The right one is definitely a step above that first one, but it is ROTJ, not ESB. The mounting plate isn't original. Nor are the grills.

And if one is tour and the other is original, why does it look like they were painted by the same person?

And if it is ESB what's with the ROTJ tusks that look brand new?

Strap clips are not original either.

The screws on the mounting plate don't match either the Paul Allen ESB or the original ROTJ stunt...

That second mask is promising, but at this point there isn't anything to suggest it is original.

About the armor hinge, it is the wrong size (larger than the original) and it is sitting flush inside the armor, unlike the original which protrudes from the surface of the armor.

ah! you beat me to it! those were the pictures i was talking about.

Brief update.....

I'm in the process of addiing a page on this on my site and discussing with the owner the wording - which is always going to be contentious, since having not seen the "cast iron" provenance he's talking about, I can only go on the photos. And theyre a long way from showing an "original" helmet.

One interesting thing I have seen though is a recent valuation from one of the major auction houses who have apparently seen it and are convinced of its provenance.....(although it could be argued its in their interest)



Cheers

Jez

I wonder about the provenance as well, since it is obviously not original. Furthermore, if an auction house falls for it and tries to post it as original, that would be sales fraud.

I agree if that was the case. But can we be sure its not production-made?

If (and I mean IF) this guys documentation details a paper trail back to Lucasfilm - and he has other documentation from respected sources (including LFL employee)- then is it possible that it is a genuine "produciton" made helmet?

Cheers

Jez

Nice ESB.

Well I'm curious who wrote the provenance if it really is that good. But that won't change what it is, or what it is not.

Let us say for argument's sake that they took an original ESB helmet, and dramatically refinished and reworked it here and there. And then as a result the mask just so happens to look like a 20th C. A 20th C that itself has been reworked for whatever reason (?).

Ask yourself this....if the helmet or entire suit for that matter had such rock solid provenance from day one, then why would anyone refinish the helmet to that extent and without accurate materials? The teeth gaps would have to be trimmed, the tubes filled in, the tube convergences sanded and reshaped, the mounting ring changed out, the tusks replaced, the straps replaced, the entire thing repainted, and I assume it has brand new foam inside as the other one? Not to mention that the armor would have to be sanded down considerably which makes no sense if it was original armor in original condition....just to mention a few...

Sounds logical.

I'm not disagreeing with you mate - its a strange state of affairs when you have a prop that visually does not match up with what we are all expecting but then (apparently) has cast iron documentation and provenance.

Its not unlike the Kurtz situation and we all know the background to those auctions!

I have a feeling the owner is going to ask me to refrain from adding my review (and comments) to my site - and TBH thats okay with me. It can then go into the auction and people can make their own minds up on it based on the photos the auction house produces - and I would assume the documentation theyre prepared to release.

On one hand I will not promote something as "original" if (based on the visual evidence I have seen) I dont believe it is - however in the same way I'm not going to damn a piece when I haven't seen its documented provenance.

Cheers

Jez

You have a point there, Jez. The TM had a similar over-painted look to it, and ultimately it was what was underneath that counted.

At quick glance, its chin triangle is not the same as that on the 20th Century or Don Post Deluxe - both of which have smaller than screen-sized triangular holes.

Yes different than the 20th C but not entirely accurate....look for example at the lower vertex of the chin vent...the curvature has a greater angle than on the hero ESB, or the Paul Allen ESB, for that matter (both the hero and Paul Allen vents seem to have been cut using the same sort of template for the shape). Size-wise in relation to the original ESB it seems ok.

Incidentally, the chin vent of the 20th C is actually identical to the vent seen on the Don Bies repainted hero ESB (claimed to be a production ESB at least). That one had a letter by George Lucas saying it was original, although the dome on it was more ROTJ.

It could be that if his letters of provenance are that good it would overrule anything we say anyway. But it should be possible to attempt to confirm what the letters say, especially since the claims of it being production original is in question.

Let him put it up for auction. Then it is out of your hands and we'll see what happens...

Great pictures and research chaps.

Joe

Don't know really where to post this but:

Degobah Luke/Vader severed head helmet

This is the same photo I am using for the C-PIH 2012 thread, there is an interesting thing I noticed studying it. It is not a pic of the helmet where it landed after the roll.
It is a staged photo. If you look at the two pics, the ground around the helmet is different, the layout of the vines and twigs and branches don't match. There is also a dirt
clod propping up the helmet on the right side which suggests that the helmet would not lye face up on it's own. It may not have even been taken after the roll. The dirt and
such may have been applied since there is a lot more mud sling than I would expect to see from what appears to be relatively dry ground.