ANH armor tint question

[Zugor[TK]]

Is there a requirement for ANH stunt armor to be consistent in color? What I mean is the variation in tint that you see in different runs of white ABS plastic. I have read the CRL and done a few searches but have not been able to find anything. 

Edited April 14, 2018 by Zugor

[Harbinger[IPM]]

Not that I’m aware of, but it looks better if all your parts match.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Harbinger

[Zugor[TK]]

I agree, it does look better when all the parts match in color. I would just like to know if it is a requirement for approval. None of the troopers in the original film had matching armor so it would be weird if it were a requirement.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Zugor

[bobafret[TK]]

@Daetrin what say you?  Ultimately a GML should abide by Detachment Leadership so I'm interested to know.  I know in the past color mismatch has been a subject of peer review.  Is this something detachment currently enforces as an assumed requirement or no?

 

Would a mix of Anovos parts and WTF be acceptable at basic, given the shade mismatch?

[JLight[TK]]

I was approved as Centurion back in 2014 with an ATA lid and NE armor. The bucket is a more milkier white than the armor, but there wasn’t a question raised about it. Now that was going on 4 years ago. 

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Ouch, this may be a sticky wicket, eh?  ;p

The hard part is when we say "color match" is that everyone sees color slightly differently, and much can depend on lighting.  It's a grey area and if there is a disagreement, the more eyes the easier it is to get a consensus.

For example I wore my TE2 armor with RT shins for a long time.  The color was off enough that I painted the shins to match the armor (since TE2 is HIPS and needs to be painted anyway).  Wait, what do I mean by off?  Well, in person they looked just fine, but in photos it was clear that they were not the same.  Since we get photographed a lot, I wanted them to look right so painted to match.

I also had an ATA with RT shins. In person standing 5' away it was clear they weren't quite perfect, but not that bad.  From > 5' away or in photos, no one could tell so I just left them alone.

So...I'd say it's worth expressing how bad the issue is.  Can you tell in photos?  Can you tell from a distance?  If so, it's best to get them to match.

The CRL doesn't specifically call this out, but CRLs can't and aren't intended to call out every exact detail, and this is why we have GMLs to evaluate the application based on the criteria.

If you are looking for mediation, it's best if you two show some photos and list reasons why you think it is, or is not, acceptable.  Else we're all just guessing.

[bobafret[TK]]

4 minutes ago, JLight said:

I was approved as Centurion back in 2014 with an ATA lid and NE armor. The bucket is a more milkier white than the armor, but there wasn’t a question raised about it. Now that was going on 4 years ago. 

The specific question raised was Anovos and WTF.  If you haven't seen it, Anovos is CONSIDERABLY darker than other armors.  My daughter has Anovos and I have AP and the difference in shades is definitely noticeable.

[Daetrin[Admin]]

I haven't seen this combo on one suit in person, so can't say.  Anyone got pix?

[JLight[TK]]

Well I troop now with the NE armor and Anovos bucket so I have seen how dark Anovos is. The difference is mostly noticeable (just barely) in photos. Yeah I think Pauls answer is the best otherwise we would have to get all different combinations of armor pre-approved and that just isn’t going to happen. It would have to be looked at on an individual basis. 

[bobafret[TK]]

5 minutes ago, Daetrin said:

I haven't seen this combo on one suit in person, so can't say.  Anyone got pix?

No costume has actually been submitted.  A member on our board asked about getting WTF parts as replacement for Anovos and I cautioned that if color didn't match close enough the applicant may need to paint to pass Basic Approval.  

 

This began a legalistic question over whether Basic Membership could be denied based on color mismatch since it wasn't addressed in the CRL.  That's really the crux of the question.

 

If the color match was different enough, might Basic Approval be denied on the basis of color mismatch?  My understanding is that it might be if the difference was enough, even though that isn't specifically mentioned in the CRL.

Edited April 16, 2018 by bobafret

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Gotchit.  Then absolutely a GML can deny if the color isn't a match/close match.  I would, and even self-policed my own kit to ensure it looked right.

[JLight[TK]]

1 minute ago, bobafret said:

No costume has actually been submitted.  A member on our board asked about getting WTF parts as replacement for Anovos and I cautioned that if color didn't match close enough the applicant may need to paint to pass Basic Approval.  

 

This began a legalistic question over whether Basic Membership could be denied based on color mismatch since it wasn't addressed in the CRL.  That's really the crux of the question.

 

If the color match was different enough, might Basic Approval be denied on the basis of color mismatch?  My understanding is that it might be if the difference was enough, even though that isn't specifically mentioned in the CRL.

My assumption is your last sentence is spot on with what should happen at the Garrison level. 

[bobafret[TK]]

I am the GML of Mountain Garrison.  A potential member asked if replacing Anovos parts with WTF would be cool and I said if the colors didn't match close enough it wouldn't pass.  This of course would be after I utilized peer review.  

 

Another member (Zugor) is suggesting that if it isn't in the CRL you can't enforce it.  I don't agree with that position and that is how I advised the applicant.  Seems like I'm not enforcing anything that isn't already understood.

 

If the color mismatch is bad enough, it might not pass Basic.

Edited April 16, 2018 by bobafret

[Daetrin[Admin]]

As a DL, GML, and former XO at 2 other dets, I agree with your position Dave.  This isn't specific to FISD, this is across all Legion costumes.  

 

It is not possible to capture every single detail in the CRL and that is not the intent.  Even in the CRLs there are some parts where the text essentially says "make it look like the photo".

 

Yes, at times GMLs can be over-zealous, but the path forward then for the applicant is clear too:

 

1. They can provide photos on the relevant detachment board asking for other input.  That input still cannot override the GML decision, but usually an agreement is reached.

2. The GML can post a concern to the GML only area of the 501st boards.  Again, they get recommendations but aren't bound by it.

3. In the extreme circumstance where a GML and applicant just can't find common ground, an applicant can always appeal to LMO review.

[bobafret[TK]]

Thanks Paul!  I'm actually a really liberal user of the Peer Review process as a GML it helps ensure that I'm not trying to be too tough or too lenient.  Whenever a costume isn't an obvious pass, I run it through Peer Approval to see if I'm picking on things that are allowed, or even if I've missed things that I'm not aware are common misses.  Detachment Leadership is a GREAT resource and the Peer Review process is a very easy way to get feedback.

[Zugor[TK]]

I would like to point out the Dave’s assessment of my intention regarding enforcement of the CRL is incorrect. I simply wanted to know what the requirement is. I did my research and asked polite questions in an attempt to understand the issue which is quite clearly a grey area. 

Edited April 16, 2018 by Zugor