It is currently Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:57 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  [ 150 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Author Enter your Message here
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:23 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 1:25 pm
Posts: 2837
firebladejedi wrote:
The way i see it if you have the faceplate of helmet 'a' and join it to the back plate of helmet 'b' no matter how unaltered the molds of these individual pieces are you have what i would call a bastard helmet.



LOL....Bastard helmet, I like that.

Anyway Gino said one was badly damaged, hence the use of the other, which to be fair makes sense IMO.

However I know what Mac is saying that it is not a 100% direct copy of all parts.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:23 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
GINO wrote:
It's true, it is a replica using the face and back/cap from one helmet and ears from another. No helmet out there utilized parts all from one helmet.

Either way, they are true to the pieces they were taken from. The individual pieces themselves are perfectly screen accurate.

However, trying to produce a perfect replica of a specific helmet is impossible unless you use molds taken all from the same helmet.
That is why you see slight discrepancies in my comparisons. The face and back/cap do not come from the helmet being compared. The ears however are the same as what is compared in the photos.


The ears from the 1st helmet (Brian R.) are complete junk due to poor casting. They are out of the equation.
The 2nd helmet (Dave M.) was NEVER molded either inside or outside except for the earcaps.
The only way to produce a screen accurate replica is to take molds directly from the inside of the vac formed piece.



Thanks for the clarification. So was the Brian R. face and back molded, either inside or out?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:24 pm 
Random avatar
I'd say the comments Matt has posted are well beyond the 14 day suspension mark. If there was a line, it wasn't just crossed, but jumped over and peed on. Especially after the repeated warnings from the mods.

If you compare Matt's comments to the comment I was suspended for, they can hardly be considered equal.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:25 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:38 pm
Posts: 816
Location: Essex UK
CSMacLaren wrote:
Defstartrooper wrote:
And i agree with Jez aswell this thread was dormant for ages all of a sudden TE registers a fresh account and starts baiting Gino and the lack of action by the staff is putting this forum in danger of looking biased you apply one rule to one member and not another.



If you want fair, call for banning them both. Consider that GINO has had the Den as his anti-TE soapbox for the last several months, and TE has posted very few posts in proportion. GINO started posting long before TE did. They both have past history and different people hear different sides. But the Den was without all this crap until GINO joined and started pre-emptively attacking TE. If GINO had said nothing, I think TE would not have responded. GINO provoked TE and continues to do so by not addressing TE's questions but instead addressing the mods and referring to TE, as it were, in the third person.

One could even argue that during those soapbox months, the mods "biased" the situation in favor of GINO, unless you want them to also act retroactively on GINO's past behavior. Both are guilty. One is guilty of pottymouthing, swearing, confronting for past offenses and attacking. The other is guilty of pre-emptively spreading libel and defamation of character, slander.


Mac you are aware as is every other member that the rule on personal attacks on members was only recently implemented after Gino's personal attcks on you and he was banned from posting for 14 days and warned further attacks would lead to a permanant ban.
I think we can all agree this is a good thing to protect members.

It is not fair however to punish him now for posts that were made weeks or months before this rule was bought in.

TE on the otherhand has made personal attacks after this rule was implemented so i fail to see why this rule is not applied.

It smacks of bias personal opinions on an individual should not come into it if you have a rule that rule should apply to all regardless.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:27 pm 
Random avatar
CSMacLaren wrote:
So was the Brian R. face and back molded, either inside or out?



Yes, of course. I serioulsy thought that was common knowledge.
It is the source of my molds as well as any other recast ANH style helmet out there. The only difference is that my molds are untouched and unaltered, a claim that no one else can make.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:31 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:38 pm
Posts: 816
Location: Essex UK
Back on the subject of the thread yes Gino's helmet is a mix of two helmets both of which he says are unaltered.
It may be semantics but Gino's quote says the most accurate replica it does not say accurate replica, just the most accurate.
His reasoning behind this is that all the parts used are unaltered copies of original parts.
Of course if someone replicates 1 single helmet with no alterations that would be the most accurate but as that has yet to be done he see's his as the most accurate yet.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:36 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 8:07 pm
Posts: 488
Location: Norwich UK
GINO wrote:
It's true, it is a replica using the face and back/cap from one helmet and ears from another. No helmet out there utilized parts all from one helmet.

Either way, they are true to the pieces they were taken from. The individual pieces themselves are perfectly screen accurate.

However, trying to produce a perfect replica of a specific helmet is impossible unless you use molds taken all from the same helmet.
That is why you see slight discrepancies in my comparisons. The face and back/cap do not come from the helmet being compared. The ears however are the same as what is compared in the photos.


The ears from the 1st helmet (Brian R.) are complete junk due to poor casting. They are out of the equation.
The 2nd helmet (Dave M.) was NEVER molded either inside or outside except for the earcaps.
The only way to produce a screen accurate replica is to take molds directly from the inside of the vac formed piece.


Now we are getting somewhere, thanks for clearing that up.
If one of the helmets was trashed and all was usuable was used and another lid gave the other parts needed that makes sense.

So apart from ears, was matt's helmet mould from 1 helmet?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:42 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
GINO wrote:
CSMacLaren wrote:
So was the Brian R. face and back molded, either inside or out?



Yes, of course. I serioulsy thought that was common knowledge.
It is the source of my molds as well as any other recast ANH style helmet out there. The only difference is that my molds are untouched and unaltered, a claim that no one else can make.



Depends on who you talk to. I post questions for the benefit of newcomers too. Bear in mind there are a lot of newcomers who, despite reading all this, may not be cognizant of all the details. For some of us, despite our experience, it's Meta-Information (i.e. "I don't know off hand, but I know where to look it up!") I think Einstein said that once....

So those comparison shots on LookSirDroids were the V2 compared against the Dave M helmet and not the Brian R, though molded off the Brian R. Gotchya. Thanks for the clarification.

Can we expect comparison shots then of the V2 against the Brian R.? I'm curious as to why LookSirDroids used the Dave M helmet for its photo comps.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:45 pm 
Random avatar
The reason the Dave M. was used in the comparisons as well as the replica itself, was because we have fantastic photos of the Dave M.
I don't have access to not nearly as good photos of the Brian R. to work from.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:45 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
Defstartrooper wrote:
Mac you are aware as is every other member that the rule on personal attacks on members was only recently implemented after Gino's personal attcks on you and he was banned from posting for 14 days and warned further attacks would lead to a permanant ban.
I think we can all agree this is a good thing to protect members.

It is not fair however to punish him now for posts that were made weeks or months before this rule was bought in.

TE on the otherhand has made personal attacks after this rule was implemented so i fail to see why this rule is not applied.

It smacks of bias personal opinions on an individual should not come into it if you have a rule that rule should apply to all regardless.



Yes, I'm very aware this rule was implemented, and I also see TE being baited so that either he can be defaulted into getting banned, or that the moderators can be manipulated on a technicality to accomplish his banning.

So this was never about being fair. It's about getting TE banned, isn't it?

Let's be honest: none of this is "fair".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:48 pm 
Random avatar
And I'm not being baited, insulted, slandered?
All that, and I still have enough respect for this forum and its rules to not respond how I very much would like to.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:55 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
GINO wrote:
And I'm not being baited, insulted, slandered?
All that, and I still have enough respect for this forum and its rules to not respond how I very much would like to.



Which came first, the GINO or the TE here on the Den? Answer: GINO.

Which came first, GINO's statements against TE, or TE's statements against GINO. Answer: GINO.

So there you have it. You brought your past history over to the Den. You could have kept if off the Den, but over the months you've seeded unsolicited slanderous comments about TE.

If you want us to have TE banned, then we need to look at the entire context of this. You brought the battle here and made the Den the battleground. We regulars didn't ask for it, but now it's here in our faces.

Is he baiting you? Is he insulting and slandering you? For this incident, yes. Had you done the same prior in the SFS/MVerta incident? Yes. And prior threads and posts? Yes.

The only difference in how you're responding to each other is that you began the fight, and he is directly confronting you for starting that fight here. Otherwise, he would not have joined the Den.

GINO, I'm sorry you had to go through what you did, and I'm sorry TE had to go through what he did, but at some point you guys were friends, am I right? Something split you guys apart, and neither of you have reconciled.

You both have two different versions of what happened, but you both experienced the same incident.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:59 pm 
Random avatar
firebladejedi wrote:
So apart from ears, was matt's helmet mould from 1 helmet?


Here is the breakdown of the molding of original ANH helmets.

Brian R. (1st helmet)
Everything was cast and from the inside of the helmet.
The only problem is that the ears molding were complete junk.
On my v1 helmet, I used cleaned up versions of the Brian R. ear molds and was happy to dispose of them when I switched to the Dave M. ears for my v2.

Dave M. (2nd helmet) (SFS)
ONLY the earcaps were cast.
The face and cap/back were NEVER molder either the inside or outside.

The only incarnation of the Dave M. face and cap/back is what was made from the mverta 3d scan. With 3d scan technology, it has the ability to pretty accurately obtain the data from the object. However it is severely limited when it comes to the tooling that grinds the form out of a chunk of foam. The fiberglass version of the Dave M. helmet was created from a very, very, heavily modified and cleaned up foam plug.
I dismiss this replica for the following reasons:
The limitations of the tooling could not capture a lot of details, undercuts, and surface nuances of the original.
The fact that it was heavily cleaned up to try to emulate what the tooling could not reproduce.
The shrinkage due to casting in polyester resin.
And the most obvious reason, because it made of fiberglass.


Last edited by GINO on Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:06 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
GINO,

Looksirdroids might benefit from an update. Upon casual observation, it didn't occur to me that the comparison was being made with the Dave M. helmet and not the Brian R based on the context and positioning of the text regarding the Brian R. The first shots of the faceplate looked like a great match., and that distracts from observing the paint details that indicate the photos are no longer about the Brian M. Also, the comparison helmet is marked "screen used".

People who are focused on lines, structure, flows of surfaces, etc. begin noticing the sides and back of the V2 differ from the "screen used".

Visual communication and human usability is a whole area of study in universities. But the simple version of this is that I think your V2 wouldn't be challenged so much if instead LookSirDroids had comp shots with the Brian R. helmet instead, despite the condition of the ears.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:09 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:46 pm
Posts: 5241
Location: San Jose, CA
GINO wrote:
The only incarnation of the Dave M. face and cap/back is what was made from the mverta 3d scan. With 3d scan technology, it has the ability to pretty accurately obtain the data from the object. However it is severely limited when it comes to the tooling that grinds the form out of a chunk of foam. The fiberglass version of the Dave M. helmet was created from a very, very, heavily modified and cleaned up foam plug.
I dismiss this replica for the following reasons:
The limitations of the tooling could not capture a lot of details, undercuts, and surface nuances of the original.
The fact that it was heavily cleaned up to try to emulate what the tooling could not reproduce.
The shrinkage due to casting in polyester resin.


So who owns this mold made from the mverta 3D scan?

Also, was a poly-urethane 3D print ever considered instead of milling foam?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 150 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  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