It is currently Thu May 23, 2019 8:13 pm

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  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Enter your Message here
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:12 am
Posts: 3112
AnsonJames wrote:
If correctly moulded and cast generational shrinkage would be negligible, certainly not enough to be able to see.
If incorrectly cast it's completely possible for two casts from the same mould to be different sizes.


Again, you can have related helmets made from different individuals and if they come from the same source then they are surprisingly similar in size, let alone variance between pulls from the same mold. The differences based on presumed lineage far outweigh casting-to-casting differences. Sure it's possible to have completely different sized castings from the same mold if the person doing the work isn't consistent in their methods. But the size range itself across the whole fanmade helmet spectrum is not that great. It takes accurate measurements to see the trend.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:58 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:12 am
Posts: 3112
Qui-Gonzalez wrote:
Quote:
If correctly moulded and cast generational shrinkage would be negligible, certainly not enough to be able to see.
If incorrectly cast it's completely possible for two casts from the same mould to be different sizes.

Sounds to me like we can pretty much dismiss the whole "Size is an indicator" as a fallacy.


Or rather, that you will base a conclusion about all fanmade helmets on a simple methodological consideration without even looking for evidence to the contrary.....I find that approach lacking in vigor and amounting to "because of this, then this must be true", without even testing it. I would consider that a fallacious approach.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 1:31 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:12 am
Posts: 3112
CSMacLaren wrote:
The issue is: is the GH Master the same size as the screen-used? We finally have an admission by SithLord that it's not, and yet when the GH Master was used in past photo comparisons, it was used as a size baseline without revealing to us that it is indeed smaller than the screen-used. Thus, resizing photos of whatever mask was paired up with the GH Master as the GH Master was sized up to match a screenshot, it would make the mask look bigger. I'm not saying there is an ulterior motive. It's just bad choice.


What do you mean, finally? I stated that way back in the VP thread but you weren't there, were you.

Post #30 January 7, 2007 RPF

Quote:
Although I've not seen the DJ helmet up close, I know for sure the DJ is further up the lineage as it's reportedly from an ILM mold taken off the screen helmet, which I believe. This faceplate is larger than any fan helmet derived from the 20th Century faceplate (which is not surprising given it's an offshoot from ESB) and also nearly identical to the GH ANH master faceplate in terms of size.


You know, I try to be fair and reasonable and am willing to be nice, but you continue to make unfounded comments like that about what I said or didn't say.

I have yet to see you present any comparisons of your own of your own castings against the original. When you do, maybe I'll apply the same standards as you have been applying to me.

The fact of the matter is, if you make a comparison of any helmet next to the original, you have to scale it somehow to line it up.

Image

Either you do that based on the helmet (dome) or the mask. There is sometimes a compromise because of angle or distance or the helmet itself but then to state that as simply being "a bad choice"? Just because I've scaled it doesn't mean it IS TO SCALE, is it. And I never state it as such. If the same mask like the VP has the same dome on it as the GH and I take photos of them, sure I can scale them and say they are the same size but that's also because I've measured them. So what you are trying to argue doesn't even have any relevance because I've measured these helmets and I've already stated their size relationships a long time ago. I don't mind discussing accuracy or making comparisons better, but all you do is try to find some way of discrediting what I do or say without doing research yourself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 1:35 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:12 am
Posts: 3112
CSMacLaren wrote:
By size definition, this mask below would be the largest in the fandom and therefore must be the screen-used itself.

Image

It's clearly larger than the GH Master.


You've got to be kidding me? Well if you want to base your analyses on masks like that be my guest. So I'm guessing you are saying this because you've measured this mask and it is bigger than all the others? :rolleyes

What's funny about this is how you completely ignore what else I say about proportions and details...it's not just the size...but size is a good indicator of lineage...not proof of it. One has to consider size, proportions and details as a whole when considering the lineage of a given helmet that has come out of nowhere and someone says it's a 1st gen casting off the original. That's the point of keeping track of size. Details can be hidden or added, proportions can be hidden as well depending on angle/distance.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 2:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
SithLord wrote:
You've got to be kidding me? Well if you want to base your analyses on masks like that be my guest. So I'm guessing you are saying this because you've measured this mask and it is bigger than all the others? :rolleyes


Some people need a smiley, otherwise they so locked onto being correct that they just don't get the humor....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:13 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
SithLord wrote:
The fact of the matter is, if you make a comparison of any helmet next to the original, you have to scale it somehow to line it up.


Correct. However, it's funny you brought this image up because we discussed this a long time ago, and I had pointed out to you even then that your size comparison was off.

The analysis back then (reposted):

Image

This basically shows that you scaled the GH Master (right) too large. If I crop the GH Master's dome and highlight it in red, and if I move it over to the screen used (left) it shows that the dome is larger than the screen-used!

Analysis today:

Image

It looks like you sized the image to match the cheek corner to cheek corner distance. However, your dome is off. The chin triangle overlays nicely, but some other measurements are off.

It's probably best not to use imperfect comps like this to illustrate size relationships. It's probably more practical to use this as a comparison of the overall look.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:31 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:12 am
Posts: 3112
Let's go back to the beginning of what CSMacLaren was so concerned about...

CSMacLaren wrote:
SithLord wrote:
Thomas, if you can't take constructive criticism, don't blast people for "criticizing" when they're simply pointing out their personal observations or pointing out the simple truth. I'm sorry if you're having a hard time with viewpoints that contradict your own. Examine for yourself a capture of the scene, the surface textures, scratches, positioning, lines, darkened areas, lit areas, etc. are almost identical for the eyes, cheeks, etc. surfaces.

If the person who made this image created cropping masks for each facet of Vader's face and only mapped textures to the point that the textures did not overlap the borders of the VP's facets, you'd be able to tell.

However, it looks more like a general copy and paste from the screen used face over the VP image, replacing the lines and surfaces of the VP. This is not just a transparency overlay that would have revealed the original lines and surfaces. It appears to be a replacement, with some exception in, perhaps, the neck (where the cape chain would overlap) and some area of the mouth where the Tantive scene's mask had a shadow that was a bit more harsh.

Being a replacement, it's a truly excellently Photoshop image, but still not necessarily representative of the VP. So using a doctored photo and implying the VP could be made to look exactly is inconclusive - and I personally hate saying that because I'm a HUGE fan of the VP. Ask others if you disbelieve that statement. I'm for the VP. I like the image but I'd still prefer to see it painted with some temporary water-soluble acrylic paints. :cheers


Well, in a manner of which you would like to state if the roles were reversed, it looks like once again I have to point out the flaws in CSMacLaren's assessment of Photoshop work. It's a simple paint and texturing job of the original raw image of a VP mask and completely and entirely represents what the VP mask is. Since you weren't around for the original VP thread on RPF, you didn't see the intermediate paint step Cantinadude provided. Below is the raw, intermediate painted step, and the final texturing work. As I said before, it's the same mask, and not an overlay of a screen cap image onto the VP.

Image

So, it has nothing to do with me having a "hard time" with a viewpoint that contradicts my own, it has everything to do with your faulty interpretation of Cantinadude's Photoshop work. You make assumptions, provide these inordinately ponderous explanations about what your expert opinion is, and it's wrong.

You state things like this:

Quote:
So using a doctored photo and implying the VP could be made to look exactly is inconclusive


So when you do photoshop work, I suppose it's something legitimate, and but when SithLord presents photoshop work, it's called doctoring?

What's really amazing to me is that I show one photo of a VP mask with GH dome and you go on these tirades about how I scale things or how I am trying to present the VP as being accurate by using doctoring tricks...when instead you should focus on the thread instead of constantly taking threads off track.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:57 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:12 am
Posts: 3112
CSMacLaren wrote:
This basically shows that you scaled the GH Master (right) too large. If I crop the GH Master's dome and highlight it in red, and if I move it over to the screen used (left) it shows that the dome is larger than the screen-used!

It looks like you sized the image to match the cheek corner to cheek corner distance. However, your dome is off. The chin triangle overlays nicely, but some other measurements are off.

It's probably best not to use imperfect comps like this to illustrate size relationships. It's probably more practical to use this as a comparison of the overall look.


Exactly, I matched the face. I showed that comparison because I liked the way it looked next to the original screencap. I never said the GH helmet was larger than the original, yet you seem to be asserting that that was my intention? If I still had the GH master I would reshoot it (I did this comparison back in mid-2006) so the mask-to-dome proportions would be closer, but I didn't at that time...it just turned out that the angles matched so I tried to scale it as best I could. And I still like the comparison. But the way you state "it's probably best not to use imperfect comps like this to illustrate size relationships"....is rather condescending. Who made you the expert? When I show a comparison like this it is simply to let people see for themselves any similarities or differences. If there are similarities I think it is no coincidence and I would attempt the same kind of comparison with the VP.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:59 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
No, you're re-inventing the context of what I'm so "concerned" about.

What I'm actually concerned about your past flawed comparisons which you used to boast on the size of your TD, SL or whatever you were promoting at the time. Each time you made size claims, I was there to show your own comps were flawed. After all this time you finally admit the imperfection of your size comps now, but back when you were making claims you were standing by the accuracy of your size comps and beating us over the head with many similarly flawed comps.

Okay, enough of this. This is indeed conversational material for another thread. My apologies to the thread participants.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:19 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10556
Location: Denmark
Personally, I'll say: snore.

There are more pics of the VP in this thread for those interested: vp-helmet-comparisons-vt1346.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:45 pm 
Random avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:48 pm
Posts: 251
I'm going to say this, Thomas, as I have said before. If you say the sky is blue, I am going to run outside and compare it with blue color cards to be sure, send that data off to others and wait for the results. Your past has decidedly colored everything you have to say when it comes to comparisons.

Right now, I am reading the link NHM posted. VERY interesting stuff here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 6:41 pm 
Random avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:14 pm
Posts: 247
Location: Edinburgh Scotland
Qui-Gonzalez wrote:
Right now, I am reading the link NHM posted. VERY interesting stuff here.


Qui,

The old VP thread had some interesting stuff in it. My posts about a pre clean up version of the VP existing were not BS. The guy who was getting it did eventually get it just about 6 months later than he thought :)

Hopefully we will all get the chance to see it in the future. It will make for great debate I hope and it answers a few questions as well :)

Cheers Chris


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:41 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 12:12 pm
Posts: 1063
voice in the crowd wrote:
Qui-Gonzalez wrote:
Right now, I am reading the link NHM posted. VERY interesting stuff here.


Qui,

The old VP thread had some interesting stuff in it. My posts about a pre clean up version of the VP existing were not BS. The guy who was getting it did eventually get it just about 6 months later than he thought :)

Hopefully we will all get the chance to see it in the future. It will make for great debate I hope and it answers a few questions as well :)

Cheers Chris


I'm very much looking forward to these photo's, it's a great time for Vader fans like all of us here.

Very cool indeed, thanks Chris and of course Anson :thumbsup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:00 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:12 am
Posts: 3112
NoHumorMan wrote:
Personally, I'll say: snore.

There are more pics of the VP in this thread for those interested: vp-helmet-comparisons-vt1346.html


wow looking back at that, that was one of the all time great Vader discussion threads.....and wow at times I sure was an ass :lol But it was a fun thread...lots of real meat and potatoes...and open discussion...heated but open...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: VP revisited
PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 9:47 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 12:12 pm
Posts: 1063
I think we're all okay, we've all survived another heated Vader discussion once again and I do hope we can all remain friends for many years to come :salut :cheers


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  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