Vader cheek mark (c-scar)

[defstartrooper]

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.



.

Yes we have you saying it shows the bare cheek , again this is just your opinion it''s not proof, you do understand the concept of proof don't you ?

What you could equally as well have there is a picture of the helmet before Jesper removed resin, you yourself pointed out the resin on the eyebrow are we to believe that Jesper chose to leave that resin and remove the rest ?

 

[vaderdarth]

All it takes are two 3/4 angles from each side with the cheek in shadow and the cheek in full light. The screen helmet and the eFX helmet should appear to be the same where that scar is concerned.............yet. Well go on, do it yourself. I don't need to draw little circles around it. The only things that don't disappear on that screen helmet are the bits of primer at the edge. The C scar goes bye bye. You have the helmet gino, give it your best shot.

 

[Art Andrews]

By the way no baiting infraction for GINO making unsubstantiated claims against members then like the ones that have been given to those that question GINO's casts authenticity ?

Sure, if you want me to throw a couple your way, and a slew of them to the rest of those who are baiting in this thread and repeatedly making a personal issue out of a thread that is supposed to be about a helmet. I don't mind passing the love around if that is what you really want. Would put a number of you pretty close to being banned, but hey, I'd hate to not oblige you... Or perhaps you should leave the moderating to us and stick to the topic at hand. Your call.

 

[KaanE]

It's there GINO, just look closely:

 

[GINO]

Yes we have you saying it shows the bare cheek , again this is just your opinion it''s not proof, you do understand the concept of proof don't you ?

Certainly an opinion shared by the huge majority of people reading this thread.
It doesn't get much more conclusive than that.
What would constitute proof in your eyes? Serious question.
Something ridiculously unreasonable like a video of JRX adding it in?

I am of the opinion that more pics of the original TM throughout the restoration process would only strengthen and reinforce what has been shown.
'Shown' as in actual pics.
Not more hot air by those who have nothing to add other than verbal noise.

.

 

[vaderdarth]

Just more propaganda gino, just more propaganda.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

How is it propaganda, Dave? If you take away every bit of text, the images we have as evidence do not lie. You can talk about opinions til you are blue in the face, but you cannot debate the pics.

 

[vaderdarth]

It's his signature, it's his website, it's his way of life Qui.

 

[KaanE]

It's his signature, it's his website, it's his way of life Qui.

This has nothing to do with C-Scar, as another member pointed me out.

 

[encased]

I will have soon the infos from Jesper himself and maybe some pics. Dont forget ....all the restauration was done many years back. Only Jesper has all of the pics being made and since he has left the scene and nobody had any reason in the past to post pics and infos like that ....people forget. If you had seen hundreds of pics, some cleaned, some not, some here, some there and then wait 4 years after discussing this and other helmets on different forums ...you wouldnt know every detail....its just human...or not??

AWESOME!! Finally a post that might actually bring some useful information and pics of the process. Not that all of the posts up until now haven't been useful. I'm just hoping this will quiet some of the bickering for a bit.

I'm wondering why we have to get it from Jesper though. Is it not Vadermania's helmet? Why didn't Jesper turn over all of the documentation to him after it was all finished? If it were my lid I'd have made sure I received all the pics and notes to what was done. But that's just me though.

I'm just trying to figure out the accuracies in case hell freezes over and I possibly ever come across a chance to own a TM. Right now it's a moot point but I'd like to have an idea so I can either go after it or cross it off my list.

I can't spend money on multiple helmets so I want to get the one I like best. And choices are kinda limited right now.

 

[Zombie Killer]

You guys straight up gave us a BS story about the picture being photoshopped. Gino has provided pics of the Baker mold. Gino is not the one who needs to prove anything else. The evidence he provided is real. Your evidence consists of a picture falsly advertised as something it is not and now that you guys are called on it you bash everyone who points this out. We are still waiting for pics of the stripped mask with the scar and until it pops up i call BS on ALL your claims because you have been shown to not bring honest evidence to the table.

 

[GINO]

Just more propaganda gino, just more propaganda.

It's his signature, it's his website, it's his way of life Qui.

Wow vaderdarth,
Doesn't seem you can refrain from making it personal can you.
Why you still have a voice here after the way you've conducted yourself in the eFX thread and this thread I have no idea.



.

 

[Zenwalker]

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.

Your argument doesn't stand because you don't know how Gino lit that helmet. The lighting angle is completely different than what was shot on the original Star Wars set.
Are you saying that Gino was able to light his helmet in the exact same manner as the cinematographer for Star Wars? Do you know if Gino used the exact same paint as was used on the SU Vader helmet? Gino must be a genius.
Also, why are the paint marks IN THE EXACT SAME SHOT reacting to light in a similar manner to the 'c-scar'? Please explain.

 

[GINO]

Since 99% of the argument for the dimensional c-scar comes from TM owners believing that it was on the original TM casting, I think this discussion should focus solely on proving that true or false.
So far, everything has been overwhelmingly proving it false.

If we can come to consensus that it was not on the original TM casting, then there is nothing tangible to believe that it existed on the screen used helmet.
The only thing left would be what people see in screen caps, but nothing based in tangible in-hand reality.


.

 

[Amish Trooper]

As much as Gino is a pain in the ass and is stubborn I gotta say that you really have been very upfront with details. Kudos

 

[demorathis]

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.

In response to this, I believe the point of Gino's pictures are to SHOW the details as they are illustrating the differentces between the Legend and Limited editions...we have to see the weathered (dry-brushed) details, which is why it still shows in his lighting.


to everyone else,
I'm a Vader lover, always have, always studies the details of any picture ever shown since 77... haven't seen the original props up close in 77 ... just props since. But
I am also interested in seeing pictures of the inside of the UK mold.

See, The accusation comes from both camps - the other accusation being that the eFX is from a Rick Baker mold which was taken of a screen-used mask which was "repaired" of a C-scar due to it being created for tour helmets. So Gino showed his mold as asked, to support his position that the c-scar was not on the Baker Mold - which no one believed at first.

So I'm interested in seeing the inside of that original UK mold which is now supposedly the source of the c-scar helmets...

The c-scar on the above pics -- look built up to me -- that's just my opinion. If extra material were indeed removed but some abrasive tool, wouldn't it also damage or serve to neutralize the underlying "uneven surface of the scar? Flatten it if using a file or sanding tool,or make it even more uneven if picked out with a metal tool?
That c-scar is pretty damn rocky -- it should most definitely be obvious onscreen and should NOT reflect light as a semi shiny surface, but it does... it doesn't appear a jagged surface, just a few scratches...

Remember what set Star Wars apart from other films was the notion of the "Used Universe" everything, every prop was weathered...(changed in Empire to seperate the empire from the masses) I don't see how a moldmaker would have as the hero helmet a banged up Vader face -- a few scratches, but a horrible scar -- on VADER? Doesn't make sense to be for him to have a badly pock-marked cheek like that. I'd think someone would've fixed it before being on camera if it were real damage, or imperfection of that magnitude ... people get their butts kicked in this business for damage like that to a prop that's important even on small films. FIx it before it gets filmed --

I'm not saying that the scar was added maliciously - perhaps for authenticity, if one believed it existed like the tube was replaced for authenticity.

The Baker mold does not have the c-scar, so logic says the UK must have it...lets see pictures of the UK mold then. Whoever has thier helmets can go to their source who got it from their source up the line til the person with the nolds can send a pic...at the very least, our curiosities are satiated.

any pics for the rest of us of this particular UK mold?

I will say this, those who ordered the LEGEND, it is Lucasfilm sanctioned, it is approved and was provenance that goes directly to the screen-used helmet - repaired or not. It has not been molded remolded nor altered aside from the practical needs for it to survive production process. I'm happy with it. It is not a bootleg -- now that's not to say that there are not bootlegs that are closer to an original, but it has provenance and pedigree as somone on the boards had previously stated...

So, we now have proof that the Baker Mold has no c-scar (though I think if he "cleaned up" the helmet, why would he leave all the other pock-marks etc? Doesn't make any sense to me...

So let's have the UK MOLD PICTURE please ...just to satisfy the curiosty and end the c-scar argument.

 

[defstartrooper]

Certainly an opinion shared by the huge majority of people reading this thread.
It doesn't get much more conclusive than that.
What would constitute proof in your eyes? Serious question.
Something ridiculously unreasonable like a video of JRX adding it in?

I am of the opinion that more pics of the original TM throughout the restoration process would only strengthen and reinforce what has been shown.
'Shown' as in actual pics.
Not more hot air by those who have nothing to add other than verbal noise.

.

Ok then provide more pics of the original TM during restoration go on i'll take that as serious evidence i'm sure you must have such evidence given your bold faced unequivocal statement that the scar was added by Jesper.
You're surely not making such a statement based on nothing but your personal opinion are you ?

Come on now GINO what's good for the goose etc.
Your casts have been questioned in the past and you've quite rightly pointed out it's down to the accuser to provide proof not the other way round.
Or are you saying the rules you apply to others don't apply to you ?

 

[Al May]

You guys straight up gave us a BS story about the picture being photoshopped. Gino has provided pics of the Baker mold. Gino is not the one who needs to prove anything else. The evidence he provided is real. Your evidence consists of a picture falsly advertised as something it is not and now that you guys are called on it you bash everyone who points this out. We are still waiting for pics of the stripped mask with the scar and until it pops up i call BS on ALL your claims because you have been shown to not bring honest evidence to the table.

Sounds like you have made up your mind that because someone got it wrong no other evidence is going to change your mind , you aint a cop by any chance are you lol

 

[AJK001]

As much as Gino is a pain in the ass and is stubborn I gotta say that you really have been very upfront with details. Kudos

Too bad others havn't done the same. I've never understood it when someone expects you to believe them just because the say it often enough or loud enough without offering any proof.

 

[Juansith]

You guys straight up gave us a BS story about the picture being photoshopped. Gino has provided pics of the Baker mold. Gino is not the one who needs to prove anything else. The evidence he provided is real. Your evidence consists of a picture falsly advertised as something it is not and now that you guys are called on it you bash everyone who points this out. We are still waiting for pics of the stripped mask with the scar and until it pops up i call BS on ALL your claims because you have been shown to not bring honest evidence to the table.

And dont forget it was some of you that came questioning about the C scar and the dome flaring and the divot on the eFX.
Gino has given proof and answers on almost everything youve asked.
You returned the favor with assumtions and opinions about Gino.

And dont you forget, this all started because of some members trying to put their helmets on top of the eFX, this still is a matter of egos.

I dont think this is a matter of knowing the truth, i bet some of you have more pics of the TM and evidence and youre just not showing it, if this is about knowing the truth and you have it i would have no doubts that that person would have shown evidence by now.

... Unless the truth is something you wouldnt want people to find out.