    ob1al Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,961
    I agree - that's crazy.

    If someone wanted a perfect finish, why not make a mold from the original and finish a reproduction casting instead?
     
  3. moffeaton

    moffeaton Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,860
    11 foot TOS Enterprise at the NASM in DC. Seen the "restored" paint job on THAT beloved prop?

    (runs out of thread, sobbing uncontrollably)
     
  4. WinstonWolf359

    WinstonWolf359 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,671
    :eek

    Oh my God. I can't believe someone would take an original model and strip off every bit of paint like that. Yeah, that goes WAY beyond what could have been done. Crazy...
     
  5. SurferGeek

    SurferGeek Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,246

    What's sad is the person doing the restoration is considered to be a "master" prop man. Just goes to show that years of experience and many past sucessful projects and you can still f-up royally.


    :cry
     
  6. xeno

    xeno Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    746
    that is not restoring a model, the original model is now gone...for good... :cry

    I just started a job as a model ship restorer in a museum, and let me tell you
    being a modelmaker for over 13 years...this is a whole other ballgame.

    the importand bit is to preserve what is there, and not destroy the model by getting rid
    of the not so good looking stuff, like the old paint job...sjees

    lets hope he was smart enough to document in detail what it used (and should)
    look like.

    Xeno
     
  7. Lynn TXP 0369

    Lynn TXP 0369 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Looks better then it did and by the looks of it it came out pretty good.

    I may get flamed for saying this, but it needed to be done by the looks of it.

    Touching it up and trying fix only the bad spots would have made it worse then it was.

    Sure it could have left as is, but If that is what the owner wanted and he didn't like the way it was that is his perogative.

    Lynn
     
  8. Lynn TXP 0369

    Lynn TXP 0369 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    By the way that paint was coming off the back end of the ships fins molding it probably would have destroyed the finish even worse then it then was and it would have needed to be redone anyway.

    The puttying may have been a little over board, I do agree on that, but other wise it came out pretty good.

    Lynn
     
  9. WinstonWolf359

    WinstonWolf359 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,671
    Well, I guess it comes down to what the owner wanted and asked to be done. I don't disagree it looks brand new and perfect, but indeed the original model is for all intents and purposes gone forever, with no possibility of ever returning it to it's prior appearance.

    As for the 11ft. Enterprise... I think the color is still accurate but the weathering is nowhere near as subdued as what was originally on the model in the 60s.

    But in other ways it *was* a good restoration. The Smithsonian did a lot of damage to the model early on because they chose to screw eyelets directly into the model to suspend it from the celing. That damage was repaired. The model was also missing the original nacelle domes and deflector dish, which were replaced with much more accurate copies. The panels to hide the wiring on the "dark side" of the model were also substantially inproved and cleaned up.

    So really, if they wouldn't have gone crazy the weathering...it wouldn't look THAT bad... :)
     
  10. Funky

    Funky Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,840
    Are there any pics of the 11 footer?
     
  11. WinstonWolf359

    WinstonWolf359 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,671
    Here's a couple I'd had on my HD.

    First, how it looked in the 70s and 80s...

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    And after the 1991 "25th Anniversary" refit...

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    A common misconception was the 11 footer had NO weathering, which isn't correct. There just wasn't very much, and it didn't show up on screen very well because of the quality of spfx shots on TOS. You CAN see some, especially around the nacelles both on the NASM photos from the 70s as well as in clear screen caps of the E.

    But the overboard, pronounced grid lines, especially on the underside of the saucer, are going quite a bit beyond what was originally present.
     
  12. Funky

    Funky Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,840
    :cry
    Wow. The difference is dramatic.
     
  13. PHArchivist

    PHArchivist Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    4,500
    Did Mirecki (he's the one that did the 11' E, right?) go overboard on the weathering based on the principles of what the eye sees versus what the camera sees?

    Is is 100% clear that the original paint job -- in person -- wasn't that weathered?
     
  14. SurferGeek

    SurferGeek Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,246
    Of all the stage model pictures and screencaps and behind the scenes images I've seen published and posted... NONE of them had weathering to that degree. The saucer section is horrible. :( I will agree that it's good to see that restoration was done to repair the damage done by the Smithsonian but restoration means to return to an original, or as close to an original state. Not someone's interpretation.
     
  15. Lynn TXP 0369

    Lynn TXP 0369 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Now THAT is a horrible restoration and wasn't done right and is a crime.

    At leat the rocket from the 50's sci fi TV series "Space Patrol" was done better.
    Lynn
     
  16. Jedirick

    Jedirick Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,145
    What was done to the rocket would be like stripping all the paint off the Mona Lisa canvas and repainting it.
     
  17. moffeaton

    moffeaton Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,860
    Right - the restoration and color matching to the Ent was great - it's the weathering and replaced/changed sight gag decals that I disagree with. Some were omitted, and some were changed. The grid lines as originally seen were pencil lines (wth the lines getting fatter as the pencil got duller.) on the saucer. As others have said, it was NEVER that dramatic - even taking into account the intense studio lighting.

    I guess it's not a total crime since it could technically be undone - but what I think is far more damaging is the "precedent" it sets with how people refernce and view the Enterprise in a contemporary setting - there's probably a whole fleet of fans that think it WAS that strongly weathered. That's scary... it will invade artistic output, models, and how people paint their personal models. And no one but the SUPERNERDS care about the decals.

    :angel

    http://members.aol.com/IDICPage3/DoNotRead.html

    (All joking aside, it DOES * me off. History is history and should not be changed)
     
  18. Propazoid

    Propazoid Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    932
    Resortation work should only be done to a screen used prop when the item is severly damaged. Chipped paint & a loose wing is no need to destroy the integrity of the original prop. I am having a very special screen used prop restored in the next few weeks. This is a foam prop, that if left untouched would eventially destroy itself.

    -Zoid
     
  19. Mechinyun

    Mechinyun Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,241
    The Enterprise makes me sad now :(
     
  20. PHArchivist

    PHArchivist Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    4,500

    Very well stated...
     
  21. Ketzer.com

    Ketzer.com Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,231
  22. Treadwell

    Treadwell Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,325
    "Although it looks to be in reasonable condition here, the model was severely damaged and had been repainted since the series had ended. That, along with many years of neglect, required that the model be completely restored."

    That, especially the part in bold, justifies that extensive (and very well done) restoration to the 1999 Eagle, IMO.

    But the Space Patrol...wow, what a travesty. I agree the final product looks good, but not one bit of its history is visible. It's been removed and covered.

    Up until at least the early 80s, the full scale version of that rocket still existed. There was a little Starlog article about it once. I'll see if I can dig it up.
     
  23. WinstonWolf359

    WinstonWolf359 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,671
    Pretty impressive. I like the fact he seemed interested in returning the model to it's original condition, and left as many "no need to fix it" areas untouched as possible.
     
  24. Ketzer.com

    Ketzer.com Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,231
    :$ I must have missed that part.

    TIm
     
  25. Treadwell

    Treadwell Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,325
  26. Pauleysolo

    Pauleysolo Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,576
    The 11 ft TOS Enterprise in the Smithsonian could be repainted to "tone down" the weathering-especially on the saucer. It would take a lot of patience and airbrushing talent -but it could be done. They should use every reference photo- screen grab, and eyewitness testimony they could get -down the the square inch possible to restore -arguably- the most famous spaceship in science fiction history to it's studio finish from the late 60's. (No Offense to the Millenium Falcon)

    Finally, I saw the Enterprise in the Air and Space Museum in 1989 and what they have done to it is really a shame. I am sure Ed Miracki has heard the critics---becaue a lot of people have been upset about this since it was unveiled.
     
  27. Jimbo890

    Jimbo890 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    941
  28. Treadwell

    Treadwell Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,325
    The shuttlecraft had already been repainted and semi-restored on at least two previous occasions, and even so was rotting out and structurally unsound, so unfortunately I don't see how these guys had any other choice.

    Just shows to go ya that early efforts to preserve can make a big difference. If the shuttlecraft hadn't been in a boneyard for a decade before being rescued, rusting and rotting in the California sun, then there might actually be something original to look at now. It's a shame we don't, but it's either this restoration or nothing, pretty much.

    Old story I've told here before:

    An old timer shows a visitor an antique hatchet that he claims was the one George Washington used to chop down the cherry tree. It had been in his family for generations.

    "'Course, my grandpa used it on the farm and had to replace the head, and my pa broke the handle once and put on a new one."

    "So there's nothing left of the original hatchet here?"

    "No, but it occupies the same space."
     

Share This Page