Vader cheek mark (c-scar)

[defstartrooper]

Because I know how cinematography works. Things that are topical can look dimensional, and vice versa. Screen captures from ANH won't prove anything.

On the other hand, if someone were to have an original mold of the helmet (or 1st generation pull) whether or not the scar is part of the actual mold (thus dimensional) would seal the deal. The proof is in the pudding, as they say. If it's in the mold, it's dimensional. If it's not, it's topical. Simple as that.

The Baker mold apparently has no C-scar. Some claim that the UK molds do. But we've yet to see hard evidence of that.

Beyond hard proof, all there is are words and opinions. And often opinions are based solely on blind belief and biased, selective reasoning.

We may never know.

Oh i see one photographic proccess is unreliable but another isn't that's convenient isn't it.
I wouldn't hold much store with the images shared of the SL i'm 99.9% sure SL hasn't ever posted any images anywhere that haven't been touched up to obscure details.
You're quite correct though that there's no solid proof that the UK mould does have a scar of course there's no proof either that it doesn't.

And yes i agree 100% the proof is in the pudding and the accusation comes from GINO that there's no scar on the original helmet and never was lets see him prove it.

 

[defstartrooper]

I remember JRX talking about removing the paint and bondo/resin during the restoration.
But the removal of that material did not expose a c-scar.
That was added by him just because he was doing what he believed at the time made for a more accurate helmet.

It's really simple.


.

Oh my lord there you go again writing history according to GINO show me any proof that Jesper added the scar beyond you saying so.
By the way it works both ways folks before the eFX GINO has never ever made any mention of the scar being an added feature.

 

[GINO]

I think it would be a LOT easier to show that he didn't add the scar, and so far what we have seen very strongly shows that he did.
Nothing has been presented to show that he didn't.


.

 

[vaderdarth]

I respectfully disagree with your assessment on the C-scar.

 

[JediCarl]

Probably a very naive question: But who would actually have an ORIGINAL UK mold?

 

[vaderdarth]

If you have ever worked on fiberglass, you might use a dremel a sharp utensil and/or a hammer and remove bits of the original fiberglass. But if the object you are picking at is done with a toothpick or your fingernail. You are not removeing fiberglass or gel coat people, you are removeing a filler that did not bond chemically with the fiberglass resin. Once it is picked free the remaining surface details will feel relatively smooth aside from a few bumps. If however, you go digging down in the gelcoat or fiberglass resin, it will feel rough or prickly due to the ends of fibers or the fractured resin giving off little sharp shards. It won't be smooth like that TM C-scar. It's pretty basic stuff. Wishing it weren't doesn't change that. Why don't you ask JRX if he had to smooth the C scar after he picked it free. Perhaps ask specifically if he had to use sandpaper on any of the C scar area. That would be valid and that would imply an error in judgement perhaps. A toothpick? You think you can dig a hole thru your helmet with a toothpick? Wow.

 

[defstartrooper]

I think it would be a LOT easier to show that he didn't add the scar, and so far what we have seen very strongly shows that he did.
Nothing has been presented to show that he didn't.


.

Not the way it works GINO as you have so often stated when questioned yourself in the past it's up to the accuser to provide proof, the accused doesn't have to provide anything.

Surely you aren't making accusations without proof are you ?
I find that hard to believe.

Aside from that it's a completely idiotic statement for you to make as you're asking someone to provide something who isn't even here :rolleyes
I'd say it's a LOT easier for you to provide your proof wouldn't you given that you are here.

You say the evidence presented strongly suggests he did add it, well strongly suggests isn't proof and if you're going to make statements of fact you should have solid proof.
Not that i think your supposedly strong eveidence is all that strong, i see you saying there's no scar and no filler that's your evidence nothing more if you look at it objectively.

 

[AJK001]

So far, the only proof that I have seen from anyone has been the Baker mold pictures. I'm really tired of people thinking that the more they say something or the loader they say it, makes something true. Reminds me of certain politians. If you have PROOF, stop talking about it and post it.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm going own a helmet that is the best out there and there isn't really anything that is going to change my mind.

 

[GINO]

Proof has been posted, your dislike of me and not wanting me to be right is just not allowing you to see it.

 

[GINO]

Just in case you missed it, here it is again:

.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Again though, I ask the question of why this "resin" was not removed from the cheek with acetone? We can see the goops of resin on the eyebrows, but the cheek is dry and not photoshopped. You may not like the toothpick statement Dave, but that is what vadermania said earlier in this thread. He was told Jesper used fingernails and a toothpick.

Not correct. JRX/Jesper worked on the ORIGINAL faceplate. After I have sent the original faceplate to Jesper (with the intention only to restore the broken tusks), he found out, after further examination, that the black resin (which in fact was applied very sloppily on the faceplate) could carefully be scratched away with a fingernail or a toothpick. The black resin was found on many areas of the faceplate, most notably on the eyebrows and in the eyebrow sockets, the nosebridge, the mouth area, Vaders right cheek and the area around the left tearduct. It took Jesper literally ages to remove this material, revealing the detail underneath.

So, Jesper says toothpick, but you disagree, Dave.

 

[defstartrooper]

Proof has been posted, your dislike of me and not wanting me to be right is just not allowing you to see it.

No it hasn't theres no proof at all that jesper or anyone else you've accused has added that detail, none other than you saying so.
I know you have trouble seperating fact from fiction but unfortunately your opinion alone is not proof.

 

[GINO]

Again though, I ask the question of why this "resin" was not removed from the cheek with acetone? We can see the goops of resin on the eyebrows, but the cheek is dry and not photoshopped. You may not like the toothpick statement Dave, but that is what vadermania said earlier in this thread. He was told Jesper used fingernails and a toothpick.

Qui,
Acetone is not what you would use to remove something like this resin flake.
Paint, but not resin.

No one is questioning JRX picked off unnecessary resin.
What we are saying is that the photo of the original TM casting shows the bare cheek without any resin on top of it.
Thus, no scar to be uncovered.



.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

While I do not agree with the accusation, I do agree that proof that there is not a C-scar on the raw TM has been posted. It is on the finished piece. I'm fully ready to admit I am wrong if someone digs up some pics from this rebuild of the tusk tubes. How many can say that?

Gino, I understand all of that, but I am not getting how something like that could be removed with a fingernail or toothpick. This resin was exposed via acetone as something with a shine to it, unlike the surface of the cheek on the TM.

 

[Dark-Side]

If you have ever worked on fiberglass, you might use a dremel a sharp utensil and/or a hammer and remove bits of the original fiberglass. But if the object you are picking at is done with a toothpick or your fingernail. You are not removeing fiberglass or gel coat people, you are removeing a filler that did not bond chemically with the fiberglass resin. Once it is picked free the remaining surface details will feel relatively smooth aside from a few bumps. If however, you go digging down in the gelcoat or fiberglass resin, it will feel rough or prickly due to the ends of fibers or the fractured resin giving off little sharp shards. It won't be smooth like that TM C-scar. It's pretty basic stuff. Wishing it weren't doesn't change that. Why don't you ask JRX if he had to smooth the C scar after he picked it free. Perhaps ask specifically if he had to use sandpaper on any of the C scar area. That would be valid and that would imply an error in judgement perhaps. A toothpick? You think you can dig a hole thru your helmet with a toothpick? Wow.

Well, I read resin...

Besides the picture still looks photoshopped to me, we had cleared that the pic was made before the resin was removed.

If you use the dremel ,sharp utensil and/or a hammer I think you make a lot of damege...

If it was filler or bondo the things change... even if it's not so easy remove it with out damage the surface. But it could be plausible.
I also must say I never saw a black filler or bondo, but it's not so relevant.

I just try to understad the process, because could be an important proof...

 

[Zenwalker]

I just reviewed all my screen stills from the standard DVD, look at the Tantive scenes in succession for all screen stills and make up your own mind whether the C-scar is dimensional. Very cool! As vader's head turns and the light source moves from left to right etc.... the scar disappears. It's only visible when the light catches the raised edge. then go look at gino's photos of the legend and see what happens to the painted version of the C scar when it's viewed from each angle........gino's scar does not disappear. If it were non dimensional paint, it couldn't disappear as the light changes sides as the paint would still reflect light when in contrast with the black paint beside it. Again, don't take my word for it, go see it for yourself. It's pretty darn cool.

Oh yeah, I no longer need the photo comps, like I was gonna get them anyway...LOL. I found what I needed on the eFX website. That's where I saw it in the first place.

peace,

Dave

I posted about this in the efx thread. I watched this CU shot of Vader talking to Leia a few times on a high end 60" Plasma HDTV dispaly, frame by frame, backward and forward a few times. If you look closely at the other two gunmetal paint marks on Vader's right cheek, they also react to the light as he turns his head from left to right in the same manner as the 'c-scar'. The paint mark near the lower right cheek corner completely disappears just like the 'c-scar'. The larger gunmetal paint mark on vader's upper right cheek corner fades out as he turns and nearly disappears as well.

It's the metallic component of the gunmetal paint that is shining in the light when it hits it at a certain angle and has nothing to do with any dimesional mark. That's why the other two paint marks are reacting to the light in the same manner as the 'c-scar'.

 

[defstartrooper]

So, Jesper says toothpick, but you disagree, Dave.

I think what Dave was getting at here is that you can easily remove filler without damaging the resin underneath as the two aren't chemically bonded so are therefore seperate layers in answer to some asking earlier how you could remove the filler without damaging the helmet.

 

[GINO]

Gino, I understand all of that, but I am not getting how something like that could be removed with a fingernail or toothpick. This resin was exposed via acetone as something with a shine to it, unlike the surface of the cheek on the TM.

That stuff most definitely could be removed with a fingernail by scratching it off or by using an object to help scrape it.
The acetone only removed the paint to expose those areas.

I agree, the cheek shown in that pic is the bare surface with NO resin on it.
NO resin and NO scar.



.

 

[GINO]

It's the metallic component of the gunmetal paint that is shining in the light when it hits it at a certain angle and has nothing to do with any dimesional mark. That's why the other two paint marks are reacting to the light in the same manner as the 'c-scar'.

Exactly. :thumbsup



.

 

[vaderdarth]

Zen walker, if that were true, gino's eFX helmet would have displayed the same characteristics as the screen helmet in different lighting angles, yet he has failed to do so. Thus my argument stands.