The Prop Den http://thepropden.aokforums.com/ |
|
On the subject of the Christie's - PIH 2012 Helmet http://thepropden.aokforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=214&t=4656 |
Page 6 of 8 |
Author: | vadermania [ Fri Aug 15, 2014 5:24 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: On the subject of the Christie's - PIH 2012 Helmet |
No Humor Man wrote: It would actually be an interesting experiment to try and pair that face mask with a dome, then, to see how it sits. I think it could be simulated by taking a profile shot of Ron's faceplate and positioning a cutout of a profile shot of an ESB dome on it. The mountig rings were actually touching the inner top side of the dome. Would be a job for Mac. |
Author: | Too Much Garlic [ Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:52 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: On the subject of the Christie's - PIH 2012 Helmet |
Not perfect, since I couldn't find exact matching angles, but close enough. I even think I have the dome go down too low in the back. But here we are. |
Author: | Vadernsons [ Fri Aug 15, 2014 10:50 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: On the subject of the Christie's - PIH 2012 Helmet |
Looks like a resemblance to the hoth helmet. I'm a subscriber to this theory...Seems very plausible Ps- really loving this thread and the info being shared by those with so much knowledge and experience. Would love to hear from Paul/ DArthVaderV if he has anything to add or comments. Also any info on whether the anh armor set was reconditioned for esb? If it happened to the helmets, is it possible that it was turned into the armor worn in the meditation chamber scene? Great to be a vader enthusiast ! |
Author: | Too Much Garlic [ Sat Aug 16, 2014 10:21 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: On the subject of the Christie's - PIH 2012 Helmet |
Putting a photograph and a movie capture together gives even more issues than putting two photographs together that aren't exactly angled. There's just too much difference between a still camera and a movie camera, which you can easily see in that example. Also, you greatly misinterpreted the size relationship between the screen capture and the photograph, resulting in the dome being way oversized for the comparison. I tried replicating your results, but simply couldn't. The dome mount in the rear is simply too high and this is what I ended up with. Remarkably similar to my previous attempt, wouldn't you say. |
Author: | Too Much Garlic [ Sun Aug 17, 2014 4:38 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: On the subject of the Christie's - PIH 2012 Helmet |
I matched the face masks. Your comparisons had the RP face mask be a lot smaller than the screen capture, which made the dome huge and the face mask tiny. When the dome is angled accurately on the RP face mask, as seen in the screen capture, the look is identical. The issue is caused by the dome angle and placement. That's also why the Don Post domes look small, simply because they are angled wrong on the face mask, similar to how the dome looks small in the Hoth scene. I'm not going to argue this anymore. The dome mount rising up in the rear as it does on the RP helmet will NEVER make a dome sit in any other way than too high in the back - similar to the Hoth helmet. That does however not prove it is the Hoth helmet, simply that it has the same amount of rise in the rear. |
Author: | Vadernsons [ Mon Aug 18, 2014 10:41 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: On the subject of the Christie's - PIH 2012 Helmet |
The RP appears to have less height of bondo under the ring at the front than the esb stunt. Also depends on where the ring inside the dome was sitting. Very probable it could've the hoth bucket. Very possible it's a anh left over as said by Ron himself & by indications of the holes in the top. Does it have the esb neck extension ? That could be a telling factor too,... I'd take Rons word on the subject , after all for him it is what it is. theres no "holy grail factor" in it as he painted all the screen used lids. it would be just another day at the office for him. |
Author: | Too Much Garlic [ Mon Aug 18, 2014 10:57 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: On the subject of the Christie's - PIH 2012 Helmet |
Darth Obsession wrote: As you can see here, the stunt's filler is equal in height all across, whereas the RP is low in the front, but is high in the rear - similar to the 20th C configuration, which ALSO has the dome sit like the Hoth helmet, some tour helmets, and Don Post/Rubies helmets, which is raised in the back. But even at that, both dome mounts are equally high in the front - the stunt just has more filler between the ring and the face mask but shorter, while the RP just has a higher mount and less filler. It's the angles front to back between the two that makes all the difference and you can tell even with the slight forward tilt of the RP picture compared to the stunt, that the RP is higher in the rear. The necks of the two helmets are also very different in shape and width, also complicating things - especially making the rear shot compromised. And the found part that make up the dome mount has been cut down from the actual source piece, which means that the center ring is a lot taller but was cut to length. Details inside the original used rings also suggests a grid pattern that was cut away from the inside of the bottom ring opening. Something similar to an ABS grid drain pipe. |
Author: | Too Much Garlic [ Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:56 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: On the subject of the Christie's - PIH 2012 Helmet |
Darth Obsession. Now you are making postulations again that you cannot back up. The TM certainly has a visible, but faint feature in that spot and anyone who had done molding knows that airpockets can appear in similar spots on several different casts from the same mold, while that feature created is not part of the mold. Even though the mark is small in that area, it can still trap air when the casting is being done. The way it is seen MOTM picture is how it looks on the TM. Just because it is there on the MOTM doesn't in any way shape or form make it possible for you to conclude it is a screen used helmet. You need to 100% (or at least 90%) match it to a helmet seen on screen before making such a claim, so please STOP making such unfounded postulations. I have to ask. Have you worked on any prop helmets? Have you done any molding and casting? Have you tried attaching a dome mount to a helmet? Do you know how difficult it is to actually get it to sit right? Even the slightest elevation in the rear makes the dome rise up in the back. Most of the time, that's where the dome mount touches the dome's inner surface - not so often that the front actually touches and when it does it usually just results in the front being raised up from the face, not the rear. Please stop making assumptions if you do not have the hands on experience. You are confusing things with your back and fourth claims and you are adding to the misinformation. I admire your enthusiasm and the fact your posts create activity in here, but please be aware of the damage you inflict with your claims, when they are based on way too little evidence. I'm not trying to bash you or your enthusiasm. I'm just trying to push you to research more before making claims. It is okay to post all your theories, thoughts and ideas, to start debate that encourage info sharing, but please be careful with your claims, assumptions and postulations - they damage more than you think. |
Author: | Darth Obsession [ Sun Aug 24, 2014 5:43 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: On the subject of the Christie's - PIH 2012 Helmet |
With all due respect No Humor Man, I read 'postulate' as, I force my opinions upon everyone. I do nothing of the sort, I study, I analyze, I compare and I voice my hypotheses. And I try to do it in a way that allows other people to see what I'm seeing and hopefully check it out for themselves. I make no demands on anyone. I have never once tried to tell anyone else they were wrong without a detailed explanation as to why I thought so. And I guess the year and a half I spent working in a fiberglass manufacturing facility back in 1985 and 86, cleaning and prepping fiberglass car parts for paint doesn't count, because we never actually made a Darth Vader helmet. But the parts we made were every bit as intricate. And in our facility, a facemask or faceplate would simply be considered a part and that cavity would have been called a flaw. And it was my job to get rid of those flaws. And since flaws were fairly common, hence the reason for my job at the time, I became pretty familiar with these flaws. Anything repetitive had to be reported back to my department supervisor and as the molds got older the flaws were more common. There were six molds for each part we made. And I never once saw the replication of any such flaw without a source issue in a single mold. So while I didn't make Darth Vader helmets, I still feel that what I did do should be sufficient to make such a conclusion as to 'suggest' an ESB mold might exist. I did not say it was categorical proof. And in my experience working for that shop, if I saw the exact same flaw on multiple parts, my instructions were to report it to my supervisor so they could locate and pull that mold and get it fixed. I never saw that happen once. And while I did see edge flaws like this more than once, they were always random, never in the same spot and never with the exact same size and appearance. Sunken corners? Yes. Blistered edges? Yes. Distinct circular cavities in the same spot? Sorry, never happened. Sorry everybody, for not having my usual big photo essay, but I just finished a grueling work week and I really just want to go to bed. ----- John |
Page 6 of 8 | All times are UTC |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |