Re-inventing Lukes ANH Lightsaber- And Vaders too??!?!
- Thread starter DARTH SABER
- Start date
DARTH SABER
Master Member
From the clear pic supplied by Jfowler it looks as though the
"flat faced" version is used for the glass eye...There isnt any space to indicate that its not screwed down all the way.Its screwed all the way down.
"flat faced" version is used for the glass eye...There isnt any space to indicate that its not screwed down all the way.Its screwed all the way down.
corranhornjje
Sr Member
Someone has a tag wrong in their post and it's jacking everything else up. Most likely teecrooz's as it's where the problem starts. I've had it done to me before and I think it was something with leaving out part of the quote tag that messed it up.
Ok, even I'm sold on the 7 grip theory. I was planning on re-doing the grips on my Larbel anyway because the Larbel grip adheasive never really set up properly, and I ordered a set of grips a while back but never found the time to put them on.
As I said earlier, for everyone who drilled 2 holes in their Graflex for the 2 hole Blast-Tech d-ring mount, if you unscrew it, remove it from the holes, and turn it around putting the d-ring opposite the outside, it will pretty much end up between the edge and the center of the bottom. The only problem is that you will have 2 screws and a longer mount then you should. I wonder if a single screw mount could be made that is 'just' big enough to cover both screw holes and be accurate.
Also, I have the Laser Disc versions of all the OT movies from the big black collectors addition box set, which also includes the original 'Making of Star Wars' and 'The Making of Empire Strikes Back', as well as a tour of ILM, but I do not have a Laser Disc player. If I can find one to buy or borrow, I have a friend who is a film student and has film editing software on his computer as well as the ability to do high res screen caps and will do them for me if only I could find a Laser Disc player. Anyone in the Dallas/Ft. Worth are know where I can get one? I have tried e-bay but so far most of the sellers are a little shady, and I called Pioneer and they still make a LD/DVD combo for $1000, a little pricy for me.
As I said earlier, for everyone who drilled 2 holes in their Graflex for the 2 hole Blast-Tech d-ring mount, if you unscrew it, remove it from the holes, and turn it around putting the d-ring opposite the outside, it will pretty much end up between the edge and the center of the bottom. The only problem is that you will have 2 screws and a longer mount then you should. I wonder if a single screw mount could be made that is 'just' big enough to cover both screw holes and be accurate.
Also, I have the Laser Disc versions of all the OT movies from the big black collectors addition box set, which also includes the original 'Making of Star Wars' and 'The Making of Empire Strikes Back', as well as a tour of ILM, but I do not have a Laser Disc player. If I can find one to buy or borrow, I have a friend who is a film student and has film editing software on his computer as well as the ability to do high res screen caps and will do them for me if only I could find a Laser Disc player. Anyone in the Dallas/Ft. Worth are know where I can get one? I have tried e-bay but so far most of the sellers are a little shady, and I called Pioneer and they still make a LD/DVD combo for $1000, a little pricy for me.
</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Hiyata99 wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
From what I can tell the bracket is approx 3/4" wide (or high in the pic) and the D-ring is coming out to approx 1 1/16". Due to the quality of the graphic this is not an exact science and some guesstimating has to take place, but I am confident that the measurements that I just mentioned are very close.
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>
I'm glad I'm not the only one. I agree with you about the image quality, but I don't know how some people's measurments differ by 6%- that's a LOT considering we're all looking at the same pic.
<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
James Kenobi 1138 wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Also, I have the Laser Disc versions of all the OT movies...
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
That's cool. IIRC, laser disc is about 425 lines versus 240 for VHS- so its image is significantly better. LD players should be dirt cheap now that they're almost extinct. I have a LD player, so you can send the discs to me if you want!! :^)
Hiyata99 wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
From what I can tell the bracket is approx 3/4" wide (or high in the pic) and the D-ring is coming out to approx 1 1/16". Due to the quality of the graphic this is not an exact science and some guesstimating has to take place, but I am confident that the measurements that I just mentioned are very close.
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>
I'm glad I'm not the only one. I agree with you about the image quality, but I don't know how some people's measurments differ by 6%- that's a LOT considering we're all looking at the same pic.
<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
James Kenobi 1138 wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Also, I have the Laser Disc versions of all the OT movies...
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
That's cool. IIRC, laser disc is about 425 lines versus 240 for VHS- so its image is significantly better. LD players should be dirt cheap now that they're almost extinct. I have a LD player, so you can send the discs to me if you want!! :^)
lonepigeon
Master Member
I've been coming up with these larger measurements for the D-ring as well. I was going to wait until I could pick up some 3/4" D-rings and measure them to say anything. I checked metric and it doesn't come out to any even numbers. A 1" D-ring is definitely way too big though.
BTW- resampling isn't going to make much difference at all. Chip and I are both graphics professionals and are very familiar with Photoshop and it's very precise. Getting this pic any larger won't help either really. You have to realize we're starting from a photo of Mark Hamill with the saber small at his feet- this thing's already been blown up beyond perfect clarity. I ran a sharpening filter on it before I even posted it to make it clearer.
I'm going to make the rounds at crafts and hardware stores Mon or Tues, see what D-rings I can come up with.
BTW- resampling isn't going to make much difference at all. Chip and I are both graphics professionals and are very familiar with Photoshop and it's very precise. Getting this pic any larger won't help either really. You have to realize we're starting from a photo of Mark Hamill with the saber small at his feet- this thing's already been blown up beyond perfect clarity. I ran a sharpening filter on it before I even posted it to make it clearer.
I'm going to make the rounds at crafts and hardware stores Mon or Tues, see what D-rings I can come up with.
THX1138
Sr Member
Just noticed something... look at the pic below posted by "Darth Saber"...
Notice that the clamp lever is not fully closed!!!
I feel the saber shown in the picture I have (that was scanned and posted by Chris Trevas) is in fact the screen used saber!
I think something was wrong with the clamp or lever that prevented it from closing all the way.
They possibly had the lever screwed in too tight into the side bar.
The D-ring also looks closer to the center of the tube in that photo.
- Jim
Notice that the clamp lever is not fully closed!!!
I feel the saber shown in the picture I have (that was scanned and posted by Chris Trevas) is in fact the screen used saber!
I think something was wrong with the clamp or lever that prevented it from closing all the way.
They possibly had the lever screwed in too tight into the side bar.
The D-ring also looks closer to the center of the tube in that photo.
- Jim
I got a Walmart D-ring that Darth Saber also has and it is close to MY measurments of the 'foot' photo. The "D" part looks too pointy though.
</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
lonepigeon wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
BTW- resampling isn't going to make much difference at all. Chip and I are both graphics professionals and are very familiar with Photoshop and it's very precise.
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
I disagree and not that it matters, but I work in graphics too. Try this test... create a checkerboard image that's 2 pixels by 2 pixels and rotate it 45º. You'll be suprised at the random appearing blob you get. I know, you're saying that's only 2 pixels, right? Well, the reference used to measure the d-ring is the O/D of the graflex which is only about 100 pixels. So, 2 of 100 is already 2%. Resampling is inherently inprecise, that's why it's called resampling.
Can anyone email me a un-retouched scan of the original photo?- one without any rotating, sharpening, or any post-scan corrections? tlrgsxr@yahoo.com
</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
lonepigeon wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
BTW- resampling isn't going to make much difference at all. Chip and I are both graphics professionals and are very familiar with Photoshop and it's very precise.
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
I disagree and not that it matters, but I work in graphics too. Try this test... create a checkerboard image that's 2 pixels by 2 pixels and rotate it 45º. You'll be suprised at the random appearing blob you get. I know, you're saying that's only 2 pixels, right? Well, the reference used to measure the d-ring is the O/D of the graflex which is only about 100 pixels. So, 2 of 100 is already 2%. Resampling is inherently inprecise, that's why it's called resampling.
Can anyone email me a un-retouched scan of the original photo?- one without any rotating, sharpening, or any post-scan corrections? tlrgsxr@yahoo.com
DARTH SABER
Master Member
ATTENTION! need a request for anyone who can screen capture...
I need a screen cap from ANH, where luke is sitting on the edge of the cargo hold after Luke, Han ,Chewy and Ben come out of hiding in the Millenium Falcon...
When Luke lifts himself out of the cargo hold and site on the edge theres a great shot of the Grips...Wierd thing is theres ALOT of spacing between them..
The other scenes showing the saber in the film definitely look like 7 grips though..
DS
I need a screen cap from ANH, where luke is sitting on the edge of the cargo hold after Luke, Han ,Chewy and Ben come out of hiding in the Millenium Falcon...
When Luke lifts himself out of the cargo hold and site on the edge theres a great shot of the Grips...Wierd thing is theres ALOT of spacing between them..
The other scenes showing the saber in the film definitely look like 7 grips though..
DS
SFPROPS
Sr Member
</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>Quote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color> So, 2 of 100 is already 2%. Resampling is inherently inprecise, that's why it's called resampling.</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
True, but with the lousy reference and weird angles we're using, you still have to "guesstimate" in order to figure out the best way to replicate this thing accurately. A 2% difference isn't going to matter all that much when you aren't dealing with a perfect specimen to begin with (and I too make my living as graphics professional).
I haven't bothered doing any measuring or scaling myself, but did pull out some of the clip and dee's I've got to see how they'd look. Again, they are 3/4 ID and 1" OD. These look pretty good to me just eyeballing. Here's what mine look like:
I did my Graflex in the old CP "How To Make A Lightsaber" manual style: using a bankers clip and pop rivets.
It won't be that hard to convert my Graflex (which wasn't accurate to begin with) to something a little closer to the orginal.
True, but with the lousy reference and weird angles we're using, you still have to "guesstimate" in order to figure out the best way to replicate this thing accurately. A 2% difference isn't going to matter all that much when you aren't dealing with a perfect specimen to begin with (and I too make my living as graphics professional).
I haven't bothered doing any measuring or scaling myself, but did pull out some of the clip and dee's I've got to see how they'd look. Again, they are 3/4 ID and 1" OD. These look pretty good to me just eyeballing. Here's what mine look like:
I did my Graflex in the old CP "How To Make A Lightsaber" manual style: using a bankers clip and pop rivets.
It won't be that hard to convert my Graflex (which wasn't accurate to begin with) to something a little closer to the orginal.
lonepigeon
Master Member
I just tried it again and got 1" outer for the D-ring.
It all depends on where you measure from, a few pixels made the difference (taking in some of the dark area just past the rim highlight).
You have to rotate the saber straight to even scale it accurately to begin with. You can only eyeball the center of the ellipse with it at an angle. There are plenty of other factors that affect this image as much as or more than resampling. We're dealing with a scan of a small part of an 8x10 photo printed from a negative (original or duplicate?) not even mentioning lense distortion from the camera itself.
It all depends on where you measure from, a few pixels made the difference (taking in some of the dark area just past the rim highlight).
You have to rotate the saber straight to even scale it accurately to begin with. You can only eyeball the center of the ellipse with it at an angle. There are plenty of other factors that affect this image as much as or more than resampling. We're dealing with a scan of a small part of an 8x10 photo printed from a negative (original or duplicate?) not even mentioning lense distortion from the camera itself.
Oohyeah KL
Well-Known Member
Man, I don't read this thread for a few days and this is what happens?!
Looking at the pics carefully again this time, especially at the space between the grips, it's very obvious that it has to be 7 grips, no doubt!
D-ring theory is also quite clear, IMO.
Well done, guys!
btw, is there a consensus on the ESB saber on how many grips?
Looking at the pics carefully again this time, especially at the space between the grips, it's very obvious that it has to be 7 grips, no doubt!
D-ring theory is also quite clear, IMO.
Well done, guys!
btw, is there a consensus on the ESB saber on how many grips?
lonepigeon
Master Member
The ESB saber is absolutely 6 grips.
The Wampa cave scene shows the bottom of the saber with 6 grips as well as the saber at Skywalker Ranch (used in Dagobah scenes) which also has 6 grips.
For the heck of it here is the original scan I received from Jim:
<img src=http://mywebpages.comcast.net/lonepigeon/lukeANHsaber_jf.jpg>
The Wampa cave scene shows the bottom of the saber with 6 grips as well as the saber at Skywalker Ranch (used in Dagobah scenes) which also has 6 grips.
For the heck of it here is the original scan I received from Jim:
<img src=http://mywebpages.comcast.net/lonepigeon/lukeANHsaber_jf.jpg>
DARTH SABER
Master Member
DAMMIT! why do my pics only stay posted for for a day or TWO ???!!!....Does anyone know whats up with this???it justa started hapenning in the last week.
I post a pic and its gone within a day???
Help!
I post a pic and its gone within a day???
Help!
E.D.C. Studios
Well-Known Member
</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
tlrgsxr wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
I disagree and not that it matters, but I work in graphics too. Try this test... create a checkerboard image that's 2 pixels by 2 pixels and rotate it 45º. You'll be suprised at the random appearing blob you get. I know, you're saying that's only 2 pixels, right? Well, the reference used to measure the d-ring is the O/D of the graflex which is only about 100 pixels. So, 2 of 100 is already 2%. Resampling is inherently inprecise, that's why it's called resampling.
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
Um, yeah but thats why you do NOT begin to rotate a graphic until its at a higher resolution. You need to pump up the res first significantly, then if you rotate the checkerboard pattern you will get two diamonds on top of each other.
That is why its important to use a vector based program like Adobe Streamline when doing such things. Furthermore, once rotated, all of the measurements along the same line will still be in proportion to each other, remeber we are only measuring in the same direction for all 3 elements here.
BTW - your graflex body measuremnt keeps coming up small because you not accounting for the roundover on the outside edge of the flash. the light is only hitting the very end...if you look harder you'll see the roundover is shadowed slightly. Its only a difference of a few pixels at screen resolution. This is why a bit of extraplotaion has to come into play here to, it always does when working from photos...if you can scale the bracket to .75" and the d-ring come up as 1" OD, its a really good bet thats what they are since they are both even measurements and known sizes of available brackets of D-rings.
The explanation of the rings being of British measurement doesnt hold too much water either, there are international standards to consider...I can order D-ring from overseas that are listed in mm sizes, but they all correspond to US standard measurements.
OH, BTW that D-ring sales comment, give me a break dude, I argue in the pursuit of factual info here, not to make sales. It wouldn't do me much good to sell D-rings that turned out to be the wrong size, and have half the RPF mad at me now would it?
tlrgsxr wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
I disagree and not that it matters, but I work in graphics too. Try this test... create a checkerboard image that's 2 pixels by 2 pixels and rotate it 45º. You'll be suprised at the random appearing blob you get. I know, you're saying that's only 2 pixels, right? Well, the reference used to measure the d-ring is the O/D of the graflex which is only about 100 pixels. So, 2 of 100 is already 2%. Resampling is inherently inprecise, that's why it's called resampling.
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
Um, yeah but thats why you do NOT begin to rotate a graphic until its at a higher resolution. You need to pump up the res first significantly, then if you rotate the checkerboard pattern you will get two diamonds on top of each other.
That is why its important to use a vector based program like Adobe Streamline when doing such things. Furthermore, once rotated, all of the measurements along the same line will still be in proportion to each other, remeber we are only measuring in the same direction for all 3 elements here.
BTW - your graflex body measuremnt keeps coming up small because you not accounting for the roundover on the outside edge of the flash. the light is only hitting the very end...if you look harder you'll see the roundover is shadowed slightly. Its only a difference of a few pixels at screen resolution. This is why a bit of extraplotaion has to come into play here to, it always does when working from photos...if you can scale the bracket to .75" and the d-ring come up as 1" OD, its a really good bet thats what they are since they are both even measurements and known sizes of available brackets of D-rings.
The explanation of the rings being of British measurement doesnt hold too much water either, there are international standards to consider...I can order D-ring from overseas that are listed in mm sizes, but they all correspond to US standard measurements.
OH, BTW that D-ring sales comment, give me a break dude, I argue in the pursuit of factual info here, not to make sales. It wouldn't do me much good to sell D-rings that turned out to be the wrong size, and have half the RPF mad at me now would it?
E.D.C. Studios
Well-Known Member
I color coded the measurements here to make this easier.
Blue comes out to 1.500"
Green is .750"
Magenta 1.028"
All measurements are taken from the INSIDE of the RED outlines
You can see the D-ring is just shy of 1.0625, which leave me to believe that it is a .750" ring, BUT as I am sure you will agree, it is a similar style to this:
If so, the way it bows out on the sides could account for the extra width over 1."
E.D.C. Studios
Well-Known Member
</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
jfowler wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Just noticed something... look at the pic below posted by "Darth Saber"...
Notice that the clamp lever is not fully closed!!!
I feel the saber shown in the picture I have (that was scanned and posted by Chris Trevas) is in fact the screen used saber!
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
Yup, I said that already!
Check my last post above where I also referenced this same pic
I am really beginning to believe this is the screen used piece...very exciting!
jfowler wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Just noticed something... look at the pic below posted by "Darth Saber"...
Notice that the clamp lever is not fully closed!!!
I feel the saber shown in the picture I have (that was scanned and posted by Chris Trevas) is in fact the screen used saber!
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
Yup, I said that already!
Check my last post above where I also referenced this same pic
I am really beginning to believe this is the screen used piece...very exciting!
Similar threads
