It is currently Sun Apr 21, 2019 9:05 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  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Enter your Message here
 Post subject: Re: ANH Vader cheek worm discussion thread
PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2011 10:14 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10538
Location: Denmark
One word: flash.

Another word: what in the Elstree picture do you say constitutes as a repaint and not just flash washing out loads of detail?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ANH Vader cheek worm discussion thread
PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:27 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:12 am
Posts: 3112
Too Much Garlic wrote:
One word: flash.

Another word: what in the Elstree picture do you say constitutes as a repaint and not just flash washing out loads of detail?


Well, the neck is curved so direct flash just affects the front bottom section near the center a bit, but that's it. Also on Vader's right cheek, top right (outer) corner, and parts of the front faces of the mouth triangle, bottom, nose and Vader's right side. All you have to do is look for saturation in the look-up table of the grey scale values and that would indicate direct reflection off a surface due to flash. But obviously I don't look at areas like that to draw a conclusion about a repaint.

Here is just one small example. On the left the original paint on an area of the front of the neck, showing a clearly dark blemish against the gunmetal background. Second from left, the same area at the time of the Corbis photos, made darker. Third from left the same image made lighter. And on the right, the Elstree photo, again the same area. The dark blemish is gone in both the Corbis and the Elstree, but they are themselves different indicating different instances of touchup.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: worm
PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2011 11:20 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10538
Location: Denmark
I'm perplexed by your reasoning. Absolutely dumbfounded. You're seriously calling the paint drip and how light and shadow reacts to it a dark blemish? You have to come up with something better than that to have it constitute a repaint and not just touch-up here and there - which Kermit Eller DID claim that he did occasionally - even if it IS a touch-up and not just how lights react to that area. That's not repainting where it would require substantial areas to be changed from how they looked, which is what the footprint ceremony and Oscars ceremony constitutes. THAT's a repaint.

Things are confusing enough as it is, without having to make things more confusing by misuse of terms.

And just to add a more likely scenario. That area is prone to rubbing by the cape chain... and you know what is so significant about that? Rubber can leave black marks... but it's easy to rub off again. So I've given you two more likely options than your extreme one - which a repaint is. Lighting and rubber smear. Anyone having wooden floors and wears shoes with black rubber soles knows this... easy to make marks and easy to rub them out.

And you're calling your creaturefeaturekid picture a Tantive original??? WOW... just wow again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: worm
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 3:40 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 1:25 pm
Posts: 2837
Quote:
And I looked at the thread that Darthvaderv posted, but the picture in that thread isn't showing the worm


2 different images from the Tantive scenes. Light can be very misleading at times but this is what I mean.
In other scenes it doesn't show.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: worm
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 3:50 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10538
Location: Denmark
Yeah, both are not showing the worm. Just the general gonk in that area, which are both on the TM and the SL and all other shots of the original, whereas the worms were originally on the TM as well, but got removed when it was stripped of paint and filler (how that happened if it was part of the cast, I'll never know).

The mold must have caught onto that gonk or something and ripped off those small pieces of silicone we call the worms. I'm sure the mold also ripped up at the tabs, which explains the gonk up there too, due to the shape of the tab pins (however, that could also have ripped with the first cast if it was successful to mold the tabs with pins - first cast would have cracked the fragile resin pins, leaving them lodged in the mold). All speculation on my part.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: worm
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 4:02 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 1:25 pm
Posts: 2837
No, I'm saying the images show a module/worm. Not as we know it like ESB but the light can give the impression it's present. This is what I mean perhaps we are misunderstanding one another. I have both TM/SL castings so I know what you mean from that aspect.

Jesper removed the worm from the original to make it ANH.

Forget the exact circles, especially the second one as being presented as worms but use it as a guide, nothing more as to what I mean.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

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:  
cron
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