Vader cheek mark (c-scar)

[encased]

It would be easier altogether to have 2 different masters though. Do all the thinking BEFORE it gets overseas. Do all the Legend pulls and finishes and then switch molds to the cleaner pull for the Limited so nothing gets confused.

The easier you make it for them the more consistent the results.

 

[GINO]

Completely different molds for the two different versions.

Remember though, this thread is about discussing the scar, NOT the eFX helmet.


.

 

[Trooper_trent]

Before i knew anything, i honestly thought the eFX was an awesome helmet, but that there were other helmets on top of it.
After reading this thread plus the closed eFX thread, i realize how great an investment i just made buying my Legend, this posts just made its pedigree go up and to my liking, even further than those other helmets that now they seem to have many skeletons in their closets.

Truth or not, i would be terrified at this point to have a helmet that is focus of a lot of controversy (bad controversy), not even knowing the authenticity of some of its key features and the thought that someone could have modified it.
Also, i found out that even the original owners do not know much of how that mold was made.
Theres nothing so relaxing than knowing that the helmet i own is top of the line, that the ILM people agreed on and helped providing all the research info necessary, and that very talented people were involved so that is built the best way possible... As long as the chinese factory doesnt mess it up.. Well see .

The only thing that has happened so far is raising the Legend status, and this was made only by those members that tried to take it down.

Best post yet. You said it beautifully. I have silently read through the entire EFX thread as well as this one as a fly on the wall, just taking in all the information being presented here as it concerns the investment I made when I bought a Legend helmet and the bottom line for me is, for all of GINO's faults and past attitudes, from what I see here, he is the only one that is playing by the rules. Keep in mind I have absolutely no loyalty to any of you so what I say here is purely from an outsider's objective standpoint.
GINO made a statement contrary to the popular belief that put into question the level of pedigree of some of the existing replicas and has consistently, logically, and calmly presented clear evidence to support his statement from several different sources.
On the other hand, the opposition has continually jumped from one counter argument to another, attempting to deflect attention, twist words, blur logic, misquote, confuse, back pedal, and in other words discount what is being presented. 22 pages later and I still haven't seen an original, clean cast, or a single picture of a mold that shows a dimensional scar was ever there.

If you want an outsider's opinion, you guys are not making NEARLY as strong a case as you think you are. All it looks like is that you're defending to the death something that you thought made your helmets the best in terms of pedigree and are afraid to admit that you might be wrong.
I'm not saying that's what's happening, I'm saying that's what it looks like to the rest of us.
Otherwise, why would you guys NOT be throwing out all kinds of proof and "told you so" pictures in an effort to restore your helmet to it's #1 position?

Repeating the same things over and over, louder and louder doesn't do anything to help your case, it actually ends up hurting it.
He who whines the loudest is still just whining.

Wouldn't you love to post a picture providing difinitive proof that would put GINO in his place and give him a big ol' serving of humble pie? So why don't you do it?
The only reason I can see that you wouldn't do it is that such a picture doesn't exist.

I'm just calling it how I see it.

 

[JediCarl]

Completely different molds for the two different versions.

And there it is.

Thanks for the clarification, Gino.

 

[AJK001]

Remember though, this thread is about discussing the scar, NOT the eFX helmet.


.

It would be nice if some would remember that, but some people just can't get past it.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

Best post yet. You said it beautifully. I have silently read through the entire EFX thread as well as this one as a fly on the wall, just taking in all the information being presented here as it concerns the investment I made when I bought a Legend helmet and the bottom line for me is, for all of GINO's faults and past attitudes, from what I see here, he is the only one that is playing by the rules. Keep in mind I have absolutely no loyalty to any of you so what I say here is purely from an outsider's objective standpoint.
GINO made a statement contrary to the popular belief that put into question the level of pedigree of some of the existing replicas and has consistently, logically, and calmly presented clear evidence to support his statement from several different sources.
On the other hand, the opposition has continually jumped from one counter argument to another, attempting to deflect attention, twist words, blur logic, misquote, confuse, back pedal, and in other words discount what is being presented. 22 pages later and I still haven't seen an original, clean cast, or a single picture of a mold that shows a dimensional scar was ever there.

If you want an outsider's opinion, you guys are not making NEARLY as strong a case as you think you are. All it looks like is that you're defending to the death something that you thought made your helmets the best in terms of pedigree and are afraid to admit that you might be wrong.
I'm not saying that's what's happening, I'm saying that's what it looks like to the rest of us.
Otherwise, why would you guys NOT be throwing out all kinds of proof and "told you so" pictures in an effort to restore your helmet to it's #1 position?

Repeating the same things over and over, louder and louder doesn't do anything to help your case, it actually ends up hurting it.
He who whines the loudest is still just whining.

Wouldn't you love to post a picture providing difinitive proof that would put GINO in his place and give him a big ol' serving of humble pie? So why don't you do it?
The only reason I can see that you wouldn't do it is that such a picture doesn't exist.

I'm just calling it how I see it.

Trent, you are my hero for the day.

Well stated!

 

[encased]

There's no reason we can't ask a couple more questions about the eFX while we wait for some new TM pics to show up. The eFX thread closed due to the scar (which shouldn't have happened as we should have just moved most posts over to a new thread to clean the eFX thread up.)

So unless someone wants to start a new eFX thread why can't we discuss that here and there in the meantime?

 

[JediCarl]

Best post yet. You said it beautifully. I have silently read through the entire EFX thread as well as this one as a fly on the wall, just taking in all the information being presented here as it concerns the investment I made when I bought a Legend helmet and the bottom line for me is, for all of GINO's faults and past attitudes, from what I see here, he is the only one that is playing by the rules. Keep in mind I have absolutely no loyalty to any of you so what I say here is purely from an outsider's objective standpoint.
GINO made a statement contrary to the popular belief that put into question the level of pedigree of some of the existing replicas and has consistently, logically, and calmly presented clear evidence to support his statement from several different sources.
On the other hand, the opposition has continually jumped from one counter argument to another, attempting to deflect attention, twist words, blur logic, misquote, confuse, back pedal, and in other words discount what is being presented. 22 pages later and I still haven't seen an original, clean cast, or a single picture of a mold that shows a dimensional scar was ever there.

If you want an outsider's opinion, you guys are not making NEARLY as strong a case as you think you are. All it looks like is that you're defending to the death something that you thought made your helmets the best in terms of pedigree and are afraid to admit that you might be wrong.
I'm not saying that's what's happening, I'm saying that's what it looks like to the rest of us.
Otherwise, why would you guys NOT be throwing out all kinds of proof and "told you so" pictures in an effort to restore your helmet to it's #1 position?

Repeating the same things over and over, louder and louder doesn't do anything to help your case, it actually ends up hurting it.
He who whines the loudest is still just whining.

Wouldn't you love to post a picture providing difinitive proof that would put GINO in his place and give him a big ol' serving of humble pie? So why don't you do it?
The only reason I can see that you wouldn't do it is that such a picture doesn't exist.

I'm just calling it how I see it.

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

 

[Peacefrog35]

And the limited will also still have the lumpy warbled surfaces, those were not cleaned up ...thank good ness! I thought the scar issue was pretty much solved. No?

 

[demorathis]

two different molds! (from the same RB source!)-- Cool that does eliminate all the filling sanding etc for each of the 1,000 helms!

ok I'm out...back to the grind...

 

[Amish Trooper]

Best post yet. You said it beautifully. I have silently read through the entire EFX thread as well as this one as a fly on the wall, just taking in all the information being presented here as it concerns the investment I made when I bought a Legend helmet and the bottom line for me is, for all of GINO's faults and past attitudes, from what I see here, he is the only one that is playing by the rules. Keep in mind I have absolutely no loyalty to any of you so what I say here is purely from an outsider's objective standpoint.
GINO made a statement contrary to the popular belief that put into question the level of pedigree of some of the existing replicas and has consistently, logically, and calmly presented clear evidence to support his statement from several different sources.
On the other hand, the opposition has continually jumped from one counter argument to another, attempting to deflect attention, twist words, blur logic, misquote, confuse, back pedal, and in other words discount what is being presented. 22 pages later and I still haven't seen an original, clean cast, or a single picture of a mold that shows a dimensional scar was ever there.

If you want an outsider's opinion, you guys are not making NEARLY as strong a case as you think you are. All it looks like is that you're defending to the death something that you thought made your helmets the best in terms of pedigree and are afraid to admit that you might be wrong.
I'm not saying that's what's happening, I'm saying that's what it looks like to the rest of us.
Otherwise, why would you guys NOT be throwing out all kinds of proof and "told you so" pictures in an effort to restore your helmet to it's #1 position?

Repeating the same things over and over, louder and louder doesn't do anything to help your case, it actually ends up hurting it.
He who whines the loudest is still just whining.

Wouldn't you love to post a picture providing difinitive proof that would put GINO in his place and give him a big ol' serving of humble pie? So why don't you do it?
The only reason I can see that you wouldn't do it is that such a picture doesn't exist.

I'm just calling it how I see it.

Wow this bears repeating a third time.. I mentined this earlier just not as eloquently and detailed but definitely needs to be said again.

 

[Juansith]

@ Trooper_Trent.
Music to my ears man, you said it all.
Unless more evidence is shown, after your post, everything is going to be pretty redundant.
If you ask me, i think that at this point we could turn the lights off of this thread and have a cookie .

 

[demorathis]

And the limited will also still have the lumpy warbled surfaces, those were not cleaned up ...thank good ness! I thought the scar issue was pretty much solved. No?

Just opinions so far

established is that the original Rick Baker US mold does not have one. And some of us are waiting on UK mold pics to compare. The causes and nature of the c-scar have not been established in concrete and they range from painted weathering, to paint wrinkling, to mishandling etc.

Personally, think it's a painted, weathering mainly due to the fact that the hues and colors match the other weathered details and react the same way to light and don't seem to match the edges that actually catch edge light, but that's just my opinion. And I don't see any other rough patches surrounding it. But there are different ideas across the board but I'm open to other speculation regarding it...

ok - now I'm out - I forgot to hit post 30mins minutes ago...

 

[darthvaderv]

I've not been around for some time.

As I was amongst the few in the beginning associated with the TM I'll just share a couple of things.

I used to speak to Jesper all the time and many things were covered about this helmet very early on. There are some things I'll keep private but he never confessed to me he added the scar but I do know subtle alterations were made, some intentional as recast traits (rightly so) and some mistakingly(from an ESB perspective mainly) (oversanding, worms, eyebrow, neck etc). I discussed the scar with jesper just as I discussed the whole TM runs. The alterations were never that bad once the group had permission to alter some of the flawed pulls from the original run. Yes the original was altered then but still we have to bear in mind 3 people were involved with the moulding and casting process in the end and this is just the original let alone the sideline runs of TM derived casts. Jesper spent 6mths doing his best I know some wern't as happy with his efforts but that's life. From what I recall the Scar was said to be there when I questioned it, it was blamed on the use of photoshop in the images to prevent the likes of Phil and John copying details onto their casts, this is why people are confused over Tom's pictures as Jesper indicated that they were photoshopped. As a friend I thought it rude of me to pry anymore into any accusation as the whole TM thing in the end became a mess apart from the integrity of Tom, Jesper tried his best as mentioned but trying to please so many fanatics would take it's toll. Yes there are flaws with the whole story but until another owner hurries up and strips his UK mold of paint :loveand Thomas looks more into the removal of paint on the TD the TM remains the only cast with an overly indented C Scar formation. There is no point asking Jesper to confirm anything as Nick has already stated he didn't add it so that's the word when I questioned it in 2007 to present day. Many other things haven't even been discussed in public as most of it thesedays is behind the scenes.


I own the most TM castings to this day, so it's an important item to me. However my interest is accuracy which I'm aware of and why I collect other authentic items and as I have said before and been the first one to make this point regarding authentic castings. The perfect blend of helmet is a mix of many others dependant on what version you seek. Things are better about the TD, the SL, DJ, TM etc. Both US and UK molds have their pros and cons. You would be a fool to discredit the TM just because the indentation of a C Scar is over pronounced. It is (pending flaws) the most accurate represenation of an ESB helmet in the community. However don't dismiss the TM for ANH. While I prefer some other helmets as an ANH base it does feature details that shouldn't be overlooked. There are many people on the sidelines here but having a collection of authentic pieces is what validates the process easier if you know what to compare study and so fourth.

The EFX at orlando was not accurate either as the scar is raised and indented more than that of a paint flake. The TM scar is also not accurate. This is no different than me telling people long ago that the domes all differ to such a degree, especially from ANH-ESB. One day this will all be explained but I can certainly say anyone who wants to keep their integrity is not about to make all these comparisons and take center stage when we have our word to keep and I mean this accross the board with all castings from ANH-ROTJ not just the TM.

 

[KaanE]

The EFX at orlando was not accurate either as the scar is raised and indented more than that of a paint flake. The TM scar is also not accurate. This is no different than me telling people long ago that the domes all differ to such a degree, especially from ANH-ESB. One day this will all be explained but I can certainly say anyone who wants to keep their integrity is not about to make all these comparisons and take center stage when we have our word to keep and I mean this accross the board with all castings from ANH-ROTJ not just the TM.

Ok, so if the TM scar is not accurate, then it doesn't come from a scar at the screen used helmet. I'm not asking where it comes from because we're here to discuss if there was a scar or a paint flake at the screen used helmet nor I do care about the TM because I can't buy it.

And don't get me wrong, I love the TM helmet, and no one is saying it's a bad helmet.

I'm DONE here.

 

[OldKen]

The more that is posted... The more I truly feel...

eFx FTW!

Maybe not perfect. But NONE of the fan castings are either.

If the factory doesn't botch the paint you will have one incredibly accurate piece for the price!

Anyone who doesn't believe the TM was fiddled with more than the eFx after changing hands so many times one by what I would consider a master sculptor... And it isn't even a possibility the scratch was added???

Idk.

I think every one of the helmets talked about in this thread are great. But NONE are perfect. And the eFx is licensed and CHEAPER!

How is that not a hit out of the park for this company?

I emplore you all to set down your popcorn and/or pitchforks and give eFx a round of applause for even attempting this!

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

I've not been around for some time.

As I was amongst the few in the beginning associated with the TM I'll just share a couple of things.

I used to speak to Jesper all the time and many things were covered about this helmet very early on. There are some things I'll keep private but he never confessed to me he added the scar but I do know subtle alterations were made, some intentional as recast traits (rightly so) and some mistakingly(from an ESB perspective mainly) (oversanding, worms, eyebrow, neck etc). I discussed the scar with jesper just as I discussed the whole TM runs. The alterations were never that bad once the group had permission to alter some of the flawed pulls from the original run. Yes the original was altered then but still we have to bear in mind 3 people were involved with the moulding and casting process in the end and this is just the original let alone the sideline runs of TM derived casts. Jesper spent 6mths doing his best I know some wern't as happy with his efforts but that's life. From what I recall the Scar was said to be there when I questioned it, it was blamed on the use of photoshop in the images to prevent the likes of Phil and John copying details onto their casts, this is why people are confused over Tom's pictures as Jesper indicated that they were photoshopped. As a friend I thought it rude of me to pry anymore into any accusation as the whole TM thing in the end became a mess apart from the integrity of Tom, Jesper tried his best as mentioned but trying to please so many fanatics would take it's toll. Yes there are flaws with the whole story but until another owner hurries up and strips his UK mold of paint :loveand Thomas looks more into the removal of paint on the TD the TM remains the only cast with an overly indented C Scar formation. There is no point asking Jesper to confirm anything as Nick has already stated he didn't add it so that's the word when I questioned it in 2007 to present day. Many other things haven't even been discussed in public as most of it thesedays is behind the scenes.


I own the most TM castings to this day, so it's an important item to me. However my interest is accuracy which I'm aware of and why I collect other authentic items and as I have said before and been the first one to make this point regarding authentic castings. The perfect blend of helmet is a mix of many others dependant on what version you seek. Things are better about the TD, the SL, DJ, TM etc. Both US and UK molds have their pros and cons. You would be a fool to discredit the TM just because the indentation of a C Scar is over pronounced. It is (pending flaws) the most accurate represenation of an ESB helmet in the community. However don't dismiss the TM for ANH. While I prefer some other helmets as an ANH base it does feature details that shouldn't be overlooked. There are many people on the sidelines here but having a collection of authentic pieces is what validates the process easier if you know what to compare study and so fourth.

The EFX at orlando was not accurate either as the scar is raised and indented more than that of a paint flake. The TM scar is also not accurate. This is no different than me telling people long ago that the domes all differ to such a degree, especially from ANH-ESB. One day this will all be explained but I can certainly say anyone who wants to keep their integrity is not about to make all these comparisons and take center stage when we have our word to keep and I mean this accross the board with all castings from ANH-ROTJ not just the TM.

Finally, a non-trolling TM post. Paul, your statements do not generally mesh with what has been stated from the other TM owners in regards to the scar, but not in a bad way. vadermania(TM) has already stated the image of no scar on his raw, stripped facemask has not been photoshopped. So, if Jesper is the one claiming that image was photoshopped and TM is the one who took the image, Jesper may not have been entirely forthright.

I don't think the lineage of the TM was ever in question. The work done to it is what has been questioned and those questions have fallen on deaf ears. This is one instance where Gino has offered up some pretty conclusive proof, at least to my eyes, and reading this thread, the eye of many others.

So, what is your take on the picture of the inside of the Baker mold? There is apparently no scar, indentation or anything like that to be seen. There are other dings and dents, but no surface indentation where the scar is shown on the TM.

The statement about the TM being the most accurate ESB helmet stands out for me. I will not dismiss it as a base for an ANH facemask either, but when "alterations were made", that kind of destroys the value of the facemask as a research piece.

"Overly indented c-scar formation"...this speaks volumes.

Ken, even if the paint job is lacking, one could strip that crap off and redo it one's self.

 

[GINO]

Thanks for making the post Paul.
I just want to go on record that I still think the TM is a fantastic helmet.
Jesper adding his interpretation to the cheek scar does not mean the helmet is rubbish, not in the least. Not to mention, a blemish like that can easily filled in on the TM for those who want to correct it.
And for the millionth time, I do not believe that Jesper added it in trying to be sneaky or anything. Just that he thought he was doing what he felt made the piece better with what he believed at that very moment.


.

 

[vaderdarth]

Thanks gino. Appreciate it. Noted will stay on topic.

 

[Darth Niob]

Jesper didnt add the C-Scar. The pic Gino posted was not photoshopped but Jesper said that pics were photoshopped because of the same reasons Paul wrote. Jesper told me how he removed the resin at the cheek under which the C-Scar was. I will post that tomorrow.
But to make it clear. Ginos pic was not photoshopped (Tom is right about that), the resin was on this pic on the cheek, teeths, eybrows and was removed by Jesper.....result were some fine details AND the C-Scar as part of the original helmet cast. Good night.