No Humor Man wrote:
My further thoughts on the extensions. We have seen on the DP DLX master cast that it has extensions all around the edges, the same with the eFX masters - all to ensure perfect edges on the subsequent castings. Those extensions are all meant to be trimmed away. We only see the neck extension left on some helmets having been shown off. However, chances are that the extension on the face mask went all the way around the rear as well. Could explain the extra length to the rear of the TD, as well as the weird position of the strap at the top of the face mask.
I don't see how the undercut in the rear is related to extension of the neck? There's nothing perfect about the rear of the TD ANH. In fact, the opposite it true. It has been reworked in the casting in places to improve it. There would be no reason practically to have an extension on the rear of the mask going all the way around because it is molded as a half head. Or perhaps I am misunderstanding? The undercut on the TD ANH in the rear isn't unique. The curvature at the rear is as you would see on a TM or VP, except that it extends further.
No Humor Man wrote:
The eye socket extensions may not be extensions at all, but simply caused by the way they filed out the cast in lenses. There are two ways to file away the lenses and the easiest way would be to drill holes in the lenses and then file in through the lens out towards the edges - that would leave a whole lot of material extending out behind the actual trim line and if they don't change angle to file that down, then that is exactly how it would look: like an extension, when it is simply leftover depth that wasn't sanded away from the cast in lenses. Same with the teeth depths - if you only file from outside in and not file down on the inside, it will leave extra material behind the trim line. It all depends on how clean you file things down and what way you do it.
I don't see how that it could be just filed away material, because you would see the raw resin there if it was filed away, and you also wouldn't see the lens seating point...the edge where the lens was seated. I also see where the lens was seated inside the upper and temporal part of the eye socket. So how can one have anything beyond the point of the lenses molded into the casting if they were cut out in the casting? If you just cut out the lenses, you wouldn't see that impression of where they sat in exactly the same position as the original lenses. They would be have to be removed from the original first, then the original molded with something other than lenses in place that are positioned further back. It is possible they did this because they wanted the entire eye socket molded. And that lens edge on the side of the nosebridge is formed, it isn't like left over glue or something that kept the lenses in place.
Yes with filing the teeth gaps there can be additional material if the resin was thick there, but you can tell the original sides of the teeth from that filed material, because of the two-part layering to the teeth that is part of the original ANH design.
No Humor Man wrote:
On the neck of the TD you are showing file impressions, so why you are saying there could have been a neck extension there is beyond me. I'm seeing evidence of actual filing having been done around that edge and the TM with the neck extension HAS the ANH neckline edge and so does the VP which we know have the neck extension, that was trimmed off.
I think you meant to write "could not have been a neck extension". Well the VP is trimmed shorter so it is harder to say what happened to it apart from what we know if the British mask having the extension. But filing marks don't mean that an extension was there. They could easily be from the original ANH mask which itself came from a mold of a plaster master that had the bottom edge trimmed. The SL ANH has the neck plus additional material on its bottom edge but the bottom edge is still intact. You don't have to trim the bottom edge for a mask like that, just inside of that edge perhaps. The SL ANH neck edge is intact not only from the side view but also from the bottom and it overhangs material that would have been part of what backed it up in the mold. Also, one could trim any casting from any mold on the neck, that doesn't mean there was an extension. The fact is, there was no extension on the TD LIKE the one on the TM, otherwise I would see evidence of the sanding that joined the TM extension to the neck. There is none. Sanding was done to blend the extension of the TM to the neck boundary and you see clearly the flattened areas on the neck boundary where the extension is. Do you see this on the original ANH mask? No. Do you see it on the TD? No. Do you see it on the SL? No. The paint drip on the right rear side is not perturbed by any kind of sanding on the TD like it is on the TM, independent of whether you have a casting with the extension on it or not. And I can compare the SL ANH neck edge on the bottom, from the side, etc. and it matches the TD. So there was no extension on the TD like the one on the TM or pre-VP. Could there have been AN extension of some kidn? Possibly, but it didn't leave behind any evidence and it wouldn't match what I see in terms of an undisturbed neck profile compared to the SL.
No Humor Man wrote:
My first run TM helmet has had the neck extension removed and if you didn't know it had it originally I would doubt you would know it was filed away.
I would know if I examined it and also had a TM with an extension in hand to compare it to. I have another authentic mask to compare the TD to, one that we know didn't have an extension and one that came directly from the original ANH mask, which itself had no extension. Whatever photographs I compare the TD or SL to, the neck is the same. Trimming differences can lead to differences in the edges, and there are none. Every other mask that has been trimmed otherwise, like the VP, it is obvious it deviates from the original neckline.
No Humor Man wrote:
The minor differences in the details on the tabs and the chin vent opening is rather inconsequential when the larger details such as blobs and overall shape and detailing of the filler is the same.
Actually, they are consequential. You cannot have differences like that from castings from the same mold. The differences in the screws, the curvature of the tabs, or even the rear latch point, the minute differences in which knobs are intact and which are not, the differences in which blobs are larger or not. And I didn't even go into that much detail yet of those differences. But they cannot be ascribed to simple differences in how something came out of the mold later on or earlier on.
No Humor Man wrote:
They are all linked to that 1 molding of the original ANH helmet. What is the question though is whether the TD is actually from that UK master mold and how many generations later the TM actually is, as we are dealing with differences that can easily be explained by irregularities happen when casting the two. Personally, I think you may be right that the TD is earlier in that sense... but it is still in the same lineage and not something from some other molding - that is simply impossible due to very specific shared details.
Yes, how many generations even that the TD is from that UK master mold or whether it is from a different molding even entirely? By other molding I mean a different, separate molding of the original ANH mask, or a master copy of that mask. It would seem unusual that with the filler material being the same, that the original ANH mask would be molded twice at two different times. But, couldn't it be a possibility that the original mask was simply kept in that state with the filled chin vent? I don't know. But there might be clues. I'll be discussing the nose of the TD ANH at some point as well in relationship to these issues.
No Humor Man wrote:
The VP shows that the original UK mold had the ANH lenses in there, so claiming the TD was cast without lenses makes very little sense.
Ok, but then why the impressions of the lenses being there in the eye sockets? How could that possibly be in the casting if the lenses were there to begin with? Not only that, the inside edges of the sockets extend further than what I see on the SL ANH, which has original lenses. They would not only have to file away the lenses, they would have to create extensions around the sockets. I'll try to show that in more detail later as I'm at work now. But I appreciate your always very critical and direct approach to the discussions, so thanks!