It is currently Sat Aug 24, 2019 8:26 am

All times are UTC


THE PROP DEN is primarily a Darth Vader Prop Discussion Board, but we also deal with other Star Wars Props as well as Prop Replicas from other movies. If you do not yet have an account, set one up, sign in and jump into the Vader Prop Discussions!


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Enter your Message here
 Post subject: AA/SDS Stunt Trooper - Distorted or not?
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:08 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
I've read on another forum (populated by very knowledgeable Stormtrooper costumers) some sentiments that the AA/SDS Stormtrooper looked either off or distorted, but they did not elaborate, nor could I register to find out why.

Could someone elaborate on the integrity of the AA/SDS compared with actual surviving physical props?

On Jez' site, he compares AA/SDS with a Gino and the Gino appears much smaller. I find this confusing because on http://www.looksirdroids.com the Gino (or perhaps the most current version) is based on two props. If so, how can two physical props be that much smaller than AA/SDS's molds?


The following shot is courtesy of looksirdroids.com

Image

More: http://www.looksirdroids.com/davin_replica2.html

As you can see, Gino's v.2 helmet looks great next to an original screen used helmet.

Now...

The following two shots are courtesy of Jez' site.

Left: AA/SDS. Right: Gino (what version, I don't know.)

Image

"Below is a nice comparison of a number of different helmets from left to right the Inaccurate FX, the Original mould AA/SDS, Gino/CRProps and the GF"

Image

So again, I don't understand. If there are two physical surviving props of roughly similar size and dimensions, and Gino's helmet is an amalgam of those two, then why are AA/SDS helmets larger than those props? And if so, what does that mean in terms of the condition of the mold?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:54 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:05 pm
Posts: 1312
Location: Pennsylvania
The AA/SDS does appear bigger...thats weird.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 9:01 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10576
Location: Denmark
From what I have heard, the SDS has a too large back and cap piece - not original - which is pulling out the face, making it look wider. Also, when looking at the side shots you can see that the neck opening on the SDS is different than the other "accurate style" helmets, as the tubes doesn't swoop in under themselves, but rather goes fairly straight down - most likely due to the vac-forming process - which makes the neck extend further than it should.

People having studied the SDS more could probably tell about more differences and similarities...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 9:14 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
Okay, so let me see if I understand this.

The current AA/SDS are vacuum formed?

If so, what exactly is the nature of these "original molds" that AA claims to have? If they are silicon molds (negatives), I can understand distortions due to pulling fiberglass castings out before they're fully cured. If they are solid hard positive molds over which you'd do a "pull" in the vacuum forming process, that's a different animal altogether.

If he has the latter, then there is no sense that a pull is distorted unless when piecing these together he's doing it differently. But if a Gino helmet is side by side with a screen-used helmet and looks more proportionate than the larger-looking AA/SDS, then I fail to understand why AA/SDS is being trumpted as being accurate when it is in fact not.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 9:24 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10576
Location: Denmark
CSMacLaren wrote:
But if a Gino helmet is side by side with a screen-used helmet and looks more proportionate than the larger-looking AA/SDS, then I fail to understand why AA/SDS is being trumpted as being accurate when it is in fact not.

Exactly. Depending on who you speak to... some say it is accurate and from original molds... others say that it is a bastard helmet made up of a real face-place and a newly made or refurbished unused original back & cap mold.

No matter... it is clear to everyone that some alterations has been made to the new helmets... especially near the neck area. Assembly could also not be completely accurate, as the originals were reworked by the people who wore them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 9:34 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
Here's one of the helmets Gino used to create his V.2.

Image

Notice this soft bevel between the green and purple areas. The AA/SDS does not have this. Now, the Gino V2 pull doesn't have this either -- some detail is lost in the vacuum forming process and possibly depending on the thickness of the material.

Now if Gino vacuum formed directly on top of this prop, then I'd understand his results.

If AA/SDS had silicon molds and cast a positive and vacuum formed over that, then I'd understand his results, respectively.

But I also happen to feel that the AA/SDS looks off at a certain angle. The area marked orange (the cheek bulge) is very pronounced on the AA/SDS at a certain angle, so it does not look accurate to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:11 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:07 pm
Posts: 404
Location: Michigan
OMG my brain hurts after looking at these.

:ill

I can definitely understand the desire for consistent photo angles now, Mac. Otherwise many of these subtleties can be created by the lens length and cam position.

Is there anywhere in the world that all these helmets are side by side (like they were for these photographs)? I would pay a hefty admission to see them LOL. Also I wish someone would digitize these suckers once and for all and get the data in some ICEM software or something so the differences would be put to rest!

**sigh**


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:44 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:38 pm
Posts: 816
Location: Essex UK
As far as i understand the history the stunt helmets were created first in HDPE and supposedly later on some in ABS although there has been no physical evidence to back up the story about ABS stunts being made.
After these stunts were made the moulds were reworked to create the hero helmets in ABS most notably the right eye flare.
If this is correct the current run of stunt faces AA pulls cant be from original moulds they would have to be copies of the hero face mould reworked back to stunt specs.
The only part that could be original would be the cap/back although most people seem to agree that it is at best a quite heavily restored mould or a completely new one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:00 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:47 am
Posts: 279
Hi people, we could spend hours, days or years even talking about this matter and still be disagree. Now from my point of view it is hard to compare different images and still be agreeing, the camera lenses, lighting factor never would be the same so it is not a fare comparation.

Still I want to show you this images from ANH and images from a current SDS hero helmet. If we focus on the facemask is all about the camera angle...just judge by yourself.



Image

Image


Last edited by AJCG on Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:53 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
crow wrote:
OMG my brain hurts after looking at these.

:ill

I can definitely understand the desire for consistent photo angles now, Mac. Otherwise many of these subtleties can be created by the lens length and cam position.

Is there anywhere in the world that all these helmets are side by side (like they were for these photographs)? I would pay a hefty admission to see them LOL. Also I wish someone would digitize these suckers once and for all and get the data in some ICEM software or something so the differences would be put to rest!

**sigh**



Hey Captain Archer! ;-)

There are some on starwarshelmets.com which is the source for some of the photos. That's Jez' site, whom I credited. But we're dealing with an absence of information. If AA/SDS owners can step forward and PM me, I can create some photography guidelines and then gather each person's photos and do some careful Photoshop comparison layouts ("comps" -- a real estate term).

Usually when people do comps they're comparing "A" and "B". But when they compare "C", they compare it against "D". But you may in fact want "C" compared against "A" and "B". So as extensive as starwarshelmets.com is, sometimes it doesn't provide you with the essential angles or comps you want.

You have a great helmet by the way. The dope I am thought it was misshapen because I didn't realize it was a Hero helmet. Duh, Mac!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:56 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
AJCG wrote:
Hi people, we could spend hours, days or years even talking about this matter and still be disagree. Now from my point of view it is hard to compare different images and still be agreeing, the camera lenses, lighting factor never would be the same so it is not a fare comparation.

Still I want to show you this images from ANH and images from a current SDS hero helmet. If we focus on the facemask is all about the camera angle...just judge by you.



Image

Image



The focus of my topic was more the stunt helmet, not the hero helmet.

But your photos show that the hero helmet does have that cheek bevel as I had indicated on the screen-used helmet on which the Gino Version 2 is based. The bevel was highlighted as being in between the green and purple surfaces. In this case, the Hero helmets you've shared does have this quality, but I find the AA/SDS stunt helmet to be lacking this -- where there should be a sharper bevel, it's more of a bulge and rounded.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 5:57 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:47 am
Posts: 279
Hi CSMacLaren,

I found this SDS stunt images in my image library, I got them from some fan website a while ago, I hope he does not mind if I share them with you guys :rolleyes . I really love this helmet. The lighting s completly different to the others pictures you posted since the pictures were taken outdoor, still is a good example IMO.

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:42 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 9:36 pm
Posts: 29
Location: Kent. UK
SDS lids are Vac formed.

The moulds are certainly not silicone.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:57 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:03 pm
Posts: 657
Location: UK
I'll try and answer this from my perspective and will endevour to try not to wind anyone up.

1) AFAIK the SDS helmet is the only one to be photographed side by side with original helmets (Matt G may have dont this a few years back but as usual he never distributed the pics). I did this with the Christies ESB Stunt in 2004 and then with the TWO Christies ANH Sandy's in 2005. I can post the links tonight but cant now as am at work.

The KEY thing about this is IMO the only way you can truly compare helmets is to have them physically side by side so you can guarantee the same size, lighting, lens, apature etc. etc etc. So the "side by side" pics of the Gino and original WILL show how accurate it is in detail, but NOT whether its correct in size since the helmets will clearly be sized to appear the same.

So while at Christies in 2005 I took about a dozen shots from every angle, rotating the helmets with the camera still. EVEN THOUGH I did this I still had some fool on the RPF say that I purposely phot'd them from "sds flattering" angles (ie 360 degrees!) - which leads me to believe that some people are so prejudiced you just cannot win!

In these pics you could see that the SDS is a pretty darn close likeness - sure the back doesnt hang right but very close nonetheless, and size-wise 100% correct imo. As "piggy in the middle" it also shows how different each helmet was, as the 2 originals dont look exactly the same as each other!

2) Is the Gino/CRProps helmet small?
Like I said its hard to say since Ive never had it side by side with an original. However people are right when they say its slightly smaller than the SDS and the pics of the SDS next to an original suggest that it is 1:1 - so that indicates the Gino may be slightly smaller.

However its worth pointing out that all the 50 helmets were slightly different. Each was hand pulled (often under extreme time constraints so the hdpe was heated to different temperatures, cooled randomly etc.), hand trimmed and assembled , so maybe there is no "one size fits all".

Cheers

Jez


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 10:31 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10576
Location: Denmark
BingoBongo275 wrote:
However its worth pointing out that all the 50 helmets were slightly different. Each was hand pulled (often under extreme time constraints so the hdpe was heated to different temperatures, cooled randomly etc.), hand trimmed and assembled , so maybe there is no "one size fits all".

That right there is another point to why comparisons for the Stormtrooper helmets are in general: pointless. None of the 50 original helmets made were identical... so unless you compare the replica with the exact helmet source it was replicated from you will find discrepancies and inaccuracies. Saying that the GINO is wrong when comparing it to one helmet is flawed, unless it is compared to the exact helmet it was copied from... and since one of his helmets is a merging of two helmets... just makes it harder.

SDS is probably not under the same time constraints as he was back during production, so naturally, the helmets would look different, if they were using the original molds. One could argue that these new helmets are as the helmets in production WOULD HAVE LOOKED if they hadn't had to rush things. Seriously... I'm not saying either way... just speculating here. Also... construction and assembly plays a major part in the look of these helmets... but we ALL KNOW that the screen helmets were different and had an individual look not shared by the others. This is what makes any comparison and any outcry for or against to be utterly ridiculous and basically a waste of time.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Hosted by Freeforum.ca, get your free forum now! TOS | Support Forums | Report a violation
buy web visitors
MultiForums powered by echoPHP phpBB MultiForums