Posted this on RPF and posting here at the same time since obviously it might not even last there:
Art Andrews wrote:
I don't take anyone's word as gospel, but I am much more willing to believe those who have HELD the mold than those who have not held the mold. I am also much more willing to believe those who took an original casting from the mold themselves than someone who bought one from someone who claimed that it came untouched straight from the original mold. I also find it interesting that the same people who are willing to swallow tall tales and the WORST COMPARISON PHOTOS IN THE HISTORY OF THIS HOBBY, suddenly can't be convinced by pretty good photos from eFX. Just goes to show, if you don't WANT to believe that nothing will convince you. Does eFx have a reason to lie about the C scar and other details? No. Why? Because 99% of the people who bought a helmet have never heard of a C scar and wouldn't understand what you were talking about if you explained it to them for an hour. Its inclusion or lack thereof was never going to change this being eFX's fastest selling item ever.
Then why are you reacting this way to discussion of it?
Art Andrews wrote:
The masses who bought this helmet care more about the artwork on the box than the details we pour over. On the other hand, do those who have a helmet supposedly from an earlier and more untouched stage of the mold have a reason to protect their investment and their reputation as king of all Vader? Absolutely!
Well the fact of the matter is, it is instructive to compare a licensed product with something that came before it. That is one of the things that has gone on on this forum for years. I didn't see you getting up in arms about the MR ROTS helmet or the Rubies helmet when it came out and was critiqued.
Art, this is one product. There are many products that have been discussed over the years on this forum. So why are you so engaged in discussion of this particular one?
Art Andrews wrote:
I you have an uncleaned helmet from the Baker mold, there is little doubt that in a number of ways it is more true to the original than the mass produced licensed helmets. Was that ever in question? Here is the real question. Does the quality of the eFx helmet, no matter how close it is to yours, have ANY bearing on the value of your helmet? My answer is no. It doesn't. Apparently, most of the people in that group would not agree as they seem to feel VERY threatened by eFX's offering and have done everything they can to tear it down in the eyes of the public, going as far as to make absolutely ludicrous claims and even more of those horrible comparison photos that show nothing at all.
There are no ludicrous claims here, Art. Part of this hobby is to get to the truth about what is authentic and what is not. About what is a prop replica supposed to look like, or how close it is to the original. No one has questioned the authenticity of the eFX and anyone seriously interested in Darth Vader helmets, including myself, has purchased one. So? If we purchase one, then we have a vested interest in discussing it here, on a replica prop forum.
I have a casting from the Rick Baker mold taken long before eFX was even aware of the mold, and at a far earlier stage of its life than when eFX got its hands on the mold, and the C-scar is clearly there. And it isn't like my casting came out of thin air. There were two ILM artists involved in making the pull. And Darth Jones, who himself worked for ILM, and has seen the mold in person himself, confirmed that it came from that same mold, as he himself got a pull from that mold. So I suppose three ILM artists would be lying about my pull?
Furthermore, the Rick Baker mold itself actually has residue of the exact resin that my casting is made of, which is further evidence that my casting came out of that mold.
So if you or anyone would like to argue about whether the C-scar should be there or not, then you should realize that the history of the mold didn't start when eFX had a look at it. And you are not even a Vader enthusiast, so why do you get involved in these discussions? If you have evidence to the contrary, then please show it.
Not only is the C-scar not on the eFX castings, neither is the fine detail that is surrounding it on that front cheek surface.
Anyone with an eFX mask can prove me wrong. And eFX themselves are more than welcome to prove me wrong. That is what this forum is about. Discussing what is really there or not. If I am wrong, then I'll say so and we can move on.
So perhaps why don't you let those who own an eFX helmet defend their interest in its details? But instead you seem to wish to attack anyone who questions the details on this helmet. Well we should all here be free to voice our opinion or to even be able to present evidence to support whatever we think is the case, without being personally attacked either individually or as a group.
You want the proof, well here it is.
The SL ANH helmet, which as you are well aware came from the Rick Baker mold, has detail never before seen at high resolution. This permits us to look at screen shots or higher resolution images of the original ANH mask and confirm that these details were present. Below is just a few examples of such comparisons that clearly show details on the cheek of the SL corresponding to details on the original ANH mask.
High resolution of paint detail on the cheek of the original and the SL ANH:
And closer:
Those grey paint details masked in on the right cheek on the eFX are actually resolvable on the SL ANH as real details.
Take the "rabbit ears" as I call them. On the original, on the SL ANH. And nowhere to be found on the eFX.
And then the C-scar....which is actually an L-scar, on the original ANH mask (left) and the SL ANH mask (middle and right). This is only one detail, yet for some odd reason it received the most attention because there was argument between TM owners and myself about its true shape.
And finally, a comparison I made just to settle this matter, showing images of the right front check surface of the original ANH mask (left top and bottom images), the same area on the SL ANH (center top and bottom images), and the same area on screen captures from the original ANH mask as seen in the Tantive IV scenes.
All the detail is there, and not just the C-scar. It is there onscreen, it is there on the best images of the original ANH mask. And it is there on a pull taken from the Rick Baker mold when it was only 13 years old, using the same resin whose residue still remains in the mold to this day, 35 years later.
