NOTE: I have divided this initial post up to multiple posts, so the first 3 replies may seem out of place. But I'm done moving content around, so please don't let that discourage you from replying and taking part in the conversations on this thread! - Mac.ForewordIt's been a long time since an affordable life-sized helmet and mask of Darth Vader was available. Perhaps like you, I was one who purchased it thinking it to be an affordable "ultimate" Vader until I stumbled across fan websites that pointed out significant inaccuracies to the Rubie's product. After studying screen captures and prop recasts, I concur. And if your goal is costuming, part of the challenge is to portray the character of Vader without the distraction of a helmet that looks too wide and distorted. In other words, you want people to look at the costume, not end with seeing the costume but instead see the character.
So here is my contribution to The Prop Den, with special thanks to NoHumorMan for his kind encouragement!
Is it worth modifying?4/18/13 - There are people on a budget, so the Rubie's is appealing on that basis alone. However, the Rubie's has increased in price. You can no longer get it super cheap. It's currently within the $95-110 range (plus S&H). People may mean well to tell you to buy this and make some slight modifications and that will make it "accurate". Although they mean well, this advice doesn't take into account the costs of tools, materials, etc.
Here is an infographic on the hidden costs of modifying a Rubie's.
If you already happen to have a ton of the necessary tools, equipment, paints, sandpapers, files, etc. around, then more power to you. If you don't, then consider a helmet kit that requires minimal fuss before taking paint. Your costs here can exceed that of an unpainted helmet kit like "Darth Ugly".
Also, know that you are working with a very difficult material - plastic. It gums up your tool bits if you work too quickly and let things heat up. Many tutorials on the Net suggest accurization mods, but bear in mind that the shape has been warped and biased to remove undercuts. The entire head shape is wrong. The important irregularities, bumps, etc. have long been sanded out. Even if modified, it can have a great look, but it will never be on par with a cast-from-original-mold helmet. So bear these limitations in mind.
Differences between Rubie's and the Original(Above: A Tale of Two Vaders. Left, we have a Rubie's Supreme Darth Vader helmet in original, unmodified condition. Right, screen-used ESB).
The Rubie's is based off of the same template as once used by Don Post Studios. Rubie's Costume Company acquired the license and that template. The template consists of an ESB mask but a ROTJ-style dome. Contrary to it being popularized as Revenge of the Sith (which by nature is symmetrial), it's not. The Rubie's is asymetrical.
Inaccuracies of the Rubie's facemask1. The lenses are front-mounted and should be rear-mounted. Further, the lenses are the wrong shape. There should be a natural curvature, not like someone used their thumb to press into the plastic while it was hot.
2. The bridge of the nose is off-center. You see four clefts into the bridge. There should be three. In reality the forth cleft is more of a depression or bevel, in that the surface of the bridge ends there and sweeps down to form the lower eyelids.
3. The five mouth vents are round-ended and should be square ended. (Addendum 1/9 - There is an incline at the bottom of each vent. These can be removed, but overall the vents should end lower. More on this later.)
4. The eyebrows lack the "frown" found on the props (a loss of "menace" that makes Vader what he is)
5. Of the triangular mouth, the left mouth wall is thicker than the right and the bottom. On the prop, they should be of similar thickness.
6. The nose has a piece of plastic stuck in there and it should be painted. The nose wal here is too thin, but if made thicker, it should be thinner than the mouth walls.
7. The alternating paint scheme (in case you hadn't noticed that the original props had one) is reversed. The upper left eyelid area and the right cheek should be highlighted (among other things).
8. The neck on the right side (as you face the helmet) is flared out.
9. The facemask, overall, is very wide.
10. The neck is very thick and the chin is somewhat buldging. It needs to be more contoured.
11. The dips beneath the lower eyelids are small and incorrectly shaped and positioned.
The helmet has a center bevel but it's obscure. The "eyebrows" of the helmet are also obscure.
Currently in this tutorial, I'm not going to address that (at least not for now).
So.... Who Cares?Whew, that was a mouthful, huh? The question is: who cares? Perhaps 90 percent of dedicated fans out there will not notice these discrepancies. Casual fans might not know what on earth you're talking about. Students of sculpture recreating Michelangelo's "David" will study the statue for years and still fail to capture all the subtle duances. But when you do close in on that final 10 percent, somehow people subconsciously recognize what you're doing.
It starts with how much you want to refine your own eye to recognize the characteristics of a screen-accurate Vader. One can only study screen captures for so long. Vader is one of those man-made hand-made marvels that deserve to be studied in three dimensions. What I needed was a valid basis of comparison. Fortunately I was blessed with the opportunity to invest in a low number Don Post Deluxe fiberglass helmet in original condition. This was licensed and signed off by Lucasfilm. While stated on the Certificate of Authenticity as being of Empire Strikes Back molds, the helmet middle bevel suggests Return of the Jedi. Regardless, it's a marvelous study piece. It has such character that it feels like
Vader's frickin' head sitting right there on my desk!
When you examine the Rubie's side by side with something that was cast (or recast) from original Lucasfilm molds, it's like comparing a Lamborghini-looking Honda upgrade kit with the real Lamborghini. One is Lamborghini-looking, and the other is pure gold. By itself it looks great, but even someone like me -- who isn't really that into cars -- can tell the difference.
If you need inspiration to modify your Rubie's, consider this: it's like the tremendous attention to detail by propmakers in "The Lord of the Rings". The camera may never directly focus on the detail of the props but they all help in increasing the suspension of disbelief, thereby increasing the reality of the characters.
It's one thing to look kinda like Vader. It's a whole other thing to BE Vader in someone's eyes!
One of the reasons why I started documenting my modification is to see if a plain beginner like me could do this. I don't have everyone's talent in sculpting or painting. But I have had everyone's encouragement and great advice, so a big "Thank You" for all who have given me your support in this process.
Further, I hope this tutorial will help someone out there. I have seen two or three tutorials, but none of them addressed the mouth area, the bridge of the nose, and the frown.
Most tutorials basically reduce the four clefts (or "ridges") in the bridge of the nose and reduce them to three, but don't address how the surface of the bridge of the nose sweeps downward on either side to form the lower eyelids.
Some indicate the lack of symetry to the helmet, but don't really correct the thin mouth wall on the right.
This tutorial will help any of you who are on a budget and don't want to spend hundreds to buy a fiberglass screen-accurate helmet. It won't make the Rubie's totally screen accurate but it will make it look far more pleasing to the eyes.
Is modification really necessary? 4/18/13 -
(Above: Did these helmets come from the same template? You decide! Answer below!)
Is modification really necessary? It depends. Any degree of modification would be an improvement. I've seen people do nothing but shoot automotive paint, and from a distance it was marvelous. The secret to Vader looking good is basically what you think you see, as opposed to how the prop actually appears. The helmet is very much about the way it responds to light and also what remains hidden in shadow, obscure.
The above shows how dumbed down the Rubie's plastic helmet is compared with a Don Post Deluxe. And the Don Post Deluxe is definitely dumbed down compared with the screen used original. The Rubie's Fiberglass limited edition is very similar to the Don Post Deluxe, but I feel the old Don Post has a better paint job to it.
Notice how the DP DLX, despite its shortcomings, looks marvelous and organic. The Rubie's looks forced. It's face is narrower, possibly to make it easy to remove from the molds as these were formed by injection-molding. The Rubie's also looks oversanded.
So count the costs... have fun, and good luck