It is currently Mon Aug 03, 2020 3:08 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  [ 82 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Enter your Message here
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 28, 2008 12:47 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 2:28 am
Posts: 235
Location: Houston TX
Looks like this thread needs serious moderator cleanup....FACT.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 11:47 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:12 am
Posts: 3112
AnsonJames wrote:
SithLord wrote:

Kermit got the ORIGINAL SCREEN USED SUIT at the start of the ANH tour in 1977. FACT

The shins he got were vacuformed and NOT fiberglass. FACT


The implication is the original screen suit had vacuum formed shins.
For all we know parts of the suit were reproduced for the tour - lightweight shins anybody?

Brian says the production shins were fibreglass and I'm inclined to believe him for a couple of reasons.

1. He sculpted them.
2. He was there.



Well those two points are separate. I just said the shins. He got the original suit and it's still up in the air if the shins were production used but that could be said for everything else Kermit got, couldn't it. Since Brian sculpted the shins and I've seen fiberglass versions being made in a photo, why the discrepancy? We can try to learn from it or ignore it. Again, I'm not questioning that Brian sculpted them, and I'm not questioning that there were fiberglass shins. I could question whether fiberglass shins were used onscreen and I could question whether vacuformed shins were used during the production. If Brian saw during the entire production on every location that they were only fiberglass and never vacuformed (is that the case in fact?), of course I respect that, but that doesn't explain why Kermit got vacuformed shins, does it. And those shins he received as part of the screen used suit. Nothing anyone says here can take away from the fact that Kermit got the screen suit for the tour, ok? So that's a valid comment. And nothing can take away what he reported the shins to be made of. He can't say they were production shins...of course not...but the suit he got was the production suit. I'm not questioning Brian just for the sake of it, there's some indication vacuformed shins might have been used, so I'd like to confirm that, but as well I'd like to confirm if they were not used. If Brian saw fiberglass shins painted and strapped and used onset, great. If they were damaged and later replaced by vacuformed shins, isn't that of interest? Well that's a topic for discussion. Maybe I shouldn't have brought it up...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 10:21 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:53 am
Posts: 251
Without a time machine there's no way to prove the vac shins were made for production so you're just going to go around in circles trying to prove otherwise.

The only solid statement regarding the shins is that Brian witnessed them being made from fibreglass.

Without any other evidence the burden of proof therefore points to the production shins being made from glassfibre.

The vac shins probably came after, either as recycled test pieces or as lightweight tour versions.

It's been said some of the tour helmets had vac formed domes (can anyone confirm this? I can't remember who said it) it's more likely the VF shins were made for touring.
It's possible they would try to make the suit as comfortable and lightweight as possible for prolonged usage.


Anson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:21 am 
Random avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 11:12 pm
Posts: 50
Location: Tampa FL
AnsonJames wrote:
Without a time machine there's no way to prove the vac shins were made for production so you're just going to go around in circles trying to prove otherwise.

The only solid statement regarding the shins is that Brian witnessed them being made from fibreglass.

Without any other evidence the burden of proof therefore points to the production shins being made from glassfibre.

The vac shins probably came after, either as recycled test pieces or as lightweight tour versions.

It's been said some of the tour helmets had vac formed domes (can anyone confirm this? I can't remember who said it) it's more likely the VF shins were made for touring.
It's possible they would try to make the suit as comfortable and lightweight as possible for prolonged usage.


Anson


Anson,
Please don't take offense, but a post like this kinda ruffles my feathers. We all know that Brian saw fiberglass shins being made and there is little doubt in my mind that this occured exactly as he said. But there is absolute photographic evidence of what appear to be vac formed shins that showed up with THE screen used suit here in the states. I don't see how or why anyone could infer that they were the only piece(s) remade for touring. If they wanted to lighten things up, the armor would be the first thing to go plastic.

Anyway, I'm not trying to rant on you but your stance implies that, based on everything we know, the screen used shins were indeed fiberglass. I really don't see how you can jump to this conclusion. We are after all talking about a production over 30 years old with very little written documentation. I am just asking that everyone, including myself, keep an open mind about things. We may never now how/when/why vac formed shins were made when the originals were fiberglass....I think its best we leave it open until further evidence presents itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:45 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
bobasfett wrote:
But there is absolute photographic evidence of what appear to be vac formed shins that showed up with THE screen used suit here in the states.


What is the context and timeframe of these photos? Could you elaborate or, better yet, post the photos? Hopefully the photos are obvious and not subject to interpretation.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:52 am 
Random avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 11:12 pm
Posts: 50
Location: Tampa FL
Sorry Mac, I was talking about the Kermit photos. My point was that there is very little public reference of the shins during production to indicate either fiberglass or vac formed shins. So, we've got evidence pre-production that they were fiberglass and we've got evidence post-production that they were vac formed. How can anyone say either style was correct for the screen used shins? Like I said, I would suggest that everyone keep an open mind about things until we know more (as with all things Vader, hopefully sooner than later!). :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 12:03 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:53 am
Posts: 251
bobasfett wrote:
Anyway, I'm not trying to rant on you but your stance implies that, based on everything we know, the screen used shins were indeed fiberglass. I really don't see how you can jump to this conclusion. We are after all talking about a production over 30 years old with very little written documentation. I am just asking that everyone, including myself, keep an open mind about things. We may never now how/when/why vac formed shins were made when the originals were fiberglass....I think its best we leave it open until further evidence presents itself.




I don't see why anyone's feathers should be ruffled - I'm responding to the remark that the vac shins were production shins - there is no evidence to prove this statement.
I'm talking about the burden of proof here - Brian worked on the movie and says the shins were fibreglass, at the same I'm not telling anyone the Vac shins were only made for touring - it's a theory.


What Brian says is good enough for me until someone can prove the shins (production used) were anything other than fibreglass.


Last edited by AnsonJames on Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 12:59 pm 
Random avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:48 pm
Posts: 251
One thing I would like to know about Krmit's suit is this: With the air of utter vagueness around what was and wasn't screen used, how do we know that he received an entirely screen used suit? I doubt he knows.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:11 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
If we're basing the idea of the production having used vacformed shins on a chain of logic of the shins "looking" like plastic in a Kermit shot, and that Kermit was supposedly given the screen-used costume to wear, then supposedly logic dictates that Prowse must have worn vacformed shins, then the chain of logic is extremely weak.

We've not seen the larger and higher quality photo that Thomas claims believes to be complete convincing of the shin's material.

Just because something appears accurate and exists in a past timeframe does not mean it was necessarily worn during the filming of ANH. It may be screen accurate but not necessarily screen used.

Also, no-one has been able to answer my question: if the shins in the Kermit shot are vacformed plastic, then why just the shins and not the armor as well? "It's thin; therefore it is plastic." Well, have you never heard of a thin fiberglass application before?

Did Kermit make a call along the lines, "The shins are digging into my ankles and feet. Can you guys do something about it?"

People may prove the existence of vacformed shins but not the timeframe, and therefore it difficult to disprove that FG shins were used during the filming of ANH.

Moreover, The Prop Store at one point supposedly sold screen-used ANH tusks. Somewhere in a Den thread, those in-the-know discussed how they came to believe why they weren't screen-used but made perhaps after the production of ANH.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:25 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
bobasfett wrote:
Sorry Mac, I was talking about the Kermit photos. My point was that there is very little public reference of the shins during production to indicate either fiberglass or vac formed shins. So, we've got evidence pre-production that they were fiberglass and we've got evidence post-production that they were vac formed. How can anyone say either style was correct for the screen used shins? Like I said, I would suggest that everyone keep an open mind about things until we know more (as with all things Vader, hopefully sooner than later!). :)


No worries, dude. The Prop Store photo of the mold of the shins strike me as a thin piece of plastic vacformed over the FG shins. I think the process later would be to fill the mold in with plaster or hardened silicone to create a buck for the vacforming process.

I feel we've been using the words "evidence" and "proof" in these threads, but we have to realize that having evidence and proof does not equal "truth" and that we are still reconstructing what happened.

"Proof" therefore not only must prove what and when something happened but be able to disprove what and when the contrary didn't happen. "Evidence" will likewise make evident what and when things didn't happen.

We've been jumping to conclusions too quickly based on scant photo analysis based on one photo that is small. We've not been treated to the large version of the photo where its exclusive ownership means exclusive interpretation. I'd rather not take someone else's word for it if I can see the photo for myself, and if someone would be so kind as to post it, please do. The only photo we have in the Den's gallery is small and too tiny to make a proper interpretation that it's a thin sheet of plastic.

The edge of the shin seems double and so it's been interpreted as plastic, but that doesn't sound right to me. The second layer could can been the attachment strap. Moreover, when you vacform, the buck has to vertically go straight down. Vacforming does not do well with wrapping around an object, and a second edge would mean the cross section is a "Z" which is uncharacteristic of vacforming.

We don't know when the molds were made - whether it was for the production of ANH, or whether it was a production member's souvenir copy after the production. We know that they had to have been at the earliest after the FG shins were made (because you don't typically vacform over clay) or after the initial plaster castings from Brian's sculpts became available, as it's possible to vacform over those too.

If Kermit's costume was phased out and replaced with vacformed ones, then let's hope for a mold of the original armor, but it would have made sense to replace the whole thing with vacformed parts. Kermit would then have to corroborate this with his own personal account of LFL recovering the screen used costume and giving him a replacement that, to his memory, felt lighter.

Though I find TPS's pieces to be absolutely lovely, I recall reading on the Den there was doubt that the ANH tusks they once sold weren't screen used. How members came to that determination, I don't recall (perhaps one tusk was supposed to be painted black and both of these TPS tusks were clean) but while TPS sincerely believes their pieces to be screen used, if there is doubt, the beliefs should always be qualified first.

Truly, we have photos, and believe the photo to be evidence, but evidence of what? That evidence can be interpreted in many ways.

Also, sometimes the interpretation of the photos has become evidence, so if the interpretation is faulty, so is the evidence.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 3:07 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 10712
Location: Denmark
I thought TPS only claimed production pieces, not just screen used. Regarding the tusks, iirc, it was mentioned that they possibly weren't screen used or screen accurate, but doesn't exclude having been made during production.

And in the Kermit Eller interview, iirc, he mentioned that pieces were interchanged throughout the tour. Though, I'll have to read it again to be sure.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:24 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:05 pm
Posts: 53
As I said previously my tusks were never sold as screen-used and are not claimed to be as such.My tusks are unused,production-made pieces made during the production of ANH.They are,as such,original production items but not screen-used.PSoL never sold them as screen-used and it does not state that on their COA for the pieces.As has been discussed elsewhere they are not accurate to the screen-used items as they are too long at their base however as Carsten and I talked about inaccurate and inauthentic are two different terms.I cannot comment on the authenticity of the shins as I do not know the provenance that accompanies them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 7:14 pm 
Random avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:48 pm
Posts: 251
I recall comfort not being too much of an issue, from what I read from Anthony Daniels. He said the 3PO suit was digging into his feet in spots as well to the point that it hurt him to walk after a time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 7:39 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
Qui-Gonzalez wrote:
I recall comfort not being too much of an issue, from what I read from Anthony Daniels. He said the 3PO suit was digging into his feet in spots as well to the point that it hurt him to walk after a time.


I recall this statement specifically of C3PO as well. It was, if I'm not mistaken, an interview in one of the "Making of" CDs that accompanied the Special Edition. Daniels also recounted how he came up with "the voice" (which probably annoyed Lucas).

Anyways, so the story of the shins digging into the feet may have been incorrectly attributed to Kermit. We rely on the memories of people who were there at the time, and yet our own memories of the stories are somethings challenged.

Just don't grow old, guys! It gets worse 10, 20 and 30 years from now! :toothy


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 9:23 pm 
Random avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:48 pm
Posts: 251
CSMacLaren wrote:
Qui-Gonzalez wrote:
I recall comfort not being too much of an issue, from what I read from Anthony Daniels. He said the 3PO suit was digging into his feet in spots as well to the point that it hurt him to walk after a time.


I recall this statement specifically of C3PO as well. It was, if I'm not mistaken, an interview in one of the "Making of" CDs that accompanied the Special Edition. Daniels also recounted how he came up with "the voice" (which probably annoyed Lucas).

Anyways, so the story of the shins digging into the feet may have been incorrectly attributed to Kermit. We rely on the memories of people who were there at the time, and yet our own memories of the stories are somethings challenged.

Just don't grow old, guys! It gets worse 10, 20 and 30 years from now! :toothy

Hey, it could apply to Kermit as well, but we have no documentation of that chestnut.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  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:  
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