ANOVOS Darth Vader

It’s very disenguinious to claim the R1 was “your helmet” it was not. Your helmet was scanned but had to be re-organized and many of your over exaggerated details had to be removed. A new helmet was then made from that model, not yours. In the same way that you have modified others work and claimed them as your own, you can’t claim it as yours.
Your “sculpting” definition is made to justify stealing others work.
Such as your modified SPFX armor. You did not get permission from him to use it. And yes it’s been confirmed you used an SPFX Anarchy casting.


Hi JediJeffrey. As you're trying this for the nth time, I'll give myself a golden JediJeffrey award!

I know you've tried this on the 501st SLD forums. And got banned. Banned on The Dented Helmet for recasting Man Of War's Fett shin tools -- and for threatening the admins there who, BTW, also run RPF. Claimed Darth Ugly was your helmet. Threatened to recast Darth Ugly. Then suddenly we're okay. Then suddenly we're not okay. Always evading when people ask you for evidence. At this point, you should truly seek out a licensed mental health professional and find healthier ways to channel your energy.

So I'm not going to even bother, though you might benefit from knowing that Anarchy took his "confirmations" down - probably because his claim my helmet is a recast of ANOVOS conflicted with his claim my helmet was an SPFX and someone may have told him it in no way helped his cause!

JediJeffrey a.k.a. Vader-Revealed info:
https://www.therpf.com/showthread.php?t=141445&page=4&p=3573748&viewfull=1#post3573748
 
Last edited:
But is that right with the scanned facemask?I´ve also heared that they scanned and modified it before they used it in the movie.
 
But is that right with the scanned facemask?I´ve also heared that they scanned and modified it before they used it in the movie.

The mask WAS scanned, but only to produce smaller pieces like toys. As I understand it for the movie, the Quasimodo mask was moulded and then very slightly modified from it's original state. The main difference was the tubes were removed and replaced with straight tubes, and a few 'blemishes' were removed. From what I was told, people were worried that with the super HD cameras that are now used, blemishes which we as fans and collectors consider to add character to a prop or costume would be easily visible and would detract from the overall look. Another reason not to go with an original cast, for all the naysayers who say they had access to the archives. Lets be honest, the original helmet looks like **** to the average film goer. They would have had to do so much clean up on it that people would STILL have been complaining that it felt sanitised, it wasn't the same, blah, blah, blah...

I don't know that myself or Mac has claimed that 'Quasimodo was used in Rogue One'. It certainly was used to produce the Rogue One helmet, and the tells are unmistakable that very little was actually changed. I initially spotted it because of the chin vent, so not all imperfections were removed. The shape and overall look is very much still in line with the helmet that I produce. I'm happy to discuss it privately as well if anyone wants to PM me. I strongly dislike getting involved in these kind of threads because there is always someone who only wants to start ****. I have no time for one upping anyone or explaining something 10 times in different ways.
 
The mask WAS scanned, but only to produce smaller pieces like toys. As I understand it for the movie, the Quasimodo mask was moulded and then very slightly modified from it's original state. The main difference was the tubes were removed and replaced with straight tubes, and a few 'blemishes' were removed. From what I was told, people were worried that with the super HD cameras that are now used, blemishes which we as fans and collectors consider to add character to a prop or costume would be easily visible and would detract from the overall look. Another reason not to go with an original cast, for all the naysayers who say they had access to the archives. Lets be honest, the original helmet looks like **** to the average film goer. They would have had to do so much clean up on it that people would STILL have been complaining that it felt sanitised, it wasn't the same, blah, blah, blah...

I don't know that myself or Mac has claimed that 'Quasimodo was used in Rogue One'. It certainly was used to produce the Rogue One helmet, and the tells are unmistakable that very little was actually changed. I initially spotted it because of the chin vent, so not all imperfections were removed. The shape and overall look is very much still in line with the helmet that I produce. I'm happy to discuss it privately as well if anyone wants to PM me. I strongly dislike getting involved in these kind of threads because there is always someone who only wants to start ****. I have no time for one upping anyone or explaining something 10 times in different ways.

Very well said Bookface. Kudos to you.
 
The mask WAS scanned, but only to produce smaller pieces like toys. As I understand it for the movie, the Quasimodo mask was moulded and then very slightly modified from it's original state. The main difference was the tubes were removed and replaced with straight tubes, and a few 'blemishes' were removed. From what I was told, people were worried that with the super HD cameras that are now used, blemishes which we as fans and collectors consider to add character to a prop or costume would be easily visible and would detract from the overall look. Another reason not to go with an original cast, for all the naysayers who say they had access to the archives. Lets be honest, the original helmet looks like **** to the average film goer. They would have had to do so much clean up on it that people would STILL have been complaining that it felt sanitised, it wasn't the same, blah, blah, blah...

I don't know that myself or Mac has claimed that 'Quasimodo was used in Rogue One'. It certainly was used to produce the Rogue One helmet, and the tells are unmistakable that very little was actually changed. I initially spotted it because of the chin vent, so not all imperfections were removed. The shape and overall look is very much still in line with the helmet that I produce. I'm happy to discuss it privately as well if anyone wants to PM me. I strongly dislike getting involved in these kind of threads because there is always someone who only wants to start ****. I have no time for one upping anyone or explaining something 10 times in different ways.

Do you think they used your dome also?
 
Ah ok...I was thinking you´ve seen it because you´ve seen so many Vaderdomes over the years.For me the dome looks like an EFX LE,LEGEND or PCR one.Very sharp centerstripe some dents but overall very cleaned up.I think that could be a source for it.:unsure
 
It simply amazes me that calls to put this thread back on-topic with ANOVOS are being ignored.

But it's astonishing how the last few anti-CSMacLaren pages of this thread has played out.

On the one hand, I can tell some posts are mocking and disparaging because the posters are simply vengeful, and one cannot appeal to their good sense privately.

On the other hand, I can't tell from some posts if the misinformation is deliberate (out of spite or slander) or an attempt to bait more information out of me and Bookface. When such supposition is promoted as fact and goes unchallenged, eventually, through repetition, they become "fact." And the ones that regurgitate the most are deemed to have "expertise."

And in some cases, they respond with "LOL" icons, as if that in any way hides their condescension.

This is, unfortunately, epidemic in this prop-collecting culture. So in light of this, there are some people whose motives and conduct compels me to add their names to a "Banned List" that I recommend to Bookface to NOT sell to such individuals. In other words, if you hate me that much, and you mock my artistic process, I don't really have much desire for you to own something I've sculpted. Be happy with the other 70+ makes of Vader out there.

There was once a humorous billboard that read, "Experts have opinions, but not everyone who has an opinion is an expert."
 
Oh boy, another Cat Fight between members bringing this topic completely off topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Maybe I’ll give steering back to Anovos a try, too...

It was mentioned a few posts ago that the Anovos had possible “Fiberdyne” origins. I’ve seen that name looking back through old threads, but I haven’t seen much about what the name refers to, exactly.

So, what is Fiberdyne, and what about the Anovos has that “look?”
 
Maybe I’ll give steering back to Anovos a try, too...

It was mentioned a few posts ago that the Anovos had possible “Fiberdyne” origins. I’ve seen that name looking back through old threads, but I haven’t seen much about what the name refers to, exactly.

So, what is Fiberdyne, and what about the Anovos has that “look?”


What an excellent question! Here's my two cents. (And I wish I had my Photobucket working... this would have been soooo much easier).

There is a helmet that was dubbed "Fiberdyne". Perhaps named after the fan who brought it into the fandom. And that was before my time.

Years back, the GH ANH Master and the Fiberdyne were compared and found to have very similar roots. I may have also seen a Fiberdyne in conjunction with Elstree Props. Elstree had erroneously called this the "4th pull" from the original ANH molds, and that was entirely a myth. Original Sculptor Brian Muir said only THREE pulls were ever made from the original UK-based production ANH mold.

The GH / Fiberdyne lineage comes from the US / Rick Baker mold. Some of the old Fiberdynes have a telltale "latch" on the masks' frown bumps. This, in turn, attached to a corresponding metal structure inside the helmet/dome itself to help lock it in place.

Years ago, Randy of SithPlanet posted pics of his SithPlanet ANH next to a mold (that appeared to not have a mold jacket). While the SithPlanet product does not have the latch feature, the mold did. Randy had once said the mold was taken off of a Planet Hollywood Vader. I don't have any pics of that offhand.

What's interesting of the GH / Fiberdyne line are specific features that show modification and deviation from the original. Now, on starwarshelmets.com, there is an actual ANH tour suit, but that suit does not have any of the GH/Fiberdyne structural traits/inaccuracies. Over on The Prop Den, we called that particular helmet the "MP" (Movie Poster) because of its striking similarity to an ANH helmet used in an ESB promotional movie poster.

Now here is where some facts get fuzzy. For years, there have been some documentation that Don Post Studios produced the tour suits. The GH/Fiberdye was believed to be an outcome of that - but now that I think about it, the "MP" (ANH tour suits) don't really have the same look. It was theorized a few years ago that it was someone's attempt (at DPS) to make the helmet more symmetrical. But now that I think about it, if in fact true that the Planet Hollywood Vader was SithPlanet's source, and if we can corroborate photos of such a helmet or display there, then it would be possible that something of the GH/Fiberdyne lineage was made to look such in order to differ from the originals. Again, this is pending evidence and corroboration.

Lastly, a few examples of the Fiberdyne lineage, specifically, appear to be on the small side, e.g. SithPlanet, SgtFang. A side-by-side photo between the ANOVOS and the eFX shows similar shrinkage where the ANOVOS mask was significantly smaller but on par with SithPlanet ANH and SgtFang.

The GH ANH, on the other hand, was used 8-10 years ago as a size reference representing the original. However, it's face is small compared with the size of the head, so it does make me wonder why size is inconsistent among the GH and Fiberdyne lineages.

Shoot, I'm really handicapped here without my Photobucket account. The images are all there, but I have no way of sharing them without starting with a new service. But I hope some of this, at least, makes sense.
 
Okay, so this may help.

So first, here is the ANOVOS. Keep this open in a browser tab, if you can:

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0...822-8259-ab0b156e1e23_1400x.jpeg?v=1457283275

Next, here is a JB ANH from back in the old days. JB - a known recaster who has been banned on RPF and The Prop Den - at one point claimed he had some Lucasfilm prototype helmet. A lot of this is covered on Jez' site: starwarshelmets.com

http://www.starwarshelmets.com/Final-ANH-Front.jpg

You'll notice there the top-edge of the forward-facing cheeks look similar, as well as the overall mouth pattern.

Click HERE for image

And here is the thumbnail of an image of the SithPlanet ANH compared with the mold. The mask on the left has a latch on the frown bump, but this may have later been removed from Randy's actual product (it's been years, but hopefully memory servces).

SithPlanet ANH comparison

Phew, I'm not that old. Here is an old photo of the SithPlanet ANH. Again, notice the similarity of features. No latch on the frown bump.

SithPlanet ANH mask

And here is a Sgt Fang, which was offered in kit form. A variety of mods done but you can see the telltale signs.

http://thepropden.aokforums.com/sgt-fang-esb-conversion-vt3137.html

And an old Den thread: http://thepropden.aokforums.com/where-did-the-fiberdyne-vader-anh-mask-come-from-vt1674.html

Let me know if you have any questions.
 
Very interesting, and helpful, thanks!

It’s a tangled web to sort through with all these different helmets, but what you’ve written cleared up some things that weren’t covered in the few threads I’d found.
 
Maybe I’ll give steering back to Anovos a try, too...

It was mentioned a few posts ago that the Anovos had possible “Fiberdyne” origins. I’ve seen that name looking back through old threads, but I haven’t seen much about what the name refers to, exactly.

So, what is Fiberdyne, and what about the Anovos has that “look?”

I will say the similarities that I see with the fyberdyne family and the Anovos is around the mouth vent. The fyberdyne always had the sides of the mouth caved in when they should if anything bend slightly outwards. The Anovos has that incorrect feature as well. Its one thing I noticed so that does not make it concrete that Anovos used Fyberdyne as their source. That feature was something that always turned me off when it comes to the face. I think it looks bad imo.

Fyberdyne

Final-ANH-Front.jpg


Anovos:

full-cd70ced60dc0cbc2210eec4effbfa03e-jpg.160774


It is the right hand side of the mouth vent(our left.
 
Last edited:
I will say the similarities that I see with the fyberdyne family and the Anovos is around the mouth vent. The fyberdyne always had the sides of the mouth caved in when they should if anything bend slightly outwards. The Anovos has that incorrect feature as well. Its one thing I noticed so that does not make it concrete that Anovos used Fyberdyne as their source. That feature was something that always turned me off when it comes to the face. I think it looks bad imo.

Fyberdyne

http://www.starwarshelmets.com/Final-ANH-Front.jpg

Anovos:

https://www.thedentedhelmet.com/forums/attachments/full-cd70ced60dc0cbc2210eec4effbfa03e-jpg.160774/

It is the right hand side of the mouth vent(our left.

It's incredible how a small detail just comes out to the forefront and you just cannot see anything else once attention is drawn to it or you consciously notice it yourself. I'm hardly a Vader pro, but was never excited by the ANOVOS one, I thought maybe it wasn't photographed well, but just something didn't feel right. Now that you pointed out the mouth triangle warping inwards I can't look at anything else on the mask and it probably explains why I didn't like it even if I couldn't put my finger on it.
One of my friends still curses me for pointing out that Vader is not symmetrical. He still tells me that every time he looks at Vader now he feels like looking at an old man with facial palsy...:lol
 
It's incredible how a small detail just comes out to the forefront and you just cannot see anything else once attention is drawn to it or you consciously notice it yourself. I'm hardly a Vader pro, but was never excited by the ANOVOS one, I thought maybe it wasn't photographed well, but just something didn't feel right. Now that you pointed out the mouth triangle warping inwards I can't look at anything else on the mask and it probably explains why I didn't like it even if I couldn't put my finger on it.
One of my friends still curses me for pointing out that Vader is not symmetrical. He still tells me that every time he looks at Vader now he feels like looking at an old man with facial palsy...:lol

Its the asymmetry that gives Vader character! Why do we need the perfect polished symmetrical crap that gives off a fake atmosphere(coughPrequelscough)?
 
Its the asymmetry that gives Vader character! Why do we need the perfect polished symmetrical crap that gives off a fake atmosphere(coughPrequelscough)?
Oh no, I agree completely, but we all know that for the normal movie-goer who's not really into props Vader is all-black and it doesn't strike them as asymmetrical. I was just musing how drastically things can change just by pointing out a simple detail and then it kind of takes over your entire perception of something like that inwards sloping mouth triangle. Speaking of symmetrical Vaders I wonder if anyone ever did a black/gunmetal ROTS helmet...
But not to weer off-topic, I relooked the official ANOVOS Vader photos, I can't unsee that mouth triangle now, but more importantly, I think the photos don't help this costume at all. Most of them are taken from a higher angle, looking down at the model (who's clearly not as big as Prowse), it sort of gives the impression of a kid costuming, even though you can see that the bits are quality bits.
 
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top