In my other thread, "Don Post Standard Conversion Project" I had mentioned that there was an uncanny resemblance between the Hasbro Voice Changer Vader helmet and the Don Post Standard helmet from 1977.

Original thread:
http://thepropden.aokforums.com/1-vt112 ... sc&start=0

It leads to some very interesting questions about Don Post Studios and what became of their molds after they were acquired. Just for those of you who are newer, Don Post Studios was around back in the day making licensed Star Wars helmets. DPS was acquired by Party Professionals several years back. In August 1999, PP was acquired by Party Professionals Inc., which, strangely in the same month and year, was acquired by CSS (Creative Seasonal Solutions) Industries in 1999.

The original DPS no longer exists; it exists in name only as a brand of rubber/latex Halloween masks. You occasionally see the high end Don Post Deluxe Vader and the economy Don Post Classic Action. This post deals with their entry level kid-sized Don Post Standard.

So the question we are asking is:

Here, left, is the mask in its original, unmodified state. On the right was my initial attempt at a modification which consisted of:

1. Removing the lens platform against which lenses were externally mounted

2. Ground away the inner eyelids and replaced it with QuikPlastic (which turned out to be a terrible product for this particular mask, so I ripped it out, and it turned out to not have welded very well.)

3. Ground out the gril openings.

4. Widened the mouth triangle in a ROTJ style (as was the original intent).

So please observe the eye shape of what I made. Let's look at the Hasbro Voice Changer mask next.

At first glance, you might not be convinced. "Mac, you're on crack! They don't look alike at all!" Well, then call me McCracken! (Yes, that is a real surname).

Note here some similarities:

1. Skull shape. The top of the skull is kind of pointy. Skull is of very similar dimensions
2. Nose shape. The upside down "U" is remarkably similar
3. Similarity in mouth wall thickness
4. Similarity in mouth holes in their width and placement
5. Tusk tubes are of similar thickness, roundness and angle.
6. Bridge of nose is of similar width. Location of the three rectangles or clefts here are also very similar


Differences:

1. Hasbro has a shorter neck.
2. Hasbro has more air holes
3. Hasbro lenses are rear-mounted
4. Grill pattern, but who cares?
5. Cheeks are slightly different; the sides are more parallel whereas the DP S is more "V".
6. Hasbro's mid-frown bump looks different; but it looks like an elongation of the DP S.

There is strong liklihood that you can take the DP S and refine it, modify the neck, cheeks, eyes and chin-neck area to create the Hasbro.

Not yet convinced of the similarities?

Similarities:

1. The curvature of their ower eyelids match ae very similar
2. Eyebrows curvature is also very similar

Here's where things get interesting: a comparison of the side profiles.

1. The mouth walls widen towards the bottom on both
2. Tusk tubes end a generous amount forward

Differences:

The Hasbro in all of this is more refined in the tusk tubes, eyebrows and neck. You can see air holes to the side, as well as small cutaways for the head strap mounting system.

Still not convinced? Read on!

Here are the domes. Left is the Hasbro. Right is the DP S.

Finally, here is one of them looking down.

Left: Don Post Standard. Right: Hasbro.

Where am I going with this? Just bear with me.


Here is a Rubie's costume plastic mask. It's a thin throwaway 2-part mask.

I once couldn't help but notice a similarity between the Rubie's costume mask and the Don Post Standard. I presented this image to Rubie's, and I never heard back from them.

Left: Costume mask painted in gray primer. Middle: DP S. Right: Composite.



Note how well the Rubie's mask (gray) lines up.

CONCLUSION

It is possible that LFL owns the mold for the Don Post Stanard. Why? I have no idea. It may have been in the original contract with Don Post Studios.

You could say, "Hasbro acquired the molds." But then how did it end up with Rubie's. And vice-versa.

It appears that Hasbro refined it and made it more symmetrical, and the finish and quality of the Hasbro Voice Changer is much better than the DP S, although the DPS has more character to it.

In October 1997, Lucasfilm entered into a strategic relationship with Hasbro in which Lucasfilm granted Hasbro exclusive rights to make certain Star Wars products in return for 2,600,000 Hasbro shares, according to:

http://contracts.corporate.findlaw.com/ ... 10.14.html

The contract is due to expire Dec. 2007.

Later, in 1999, there was an SEC filing in which Lucasfilm purchases 9,450,000 Hasbro shares while granting Hasbro certain intellectual property rights.

Now LFL also licenses to other companies such as Gentle Giant and Rubie's. Rubie's claimed they had gotten the same mold as was leased to Don Post.

Here's where all this is going: What if they actually got the mold master used for the Don Post Deluxe? That would not only explain the similarities between the DP DLX and the Rubie's Fiberglass Limited Edition but it would also explain the use of a Don Post Standard as a base for their 2-piece costume helmet.

So... LFL might own more molds than we think. One wonders what else they own of the old Don Post Studios!

No I don't think they have the DP Deluxe Molds because their only good for so many casts and or years and then you toss them, besides if you kept every mold from the start of star wars too date including figures, toy's ex. ex. the wharehouse you would need to house all of this would be more expencive then it's worth

LFL likes to keep movie ralated objects mostly and i think it stands to reason that they acquired a helmet and made a mold much like some fans did with the DP Deluxe and just modified it to their own specs or
(my personal feelings ) made a 3d image of that mask and modified it, then using a special CNC machine, cut out the final plug or mold

AP,

When we think "molds" we think silicone negative.

But what if they received a positive?

Some people refer to a positive as a "mold."

To me size is the only similarity between the two. Interesting study though.

Question, weren't these made using injection moulding? If so the moulds would be made of metal and have a fairly long shelf/usage life.

Doug

yes your right most do think of negative, but since these were not made of fiberglass,
but instead ABS i think a plug was used, and also with todays technology
it's so much easier to do this in a 3d environment and then CNC the final
results