Excellent presentation as usual....very nice paintwork. But I would not compare it to a TM...

Right. Because a TM is not a ANH.

Actually, it is more accurate than a TM. Also, the tusk areas did not have to be rebuilt. The provenance is golden, however I cannot speak more about it.

What makes you say that?

How is it more accurate?

It's provenance for one, plus the fact that the tusk areas had to be resculpted on the TM.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not bagging on the TM at all as I think it is very nice. But when people throw around comments like, "nice, but it's no TM," then I have to disagree. I don't think it's more accurat than the TM, I know it is. I wish I could do more to convince than show pics.
As I said before, much like a lot of the other pieces in my collection, I cannot discuss them in-depth. Best I can do is show some pics.
It was never my intention to start a debate about it, but a lot of times people make claims without even knowing the piece that they are criticising.

GINO,

So when you say provenance, are you saying your helmet came from a source that was pre-producion or post-production ANH?

As I understand it, the TM is post-production ANH (pre-ESB). Now, nothing can take away from how nice your helmet looks, but the "C" shaped scar on the cheek you added differs in shape and position to the Tantive IV shot. The TM would reflect this accurately. So if your helmet somehow precedes TM but lacks little details like this, I'd say the TM is more accurate in the details.

Wouldn't that mean that whatever is "better" is merely subjective depending on each collector's individual preferences?

I don't feel it's necessary to poo-poo the TM helmet to make another better. You've captured a good look with your setup, and your helmet should stand on its own merits, not at the cost of another's.

Well it's difficult not to say more myself, I just think keep it as simple as this.

The TM is a great helmet and Gino your helmet is also very nice.

Lets not start a war here in a deserved show off thread.

Well, if your dome is a direct cast of a screen-used ANH dome, then your complete helmet is indeed more ANH accurate. My dome is pure ESB.

My faceplate was ESB before the restoration. Now it is ANH. The tips of the tusk tubes are reconstructed, that's correct. If your faceplate is a direct cast of a screen-used ANH faceplate, than it is indeed more accurate than mine.

Gino, how can you be sure that your helmet is really what it is - have you ever handled an original screen-used ANH helmet?

See, you COULD give us more information about your helmet, but you don't WANT to. That's the difference between us two.

Show us the tabs on your faceplate, cover the logo of the manufacturer if necessary. Let's compare them side-by-side with the tabs on my faceplate.

Again, as I stated before, your ANH Vader is one of the best fan-made displays that I have seen so far.

Tom

Thanks Tom,
I did not want to get into debate about what is more accurate as I already know how volatile the subject is. Wouldn't have said anything at all until someone else had to comment about it first.

I do think that the TM is a fantastic helmet also. I still would love to see how that ESB dome compares to mine. I plan on posting pics of my ESB version very soon.

I ground off the remnants of the original tabs on my ANH helmet and replaced them with real tabs which actually serve to hold the dome in place. No velcro necessary. I was surprised just how well the tabs work as initially I thought there was no way it would. I would post pics of the tab section of my faceplate, but there are details that are not public knowledge that would be exposed. In time, if that info makes it's way into the public, I'll have no prob posting pics of mine. However it is not my call to expose that info.

I feel very lucky, thankful, and fortunate to have been given access to these helmets and the info about them and their accessories. It is a very difficult thing to have the desire to show off your stuff, yet still honor those and the conditions at which they were made available to you.

ESB and ROTJ will be up soon. ESB first, then ROTJ. There are some subtle differences between the ESB and ROTJ details that I have never noticed before that I CAN share and plan to do so when I post the pics.

I have a thought. Instead of posting here, maybe show it to Tom, if that can be arranged. I have no problem with not seeing the pictures, as we all know that these details can be used for the wrong reasons... but at least this is an option to get some studying done... just a thought.

You have a very nice helmet GINO. It looks very ANH and imo that's all that really matters, right?

Thanks Carsten.
Again, it's not my call to expose that info, not even to just one person.
Like I said, if that info comes out one day, I'll post pics of mine and say, "...remember that thread on the Den..."

You're welcome.

Oh... I was only talking about the tabs... but that's okay. Your call.

Really looking forward to pictures of your ESB & RotJ!

analysis deleted in fairness to the thread....

SithLord,

Fascinating analysis. GINO's mask's nose looks a bit different though, like there is loss of detail. Or is that optical illusion?

I can see what you're saying. The width of the mouth openings in GINO's appear wider than the VP ANH.

Still, GINO did a great job with the paint.

Are the flanges a bit on the long side, or is that optical illusion?