So what about the Y-crease on the Darth Jones mold. Is the DJ's crease the same level of detail as the eFX?

Very nice Paul.

Looks awesome, Paul!

So let's look at these shots:





I understand and agree that lighting has a huge part in the perceptibility of the Y-crease, but even with lighting like these two shots, I thought I might see a little more detail.

Recall that with one of the eFX product offerings, Gino sculpted the Y to add detail back in. I haven't been keeping track of all considerations of the project and if they're going to production with Gino's modification.

On another note, the C scar is painted in an incorrect position.

As for the earlier comments of the C-scar being painted or dimensional, the good thing about the TM is that its surfaces reflect the paintbrush stroke textures of the original. In other words, it capture paint bristle direction, paint flaws, etc. Something as soft and subtle as the paintbrush strokes on the side of the mouth (which you can see on Hi Def screen caps) are actually *on* the TM's mouth surface. So if the C-scar were painted, then it would have looked like paint.

There is some speculation that the C-scar might have been due to damage due to handling. Then the dimensional aspect would have been in the paint. No-one has said the C-scar was sculpted by Brian Muir, so why this riles people up I don't know why. Moreover, the TM also captures paint drips that mach screen shots. Paint drips are dimensional as well.

If the C-scar and paint drips are not in the Rick Baker mold, then I'd really like to see what details actually survived by the time it was cast by Rick Baker. I've not kept track of conversations on this particular topic, but I do wonder to what extent the original was cleaned up when RB cast it. Is there any possibility it was done after its repaint for Chronicles? If so, none of the Chronicles shots to my memory show a C-scar as the mask appears repainted. And didn't we discuss a while back in the glossy dome vs. matte dome days that Vader had been repainted when he appeared at the Chinese Theater?

Are the worms in the whiskers in the RB mold? If not, those might have been sanded off as part of the repaint.

But regardless, don't get me wrong. This eFX is incredibly handsome. In a way, I'm glad Gino and not someone like SPFX had say in quality control. Gino may not be right in all things contrary to popular opinion, but one thing he is is anal. And that anality ensures a degree of quality that was absent when the Don Post Deluxe line came out and, years later, the *gasp* Rubies Supreme!

I agree with Paul that each of these accurate castings all have their pluses and minuses. But the eFX puts people light years ahead of what was available years ago, and definitely light years plus leap years ahead of an SPFX.

Ya, that sure is darn pretty.

The DJ ANH has at least the contour of the Y-crease and even though it was cleaned up a bit, is still much better than the eFX in terms of gross detail, and nowhere near what it would look like when it came out of the ILM/Rick Baker mold as illustrated below...this was just a quick comparison I made as the frontal angle/lighting is of course different in the photos. But I could show other angles and the story would be the same.

The problem or at least the arguments previously about the C-scar was that Gino was unable to make a simple observation in regard to what the C-scar actually was, and instead tried to cover his tracks by showing a small blurry image of the inside of the RB mold. It is there in its original form. It isn't painted on. It is a very slight discontinuity in the surface of the cheek, whether by a layer of paint flaking off or some other damage, maybe even a scratch...but a scratch could have resulted in loss of paint as well, plus the fact that the left cheek is more nonuniform in shape than the right so that dry paint would have more difficulty "holding" on if there was bumping of that area. And the paint drips are there too.



The whiskers on the RB mold have a bit of bubbling, or at least the SL ANH has that toward the top on the left side, but the worms are not there for whatever reason. Also, there is no evidence of repaint of the SL ANH, especially, and I have shown this ad nauseum in that cheek area, therefore there is no evidence of repaint of the original mask prior to the RB mold being taken.

I don't have all my comps here but here were a couple I posted before.

This shows the right temple with the paint drip and paint detail on the crown of the head.



This shows details around the C-scar that match a Tantive IV screen grab.






Yes, it is actually good that Gino oversaw this so that it could be made into the best possible product for collectors. But that is not the issue here. The issue here is how Gino portrays it as being perfect, and it isn't. Sure he knows something about paint, but he knows nothing about fine details as shown for example by his ignorance of what the C-scar actually is. Yes it is a highly desirable helmet and a pinnacle as far as licensed Vader helmets go, but I like to think we are also here to discuss its merits or drawbacks in detail because it is easy to just say wow that looks great.



Well that is for certain. And yes each casting is missing something, but I'll take whatever casting has the best detail of its kind and compare it against a licensed piece to see if it measures up to not eFX's standard, or Gino's standard, but my standard.

I'll say this: the criteria for the Don Post and Rubies helmets IS NOT the same as the eFX Legend line, so comparing the two is unfair. They offered the best they were interested in offering, as well as eFX is offering the best they are interested and able to offer. They are all Vader helmets... it's just our recent and educated opinions on the overall accuracy of the offerings that makes them different. Neither Don Post or Rubies clearly wanted to offer what eFX is offering now - it is the fanbase that changed and our sensibilities that showed the companies to improve their game in order to satisfy our ever increasing attention to detail and craving for the absolute best and most accurate. Previously people could be fended off with an inaccurate offering because they didn't know what the real deal was supposed to be and what detail it was supposed to hold. The top of the line in fandom then was the slightly cleaned up DJ. Little did we know of the level of detail that was revealed in casts popping up later... and that knowledge gave eFX the reason to make the choice they did to offer the more accurate stuff - they could see how worked up we got over the smallest thing and they KNEW these things would sell. They just underestimated how well the Vader would sell, or they would have made more. The other characters may not sell as well, so it's a balancing act... but the licensed companies pushed the fanbase, who in turn pushed back at the licensees to improve.

The softness of the Y crease reminds me of how it looks on the ESB Poster Helmet. Covered in thick paint. You can even see it in the softness of the edges on the raised center ridge - it looks like my scan - soft. And why they didn't paint the dome with the same gloss black paint that was used on the face mask is just beyond me.

Not fair for whom? The licensees or Lucasfilm?

Neither.

Then how can you say with such certainty and emphasis that the criteria for comparison is "unfair"?

A while back, a certain Fett statue was sculpted with a great deal of accuracy, but after showing the prototype to Lucasfilm, LFL asked for some changes that reduced what hardcore fans were hoping would come to market. Those who have been in the fandom longer may have other stories - stories that, when combined, seem to paint a picture that fans and licensees have, in the past, had to accept whatever level of accuracy LFL defined for a licensee to take.

The Don Post Deluxe, the Illusive Concepts bust, and the Rubie's Fiberglass Limited Edition have one thing in common: LFL-owned molds. Characteristic: softened detail in mask and dome. The dome on all three bear the same features, which is a soft fold line but a larger-than-screenused midstrip that is crudely ROTJ. After Don Post Studios, when Illusive Concepts made their bust, their dome had that same Don Post look to them. Likewise, the Rubie's FG LE was very Don Post looking, albeit with some subtle modifications.

Licensees either took what was given, or they didn't know to expect more. The license was based on ESB. Moreover, there is a belief among the fandom - founded or unfounded - that Lucasfilm purposely dilutes props for public consumption.

Come eFX, and they gunned for ANH, and got LFL to find the Rick Baker mold. Now, if eFX hadn't known to expect more and pressed for something that was sharp in detail and not super-cleaned up, then one wonders (given LFL's past treatments of licensed products) if the ANH offering would have been dumbed down or not.

Unfair to whom?

In Rubie's defense, they are not studied on the prop. They wanted a Vader and got the original Don Post molds, from what they've told me over the phone.

With eFX, they've established a track record already of fairly accurate merchandise. With stormtrooper helmets, thanks to Jez, they had some mentoring since the MR days of what fans expect - and the record sales and sellouts proved it. Not to forget Jez' participation in advising eFX on the ANH Vader helmet in addition to Gino.

One could say that LFL is in a different mode and would have just let a casting of the ANH go with all sharpness and details - without requiring a licensee to dumb it down. Perhaps they required dumbing down in the past to reduce the chance a mass production product gets passed off deceptively as a studio original. Now that accurate castings have emerged in the fandom, e.g. TM, TD, SL, VP, DJ, etc. -- it's only a matter of time before recasts get into the mainstream, making any "dumbing down" of sharpness a moot point. It would be difficult to speculate either way whether this had any impact on LFL's decision. They licensed Vader to Sideshow who used a fan source rather than something from LFL's own molds, so was that attitude or simply license cost?

So I've basically made comparison based on the end results of each endeavor, not the intent or level of knowledge of the licensee.

The end results were aided by studied fan input.

Absolutely. And that's why, to some degree, you cannot really compare the offerings.

It's like doing a 1:1 comparison between a Don Post Standard and Don Post Classic Action. Both a plastic Vader helmets - cheaper than the fiberglass variant. However, they both have different mission statements and intents. Sure the DP, Rubies and others were sold as "from authentic sources" alluding to being from the screen used molds or similar, without saying it straight up as that would have been a direct lie. They either didn't know and/or they didn't press for super accuracy, so that was not the criteria they were offering. They just offered officially LFL licensed helmets and masks.

eFX jumped in at the right time, with the right attitude and with the knowledge that accuracy would sell, but they still underestimated the market to some degree.

Just because they have different mission statements (where did you read them?) and intents, doesn't mean people won't compare. People have been comparing, for years. People have been comparing helmets in the fandom for years. Have you never heard of Comparison Shopping? People compare all the time, and they will use whatever criteria that means something to them.

This is a really good point.

What is interesting is that even with the TM, TD, SL, VP, DJ, how many of these helmets as copies are in private hands. Still very very few and there are just maybe a couple of instances of recasts of these. That is actually quite a good record when you think about the possibilities for recasters to recast one of these, and considering how many years these have been in the collector's eye.

Now, about dumbing down the eFX. Certainly eFX would contend there wasn't any dumbing down. But that is obvious both in the dome and the mask. Now, it is nowhere near what we've seen on the likes of the DP or Rubies, so it is more subtle but there nonetheless. Would the presence of the authentic castings owned by fans influence how much dumbing down? Maybe, but I would be curious what really went on in the process of getting the helmet from the RB mold to what we see now. The only way to confirm it would be to strip an eFX helmet down. So it should be interesting.

Some of the people reading a discussion like this might take the view that it is just attempts to downplay the accuracy of the eFX helmet. Instead of taking a negative view, consider that one can ask what is missing on a casting, or lost in detail, but one can also ask just how good is a casting, and what it has retained. So it is a cup half full or empty sort of thing. It is a great helmet no question and great for collectors. We are not allowed to nitpick about it on other forums, so here we have this little corner of the internet where we can nitpick and argue about what really makes a given helmet stand out, or fall short.

QFT!

Yes, quite surprising. Don't think the eFX is going to last that long without being recast imo.

Yes, it is almost a given considering the record of recasting of licensed Vader helmets in the past.