TFA Graflex Research (That's a Graflex, right? Force Awakens teaser trailer #2)

O.K. I knew I saw a link for the video the other day, Title had posted it up in The Last Jedi Graflex Research thread...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZAryCaRE3k

Interstingly, in the photos of Madlyn Burket holding the "Rey Light Saber" prop where she's wearing the blue SCARIF sun T-shirt ( http://www.starwars.com/news/here-a...adlyn-burkerts-5-favorite-star-wars-artifacts ), the clamp cover simply looks stainless.

What I find most interesting in the video is what is written on the prop's blue storage bag...

Rey Light Saber
x 2

SO, does that mean there are two "Rey Light Saber"s?

And I sure wish we had a better version of this pic, since in that article... "On telling this lightsaber apart from versions used in the original trilogy: (Madlyn says--->)“This one has a pretty big tell. There’s an opening here for the blade to go in.”" She's pinching the Bulb Holder open, but there's still the Bulb Plunger sitting there... I don't see a hole! Is it a blade plug with a Bulb Plunger in it??? Or does she not fully understand that the "hole" she sees when compressing the Bunny Ears is just the enlarging of the Bulb Holder where she thinks a blade can go? Or are we simply unable to see that there is an actual hole around the Bulb Plunger?
rey-lightsaber-prop-madlyn-close.jpg

And she also says, “This is a new build. This was for VII and VIII. This was used on both. We saw what happens in VIII, so I’m really happy to have this one now in this condition.”

So, does that mean that this particular prop was used in TFA and TLJ, or that it is a new build (representation of the prop(s) used in TFA/TLJ because she now has one in this condition?...because one of them was destroyed. Or did she mean "new build" as in different from the ANH/ESB GRAFLEXes? Or since she's the Lucasfilm Collections and Exhibitions Archivist does that mean that this "new build" is for the traveling displays? Which brings me back to the blue storage bag and the "x 2" on it, and it's supposed to mean version 2?
 
Last edited:
I'm quite convinced it's a vintage. Maybe they had it replated or coated.

I'm not sure if there's a ring underneath the glass eye. There might be.

The clamp cover color is exactly like my stainless steel replicas. It was already clear from the 2015 Wired picture. To me, it looks like the same color. Maybe it's the fluorescent lighting.

Roy

Roy is it me or is the bottom tube not a shiny as the top? Check out the color in between the grips and compare them to the top of the flash

What do you think?
 
Smooth pins! Folmers in the ST.

i feel like they are vintages, but they definitely buffed them up. They eye depth is still odd. I thought maybe it was a result whatever their custom blade holder is-- but strait pins...
 
if they are early folmers, i know there is a deep glass eye, is there a difference in the threading with the deep glass eye?
 
There are so many variations of the eye, that's possible. I call uponthe power of @scottjua for an answer.


They're all interchangeable so, as far as I know and have had hands on out of 40+ real vintage flashes of various time periods, I have never seen them have a different thread pitch.

Also there's no washer I can see... it's just the base of the eye under the knurl (that's been machined away)... to me.

- - - Updated - - -

Now that the ESB Wampa Cave and TFA/TLJ versions are confirmed Folmers, their prices are gonna skyrocket even more! :(

Also, this new video doesn't prove much of anything. We know the screen used TFA hero (which is generally considered the close up prop), has much shorter T track on the bottom can. It was on screen...

We DO know that the prop department made a bunch of them... and you've seen different iterations in the behind the scenes blu ray stuff, at disney, in this new video, and on screen very close up in the movie. All are different from each other.
 
There's a lot of close ups of the one with long grips as well, though. I've got more screens of that one than the short grip Maz box saber

http://graflexbank.com/viigallery.html

sure, but the one meant for close up is usually deemed the "hero". In any case, my point is the one from the SW show isn't the one that they CHOSE for extreme closeup. It's possibly secondary hero, but it's different for sure. So there's no telling what the SW show saber is given the fact that so many were made.

Hel even by ESB it's hard to tell how many there are...
 
They're all interchangeable so, as far as I know and have had hands on out of 40+ real vintage flashes of various time periods, I have never seen them have a different thread pitch.

Also there's no washer I can see... it's just the base of the eye under the knurl (that's been machined away)... to me.


Right, but if the threading was removed, wouldn’t that expose brass as well?

I have a feeling these eyes (if not the entire flash) was scratch built

I don’t know why this glasseye is bothering me so much...
 
Right, but if the threading was removed, wouldn’t that expose brass as well?

I have a feeling these eyes (if not the entire flash) was scratch built

I don’t know why this glasseye is bothering me so much...

take a look at a real glass eye... the threading doesn't go all the way under the knurl...

I think you're misunderstanding what I said... the KNURL on the glass eye is machined away... not the threads.

With the amount of lazy prop making they did, there's ZERO chance they scratch built such a complicated shape... they simply turned down the knurl, nothing more. Even still... WHY they did that... who knows.

case in point the photo just above this post... shows exactly what I'm talking about.

Also the eye stick out, because with the knurl removed its probably hard to grip to tighten all the way down.
 
Btw Roy, u nailed that damn clamp card!! Holy hell is that spot on!!!

Maybe it IS one of Roy's cards...

Hey Guys, are you talking about Roy's Clamp COVERS? Or his Edge Connector Clamp Cards?

For a second there I thought you may have even meant slothfurnace's Clamp CARDS, but I double checked and Roy actually sells some too, and now I'm not sure what y'all are trying to say.

I'm pretty sure you meant COVERS, I'm just making certain we're on the same page. ;)
 
I think Roy nailed them both! But we never really hand any great shots of the card until now, with very little reference Roy nailed it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
case in point the photo just above this post... shows exactly what I'm talking about.

Also the eye stick out, because with the knurl removed its probably hard to grip to tighten all the way down.

Hey scottjua, I dunno. I'll have to double check my copy of the magazine, but that fuzzy pic above looks like it has a lock washer under the de-knurled ring. Hold on a second, I got this image covered last year, be right back.... Yep, here it is again...
attachment.php


So, the Empire Magazine GRAFLEX looks like it doesn't have a washer, but it still isn't sitting in place properly. Maybe it's a goofy shaped bulb preventing the Glass Eye from seating fully. I know I had to modify the lip of the LED bulb that I put in my GRAFLEX in order for it to seat the way it did with the old round incandescent bulb.

And with halliwax's experiment here... https://www.therpf.com/showthread.php?t=273467&p=4406487&viewfull=1#post4406487

I'm still in the "there's a washer under there" camp. At least for the 'Rey Light Saber x 2' in the 'GOT Creators Making New Star Wars Films, Up Close with the Falcon, and YOUR Solo Teaser Reactions!' video with Madlyn Burkert holding it...
LIGHTSABER - Rey Light Saber x 2 - held by Madlyn Burkert - Lucas Film Exhibitions and Collectio.jpg

Maybe it's a "light-a-fact" (photographic artifact), but it seems to have something steel colored beneath the exposed brass of the de-knurled ring that is almost the same diameter as what's left of the Glass Eye. A lock washer would certainly make sense in order to help prevent it from backing out and getting lost.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This thread is more than 5 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