Vader Helmet Opinions Sought

[CSMacLaren]

voice in the crowd, your new signature image is epic. :lol

:thumbsup

Here here! :thumbsup

 

[LeAngeSolitaire]

Well, on the Reveal pics taken at the SW exhibits, I noticed that three of the four tubes ended really, really flat. That is not the way it was on the original. It's a feature exclusive to the Reveal. Interestingly, this mask reproduces that, but everything else is all wrong about it. An observant fan could have made such mods.

I really can't see the mods you are talking about, to be honest. I'm not being argumentative, but I just can't and I'm very observant. The differences you are seeing are perspective distortion, I am 100% sure of it.

You talk about mods being made by an observant fan. Not 20 years ago it couldn't. You are adamant this is a fan build and I know it isn't. You even queried whether it was switched out in the past 20 years. Seriously?! No one apart from 4 people knew of the existence of this lid until now and I doubt anyone would mount an operation to a suburban garage to switch out a 20 year old raw casting of a Vader lid.

I think it's actually a progenitor helmet to the screen used. The reason is that you can easily modify this to be identical to the screen used but not vice versa.

 

[voice in the crowd]

voice in the crowd, your new signature image is epic. :lol

:thumbsup

Thanks just trying to put the fun back into 'fun'damentalist Vader threads.

Vader threads have been too heavy lately.

The RPF should be a fun place - that is why we come here right? :thumbsup

Cheers Chris

 

[LeAngeSolitaire]

I was just sent the following picture by the owner of the Vader. This shows a very interesting feature that he tells me would be very difficult to replicate and would certainly not be known about by a fan in 1989/90. Tellingly, it's only on one side and not the other.

 

[CSMacLaren]

I really can't see the mods you are talking about, to be honest. I'm not being argumentative, but I just can't and I'm very observant. The differences you are seeing are perspective distortion, I am 100% sure of it.

You talk about mods being made by an observant fan. Not 20 years ago it couldn't. You are adamant this is a fan build and I know it isn't. You even queried whether it was switched out in the past 20 years. Seriously?! No one apart from 4 people knew of the existence of this lid until now and I doubt anyone would mount an operation to a suburban garage to switch out a 20 year old raw casting of a Vader lid.

I think it's actually a progenitor helmet to the screen used. The reason is that you can easily modify this to be identical to the screen used but not vice versa.

What I'll try to do is a more detailed analysis of the aspects of the face that deviate from, say, a 20th Century mask. The 20th Century was made by Don Bies for the 20th Century Fox promotion/tour suits and I can verify that the 20th Century castings do have traits that are characteristic of masks that descended from Lucasfilm's UK mold.

So instead of having your friend match the mask to an LFL Reveal shot, I'll try to photograph a 20th Cent to match one or more of the photos you posted.

Give me time... I have a day job. :lol

 

[LeAngeSolitaire]

What I'll try to do is a more detailed analysis of the aspects of the face that deviate from, say, a 20th Century mask. The 20th Century was made by Don Bies for the 20th Century Fox promotion/tour suits and I can verify that the 20th Century castings do have traits that are characteristic of masks that descended from Lucasfilm's UK mold.

So instead of having your friend match the mask to an LFL Reveal shot, I'll try to photograph a 20th Cent to match one or more of the photos you posted.

Give me time... I have a day job. :lol

I don't see the point of matching it up to what you have admitted is a helmet that has distant roots to a studio made one. All the proportion things you supposedly see are perspective errors. Others I cannot see at all. It is more productive trying to match it to the Vader mask it is actually supposed to be. I'm not trying to be argumentative, just sensible. It's details that speak the most, not perspective error laden comparisons with a helmet that is clearly going to be different. I can see differences in this helmet and I can see a lot more that matches and could not possibly have been replicated on a fan build from 20 years ago. I just wish you could just accept that and help get to the bottom of what it could be as opposed to just poo-poohing it with non-existent observations supported by a clearly different helmet.

 

[CSMacLaren]

I don't see the point of matching it up to what you have admitted is a helmet that has distant roots to a studio made one. All the proportion things you supposedly see are perspective errors. Others I cannot see at all. It is more productive trying to match it to the Vader mask it is actually supposed to be. I'm not trying to be argumentative, just sensible. It's details that speak the most, not perspective error laden comparisons with a helmet that is clearly going to be different. I can see differences in this helmet and I can see a lot more that matches and could not possibly have been replicated on a fan build from 20 years ago. I just wish you could just accept that and help get to the bottom of what it could be as opposed to just poo-poohing it with non-existent observations supported by a clearly different helmet.

LeAngeSolitaire,

I understand you're not trying to be argumentative, but I would urge you to not throw out the 20th Century as a basis of comparison so quickly.

The UK mold was made off the screenused original ANH to produce the ESB production helmets. I have a 1st generation casting of a mask dubbed the "TM" that was pulled from the Lucasfilm UK mold, and have compared it against the 20th Century. The 20th century is hardly out of whack, and it even has the three 3M tabs on its crown, which is a characteristic of castings taken out of the Lucasfilm UK mold - although it is one or more generations down. As mentioned before, the 20th Century line of masks were used in tour suits by Lucasfilm.

You have also seen my earlier post how well my picture of my Darth Stone 20th Century lays over an image of the Lucasfilm tour ROTJ reveal. Notice the lines and surfaces flow from the 20th Century image to the Reveal Image.

To write the 20th Century off as a basis of comparison because it has "distant roots" would be unfortunate to this discussion, because I matched the photographic perspective as possible and it overlays extremely well. I cannot say the same - yet - for the Reveal ROTJ you shared.

If you are unconvinced of the 20th Century, then your only course of comparison is to ask your friend to rephotograph his Reveal to match the photos of the known Lucasfilm ROTJ reveals shared in this thread. I will avail myself to do overlay analysis. The important thing is that the greebles (sp?) of the Reveal of both masks all line up line for line, detail for detail. Currently, one of the air vents don't line up.

The motivation here is not to poo-poo your mask. We're trying to provide insight based on study of castings that are known to be accurate to the original molds, and for whatever you are resistant to the notion that there are people who are trying to help you out of a spirit of friendship, we have no motivation to poo-poo your helmet for the sake of poo. I may not know everything, but having studied Vader as a sculpture for 5 years and having been in one sculpting project after another, I don't share my observations arrogantly or flippantly.

 

[CSMacLaren]

LeAngeSolitaire

I'm saying this because, 5 years ago, when I first arrived on the Vader scene, I didn't see the subtleties some more-studied folks were already attuned to. I figured they were arrogant naysayers until further study brought me to the same conclusions as they already had. I can imagine how these comparisons might be turning you off, but there's no hidden agenda here. When an authentic prop enters the fandom, we all win, and it's cause to celebrate. Even auction houses are extremely careful nowadays because they've let a dud or two slip by.

If you need authentic Vader information, visit this thread:

Authentic Vader Props

Another great resource:

Star Wars Helmets

I realize this may be a lot to take in, but you're among friends here, and we're all helping each other to learn more about prop authenticity.

 

[jme3]

LeAngeSolitaire,

At the risk of, but not intending to, take away from your enthusiasm, I honestly do not see the original reveal in the casting your friend has. Firstly, although no one I'm aware of has stated it factually, the general consensus has always been that the studio reveal was a one-off of an existing mask, butchered and embellished with greeblies to the profile we have all come to know in the ROTJ reveal. If there was indeed a mould, there are very telling differences in aspects of your friend's casting that give it away immediately, namely the upper crown aspect, the likes of which to the original that I, at least, have never seen duplicated in anyone's replica. If by some strange twist there's an idea that the studio reveal itself may have been moulded, then your friend's casting is even further off than that with issues like the depth of placement of the dynodes into their "windows" and the relative positions of the wire braid leads at the forehead.

I'd say he has an interesting conversation piece and a fair base from which to go on with his project, but I would be surprised indeed to learn that it has any connection at all to the original in anything but aspiration.

Good luck to him on his build-up.

 

[LeAngeSolitaire]

LeAngeSolitaire,

I understand you're not trying to be argumentative, but I would urge you to not throw out the 20th Century as a basis of comparison so quickly.

The UK mold was made off the screenused original ANH to produce the ESB production helmets. I have a 1st generation casting of a mask dubbed the "TM" that was pulled from the Lucasfilm UK mold, and have compared it against the 20th Century. The 20th century is hardly out of whack, and it even has the three 3M tabs on its crown, which is a characteristic of castings taken out of the Lucasfilm UK mold - although it is one or more generations down. As mentioned before, the 20th Century line of masks were used in tour suits by Lucasfilm.

You have also seen my earlier post how well my picture of my Darth Stone 20th Century lays over an image of the Lucasfilm tour ROTJ reveal. Notice the lines and surfaces flow from the 20th Century image to the Reveal Image.

To write the 20th Century off as a basis of comparison because it has "distant roots" would be unfortunate to this discussion, because I matched the photographic perspective as possible and it overlays extremely well. I cannot say the same - yet - for the Reveal ROTJ you shared.

If you are unconvinced of the 20th Century, then your only course of comparison is to ask your friend to rephotograph his Reveal to match the photos of the known Lucasfilm ROTJ reveals shared in this thread. I will avail myself to do overlay analysis. The important thing is that the greebles (sp?) of the Reveal of both masks all line up line for line, detail for detail. Currently, one of the air vents don't line up.

The motivation here is not to poo-poo your mask. We're trying to provide insight based on study of castings that are known to be accurate to the original molds, and for whatever you are resistant to the notion that there are people who are trying to help you out of a spirit of friendship, we have no motivation to poo-poo your helmet for the sake of poo. I may not know everything, but having studied Vader as a sculpture for 5 years and having been in one sculpting project after another, I don't share my observations arrogantly or flippantly.

Mac, I appreciate your input, truly. However I cannot understand the logic of comparing the 20th C helmet to this one other than to say 'yep, it looks like Vader'. I hear your point and I can see where you are coming from but it still makes more sense to compare to to what a screen used example of what my friend's helmet purports to be. Sure the reveal helmet probably has common roots but they are also different beasts in many ways. Ultimately it's not going to be general proportions alone that will indicate what this is but a combination of the proportions, the little details and the historical background together that will decide.

Others here have noted that there are too many details that match the screen used original. There are little bumps, contours and imperfections that cannot have been deliberately replicated, especially not 20 years ago. Even the slats match in every single way! No one is lying about this. This genuinely is a 20 year old casting from a source that really does not give a damn about the provenance - he just wants to finish his display piece. It was I who suggested holding fire on butchering the helmet pending more info on what it is. What I am incredulous about is the fact you maintain that this is a fan build. It isn't, it can't be and it's silly to even suggest that something this oddly accurate could have been fan built 20 years ago.

I may be a newbie to Vader but I am not a newbie to props and I have an exceptional eye for detail and forensic analysis. Many of the differences you pointed out are attributable to perspective differences. I respectfully maintain that you are wrong about that. The shape of the eyes, the nose ridges and cheeks are all consistent with the known reveal prop. I am sure you also have a good eye for detail but you originally thought this was Vac formed, so you can be fallible.
I have emailed Brian Muir and asked if he would like to examine this helmet in person. My friend will also be taking further pics and HD video of the helmet later this week so if you want to suggest some pics, let me know in good time. I know that Vader can bring out the worst in some people, the 30 page thread on a C scratch (wtf?!) is testament to that, so I don't want this to descend into a massive ego driven pissing contest. I just hope we can look at this unique helmet objectively becuase if it's what I suspect it is, it's a very important find.

 

[LeAngeSolitaire]

If by some strange twist there's an idea that the studio reveal itself may have been moulded, then your friend's casting is even further off than that with issues like the depth of placement of the dynodes into their "windows" and the relative positions of the wire braid leads at the forehead.

If by the dynodes, you mean the slated squares, I suggest you take a look at my hi-res images and compare to the existing reveal. The depth of placement is identical in every way. The positions of the wire braid leads look fine apart from the right hand one. Then again, these could have been changed since the forehead/connector junctions looks to have been softened using filler which was possibly done to close a the gap between greeblies and the head when the greeblies were attached.

 

[Dann]

Are the "slats" you're referring to the square "window blind/shutter" looking things?

If you don't have the mask in front of you how can you be sure about the perspective distortion?

 

[CSMacLaren]

.. but it still makes more sense to compare to to what a screen used example of what my friend's helmet purports to be.

My logic is simple. Forget the fact it was a Reveal. It's still Vader. They took a casting of Vader and embellished it into a Reveal mask, but prior to the embellishment, it was still a Vader like all production masks.

If it fails to match up accurately with a Vader of Lucasfilm lineage, then there is room for doubt as to claim of its provenance to the original.

 

[jme3]

If by the dynodes, you mean the slated squares, I suggest you take a look at my hi-res images and compare to the existing reveal. The depth of placement is identical in every way. The positions of the wire braid leads look fine apart from the right hand one. Then again, these could have been changed since the forehead/connector junctions looks to have been softened using filler which was possibly done to close a the gap between greeblies and the head when the greeblies were attached.

Yes, the dynodes are the "slated squares". Please look at the attached photo for the location of the wire braids and the exact profile of the center four dynodes in their cutouts:

 

[LeAngeSolitaire]

Are the "slats" you're referring to the square "window blind/shutter" looking things?

If you don't have the mask in front of you how can you be sure about the perspective distortion?

Yes.

I am taking the word of the owner of the helmet who is a 20 year veteran propmaker and cameraman for film and TV who offered the caveat when he sent me the pics. I also know from my own experience that perspective can affect overlays which makes them less than 100% reliable as comparisons.

 

[Dann]

Well it looks to me like the far left braided wire would need to move to the right a bit to align with the edge of the left middle dynode, and the center braided wire needs to be a little left of where it is (it's not perfectly centered on the real deal).

Also, maybe it's distortion, but the two middle dynodes seem to be too far off axis, it seems on the real mask they're more parallel with the center bumb in the mid brow.

 

[jme3]

Well it looks to me like the far left braided wire would need to move to the right a bit to align with the edge of the left middle dynode, and the center braided wire needs to be a little left of where it is (it's not perfectly centered on the real deal).

Yeah, all of that.

And, if the assertion is that the original and this casting were both derived from a common mould, the crown alone betrays that. If, on the other hand, there's the wildly preposterous belief that the original reveal was stripped down to only the wire leads and dynodes and a mould was taken of that ( and all strippage was subsequently and meticulously replaced), then there are still the issues about the depth of dynodes and the wire braid placement. It's just not convincing.

 

[LeAngeSolitaire]

Yes, the dynodes are the "slated squares". Please look at the attached photo for the location of the wire braids and the exact profile of the center four dynodes in their cutouts:

Great pic. Thanks for posting that.

Those dynodes look like they are actually separate pieces. I can also see what looks like glue residue. The braids are separate pieces too.

How odd. This raises some more questions as to why the braids were moulding in and the dynodes too.

 

[Dann]

I am seeing something that might be glue residue, though.

Interesting.

 

[jme3]

I can also tell for certain that the dynodes in the casting are not the same Electron Tube variety as those in the original reveal; the frame around the slats in this casting are noticeably thicker than the originals.

Edit: clarification below.