Chronicle Collectibles Jurassic Park Night Vision Goggles

TomVDJ said:

Sorry to say, but none of my top notch replica's are licensed props. I have some licensed replica's where I also have a fan-made version, and in most of the cases, the fan-made version is more accurate / better built than the official licensed prop. So purely stated the a licensed prop "derserves" the same price as a fan-made replica, just because it's offocialy licensed, is not justified in my opinion. All depends on built quality and accuracy, and in many cases this is the main concern of fan's when making replica's, while the main concern of companies is making profit.

Click to expand...

Statements like this always makes me laugh!

So many factors go into pricing and construction of a licensed piece that many people fail to see the process and bottom line.

Do some fan built items have better build quality and more accuracy? Yes, quite often. Are those fan made items worth the high price tag? Yes, quite often. But you need to realize a fan building a prop at home, who doesn't need to answer to a studio (who owns the rights) or a factory (who might need to change things due to production limitations), can achieve much more accuracy in the end. Sure you would hope a licensed prop could meet the same quality, and in many cases it starts off with that intention, but after changes by the studio (many changes you just don't understand why they want it changed), and corners that must be cut because the factory cannot mass produce something correctly, the licensed piece starts to become less accurate. And you can argue accuracy with a studio, but they have final say and they can squash your item before you bring it to market. So you play by their rules or you get nothing. In the licensing game you PAY even if you produce nothing. If you pay $10K for the licensing rights and never release one item, you do not get a refund.

And then there is pricing aspect. You are looking at tens of thousands of dollars put into the license.... lawyer fees for contracts and other legal issues... thousands put into the design and creating of the pre-production piece.... thousands of dollars given to the artist to paint it.... monthly paychecks for the employees on your payroll... contracting a factory for creating factory samples.... then contracting the factory to do the full production run.... then paying for a truckload of the items to ship via boat overseas.... then pay a freight delivery company to deliver it from the docks.... then pay your monthly rent on the warehouse you store the product in which can run upwards of $10,000 a month when you have a whole catalogue of products... then you have utilities for the warehouse and office.... and much more.

I constantly here people say, well the company is paying $75.00 per piece from the factory but asking $500 and that is greedy. Is it? Add all the above costs into the equation, and then you find your profit margin is depleted.

That means that often, the end result becomes a guy who makes a run in his garage avoids all that overhead and can sell a better quality more accurate item for about the same price and people question why. Like I said, people will never truly understand any of that until they have to deal with it daily. You will never understand the frustration of wanting to create something completely accurate, and having the best intend on delivering that, and only to watch it slowly slip away from accuracy with each requested change. And to want to make things affordable, but the more the changes happen and the more factory production run costs go up, you cringe watching the retail price rise.

@Moviefreak, I don't really understand... First you say that my statement makes you laugh, and then you end with the same conclusion I made: in the end, in most cases the fan that is doing an unofficial run, comes up with a better replica. So why does my statement makes you laugh?

You think Noble, Factory Entertainment, Master Replica's, etc... would do runs of props if they were not sure they could make profit? I doubt it. And indeed like you said: to make sure a release is profitable, they do make some shortcuts, because they know that a lower price will sell more of their products.

I totally understand tha licensing costs are huge and setting up a production line is costly, but for me as a collector, their are two things that matter: 1 quality and accuracy, and second: price. But quality and accuracy come first. For companies, they will have a balance between accuracy/quality and price, resulting in less quality. Let's face it: companies produce for a much broader audience than people on the RPF. I think the levels of accuracy that people on the RPF are expecting, is much higher than the everage expectations of that broader audience...

TomVDJ said:

Sorry to say, but none of my top notch replica's are licensed props. I have some licensed replica's where I also have a fan-made version, and in most of the cases, the fan-made version is more accurate / better built than the official licensed prop. So purely stated the a licensed prop "derserves" the same price as a fan-made replica, just because it's offocialy licensed, is not justified in my opinion. All depends on built quality and accuracy, and in many cases this is the main concern of fan's when making replica's, while the main concern of companies is making profit.

Click to expand...

My comments were in regards to this prop, not props in general. Your right most of my best props are fan made but that wasn't my point. Rylos are nice but not scanned from originals and these are. I would say this is one of the few props where the licensed piece is actually better than any fan made version (available for sale to us) up until now and in this example the fan made was not made by the average joe, it was made by someone (Rylo) who knows what he is doing and is a stickler for accuracy like most here. My point was that as accurate as Rylos are these are even more accurate, licensed, will come with a nice box, and from a business with overhead for the same price. Some were complaining about the price but I was just trying to illustrate these are better at the same price as whats been offered . Add the fact people are paying $700-1000 for Rylos shows that these are not priced out of line. One other thing, although these come from a company we all know Paul is a pro, a stickler for accuracy and a BIG fan so its not like were getting it from Toynk. I still consider this semi fan made.

Tom we can always get a licensed replica of these goggles and make it alot more screen accurate than it already is . That's the beauty of therpf!!

- - - Updated - - -

Zombie Killer said:

My comments were in regards to this prop, not props in general. Your right most of my best props are fan made but that wasn't my point. Rylos are nice but not scanned from originals and these are. I would say this is one of the few props where the licensed piece is actually better than any fan made version (available for sale to us) up until now and in this example the fan made was not made by the average joe, it was made by someone (Rylo) who knows what he is doing and is a stickler for accuracy like most here. My point was that as accurate as Rylos are these are even more accurate, licensed, will come with a nice box, and from a business with overhead for the same price. Some were complaining about the price but I was just trying to illustrate these are better at the same price as whats been offered . Add the fact people are paying $700-1000 for Rylos shows that these are not priced out of line. One other thing, although these come from a company we all know Paul is a pro, a stickler for accuracy and a BIG fan so its not like were getting it from Toynk. I still consider this semi fan made.

Click to expand...

I was honestly expecting the price tag to be $650 nothing less. I'm SHOCKED it's under $500

TomVDJ said:

@Moviefreak, I don't really understand... First you say that my statement makes you laugh, and then you end with the same conclusion I made: in the end, in most cases the fan that is doing an unofficial run, comes up with a better replica. So why does my statement makes you laugh?

You think Noble, Factory Entertainment, Master Replica's, etc... would do runs of props if they were not sure they could make profit? I doubt it. And indeed like you said: to make sure a release is profitable, they do make some shortcuts, because they know that a lower price will sell more of their products.

I totally understand tha licensing costs are huge and setting up a production line is costly, but for me as a collector, their are two things that matter: 1 quality and accuracy, and second: price. But quality and accuracy come first. For companies, they will have a balance between accuracy/quality and price, resulting in less quality. Let's face it: companies produce for a much broader audience than people on the RPF. I think the levels of accuracy that people on the RPF are expecting, is much higher than the everage expectations of that broader audience...

Click to expand...

Oh, I agree 100% with most of what you stated, but it was this assessment that I see time and time again that makes me chuckle:
"So purely stated the a licensed prop "derserves" the same price as a fan-made replica, just because it's offocialy licensed, is not justified in my opinion".

It seems people assume that since the quality/accuracy is less, then it should be priced at less. They always neglect to realize the amount of cost that goes into the piece. And yes, most companies want to turn a profit, that is why they end up with higher than expected prices and people end up complaining. It is a business and they need to make a profit margin to even stay in business. No arguing that with you. :thumbsup

Pitbull, if it had come with that head stand it would probably have been $650...lol

Zombie Killer said:

Rylos are nice but not scanned from originals and these are.

Click to expand...

Lineage to an original is nice, but if the finishing of the replica is quality-wise inferior, then I prefer an easthetically better replica without the lineage to an original. It's like RelicMakers Cross of Coronado: some of the dimensions are a bit off compared to the original, but the finishing of the replica is so great that in my opinion it's still the best replica of the Cross of Coronado out there...

Anyway, it all comes down to taste, I think. But even if this Chronicle version is scanned from the orginals, if they screw up with the finishing, that "scanned from original' becomes pretty worthless...

TomVDJ said:

Lineage to an original is nice, but if the finishing of the replica is quality-wise inferior, then I prefer an easthetically better replica without the lineage to an original. It's like RelicMakers Cross of Coronado: some of the dimensions are a bit off compared to the original, but the finishing of the replica is so great that in my opinion it's still the best replica of the Cross of Coronado out there...

Anyway, it all comes down to taste, I think. But even if this Chronicle version is scanned from the orginals, if they screw up with the finishing, that "scanned from original' becomes pretty worthless...

Click to expand...

Funny Im the absolute opposite - I want an exact copy of the original.

I used to love idealized versions. But the more significant a film is to me, the more I want the features to match. I want the mistakes. I want to appreciate the hand-made-ness of the prop. See the human quality to it.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

I do prefer the "prop as it would have been if the prop maker had put a bit more time in it" versions, I guess ;-). In movie making, quite often there is not enough time to finish some props in the details a propmaker would wish too. Why do you want imperfections in the representations of these props? Either you have the original prop, or you have a "nice" replica, I'd say... But hey, everybody his own preferences, off course ;-).

TomVDJ said:

I do prefer the "prop as it would have been if the prop maker had put a bit more time in it" versions, I guess ;-). In movie making, quite often there is not enough time to finish some props in the details a propmaker would wish too. Why do you want imperfections in the representations of these props? Either you have the original prop, or you have a "nice" replica, I'd say... But hey, everybody his own preferences, off course ;-).

Click to expand...

A screen used piece is fascinating for many reasons - to see its unfinished or rough quality adds a bit of admirable improvisation. I guess its a bit like a museum piece. I'd rather have the weathering to match it than not. I want it to be a copy of the relic than an 'imagined' interpretation.

But to each their own..

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Since reading Toms post about how he almost got Screen Production night vision goggles. I too would like to take a look at those photos anything helps.

It's been so long its easy to forget. They were originally 499.00 for the first few pair out of the gate. The price practically doubled for the second wave due to all the unforeseen work involved.

As for comparisons. It's truly an apples/oranges thing. My goggles were replicas of the background goggles on display at the parks. They were made for the production but we don't see them in the film. The lenses were static but the rings lit up. The toggles were non functional and have a lower profile, etc. Chronicle has replicated the known hero goggle and simply made a compromise with the lenses. No way to make those things motorized at that price point.

To be honest, if Chronicle's were available years ago when I started my project, I'd have just got theirs and never have even considered mine. BUT, since I had to dig in, I decided mine would truly be constructed like a practical movie prop. Mine were intended to look and feel like an actual film prop. When you flip them over, you can see how the sausage was made. The wires, the battery holders; it's all right there. The construction utilizes everything from heavy fiberglass and resin to machined acrylic; each and every pair were a labor of love right down to the custom airbrush. They're also very heavy.

Chronicle's goggles are what one would expect out of a well made licensed piece and in my opinion, exceptionally price appropriate. They're made for the public who have become accustomed to a pre-fab (for lack of a better word) build and they've done a fantastic job. There's gonna be a battery compartment, license info, etc. That's exactly what most new collectors have come to expect.

While I appreciate the compliments, I just don't think it's fair to Chronicle to compare what are essentially two different pieces made for two different audiences. The average guy who's never heard of the RPF just wants what he (in his mind's eye) remembers having seen on the screen, They want clean and homogenized. Rather like a Wand company phaser compared to a Jlong replica. There's one camp who says, "That'll do, it looks great" and yet another who wants something utilizing a different method of construction. Such is the case here.

These just appeal to different audiences for different reasons, that's all. Again, I appreciate the compliments on a project that took me forever to complete, but I say wait and see what Chronicle puts out. I'm sure they'll be price appropriate and a wonderful option for anyone who missed what few pieces I did. Or, they can make a great companion piece for the completest out there.

Just my 2 bits!

-Rylo

Edit: I neglected to mention what a number of you already know. Chronicle's Art Director/co-founder is a friend of mine. We've worked on numerous projects together over the years. He actually collaborated with me on parts for my goggles years ago so it's exciting to see his version come to light. Hell, these goggles could almost be considered cousins in this odd incestuous prop world in which we live! There's a bit of a tendency on the forums to compare the replicas that proceed the licensed props to the point of creating an odd competition. With regard to these, I've been in the loop since the project started so I can assure you they are everything their price point allows them to be and that's to be commended. Alright, I've covered it all now so people can stop sending me PMs. Right?!

davidJurassic said:

Just to be clear...the lenses will not wind in and out. They are static swappable pieces. But I like the fact we have the choice.

And personally the flaws/asymmetry are part of the selling point - so an inaccurate harness and some changes in the form, for me, detract a bit. If you want an idealized symmetrical pair Rylo is your man.

I think Rylos were originally around the $450 mark, but are much more like $800-1000 on the secondary market currently.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

An interesting thought, indeed. The same sentiment was floated with my old reveal saber. Some speculated that as soon as the EFX reveal was released mine would come down in value. I actually loved the work EFX did on their reveal and thought their price point was great. The end product was amazing, too. In the end, they made a great mass marketed piece.

BUT, as mentioned above, they truly were different animals. Mine was a die-hard interpretation of the known Elstree reveal with each and every piece having been hand machined in aluminum and brass. There wasn't the first piece of plastic on it and I spent three years finishing the project. You just can't achieve that on a mass produced (at a reasonable price) scale. My run came and went before most people ever knew about it. Now, the saber sells for twice the original price when you can find one. I don't even own one.

So, what do we attribute this to? Simple. I'm blessed to have a core group of people who appreciate my work. They know I'm fussy and anal retentive to the point of being practically dysfunctional. It's a miracle a prop ever leaves my house for as much as I can obsess. That effort translates to desire and makes one's efforts "collectible." Plus, most of my runs are insanely limited. Always low double digits these days. If you only make a couple dozen (or less) of something, it can make for a tough find if one has a reputation for solid work. The average collector has no idea who this "Rylo" character is. I'm comfortable knowing my stuff appeals to a select group...

So, we'll see. To your point, I saw a few of my sabers go low when EFX released theirs. It took about 3 months for the die-hards who missed my run to appreciate the differences. Since then, the value has continued to climb and it's rather understood among collectors what the differences are. I wouldn't say it means one is better than the other, just a different option for a different collector.

I'm excited to get a pair of Chronicle's goggles, myself! I'll set 'em right next to mine and consider my collection complete!

-Rylo

Funky said:

Only because there is nothing else currently available. No disrespect to Rylo as he makes a fantastic product but I suspect when these star landing on people's doorsteps Rylo's goggles will take a severe nosedive.

Click to expand...

I forgot to mention this earlier. To answer everyone's question about Chronicle's lenses on the goggles. They lenses will not extend and retract. You will get 2 sets of interchangeable lenses representing two settings.

Consider this a fact. Hope that helps!

-Rylo

NathansPROPS said:

Since reading Toms post about how he almost got Screen Production night vision goggles. I too would like to take a look at those photos anything helps.

Click to expand...

No problem. Cool to see there's interest in the pix. I'm digging them up now. Gimme a few min. =)

Tom

davidJurassic said:

Hi Tom would love to see those! Feel free to message me or post here.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Ok, here they are. I was offered these almost 5 years ago to the day.

Rylo said:

An interesting thought, indeed. The same sentiment was floated with my old reveal saber. Some speculated that as soon as the EFX reveal was released mine would come down in value. I actually loved the work EFX did on their reveal and thought their price point was great. The end product was amazing, too. In the end, they made a great mass marketed piece.

Click to expand...

That's a great example in fact. I have one of your reveal sabers. When I started looking for "a reveal saber", I first read about the EFX version. They had electronics, but reviews said that they were quite wobbly when extended and that build quality could be better. Not long after that, I discovered that you also did a very small run of reveal sabers (45 pieces or something like that?). Without electronics, but built very well. So I passed for the licensed EFX version and patiently waited until one of yours popped up on here of the Evil Bay, and in the end I was lucky to find one at a very affordable price (a bit more as what the EFX ones were going back then). I can not imagine that a company could come up with the same quality...

I do have some licensed replica's that are considered to be "high-end", like for instance the Star Trek Roddenberry Tricorder. But when I look at it (like the autistic collector I am), I see quite some things that could have been done better: The paint on the hinges is not 100% smooth. The decal is not 100% straight, the back of the tricorder is plastic, while the rest is diecast metal, etc... Not major things, and overall it's a great replica. But when I look at Rylo's replica's, I assume he is as autistic as me, because I rarely see something that could have done better. The only thing I can think of is the fact that the toppers on his last run of Hammond Canes were smaller (with smaller bugs) than his earlier runs (if I remember correctly, the toppers were made by a fellow propmaker) . I liked the slightly bigger toppers with crane flies instead. But apart from that... Can't think of anything.

So for me that's the big difference: I think I would be bothered with the asymmetry in the goggles, even if I knew one of the original props was also like that. So personally I'd like a good accuracy, but I don't mind some aesthetically optimizations if they don't compromise the accuracy too much. So that's why I also have both RacProps and Tomenosuke's version of the Blade Runner blaster, for instance: Tomenosuke's version is quality wise the best, but the barrell is way too black and the green leds do not light up. For that reason I also have RacProps version. But I'd just love to see a RacProps blaster that has the built quality of a Tomenosuke's.

Well, let's say I'm autistic about my prop replica's ;-).

Update on the Chronicle NV goggles:


-Accurate headband strap now in development, aswell as correct color plastic
-Padding also being included round inner edge of goggles
-Correct switches
-Demo pair being held appears to have lenses missing in this video - might just have been the only one to hand and lenses are detachable, but not having a finished piece I thought was noteworthy.
-Timeline "difficult to say", they "think first half of 2020".

I'm really pleased they are working up the accuracy and quality - my only concern is the timeline.

So no mention of the Cryogenic can?

Apollo said:

So no mention of the Cryogenic can?

Click to expand...

Looks like many of these are pieces that are receiving feedback/queries from buyers as to when they are coming out. I know the Syd Mead blaster and goggles have both been delayed at this point. So this is a way to get an idea of progress