Early 2019 CRL update change requests

[Sly11[Admin]]

So we have the same conversation running across two threads, thought I was going crazy when i couldn't find my posts

[mikidymac[TK]]

Don't get me wrong, I fully understand that this discussion is for the upper two levels and specifically Centurion which is totally optional.

What I am saying is let's not get so involved in the tiniest little detail that it becomes out of reach for a reasonable person to modify their kit to achieve. As the Centurion requirements are now they are very good in my opinion and not that difficult to follow. When we get into the ears being a certain degree of tilt and the milimeters the brow should be visible I feel that is going a little too far.

 

In the end it is up to the officers approving these details and I doubt they are going to be taking a scale and calipers to the pictures to see if the ears and brow are within the last degree or millimeter to be approved. Simply saying a visible space should be seen between the brow and eyes should be enough and not have to get into the 5mm-10mm specific measurements. There is a big difference in this and having to paint a snap white or using coverstrips. We don't want to get to the point where Centurion requires every gap to be closed or every coverstrip to be exactly 20mm wide.

 

I hope this does not come off like I am going after the ones that suggested the brow and ear revisions. I know we are not the only ones that have issues with the CRL's and it is an evolving thing. There are some other costumes that even basic is very difficult and do not even follow canon but a few people have held to the CRL as "their" creation and law.

Edited January 3, 2019 by mikidymac

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Well, by the numbers it can be argued that Centurion is too easy to achieve currently.   Nearly 33% of EI go Centurion, where you'd expect it to be under 25%, maybe even 10%.

[CableGuy[TK]]

Don't get me wrong, I fully understand that this discussion is for the upper two levels and specifically Centurion which is totally optional.
What I am saying is let's not get so involved in the tiniest little detail that it becomes out of reach for a reasonable person to modify their kit to achieve. As the Centurion requirements are now they are very good in my opinion and not that difficult to follow. When we get into the ears being a certain degree of tilt and the milimeters the brow should be visible I feel that is going a little too far.
 
In the end it is up to the officers approving these details and I doubt they are going to be taking a scale and calipers to the pictures to see if the ears and brow are within the last degree or millimeter to be approved. Simply saying a visible space should be seen between the brow and eyes should be enough and not have to get into the 5mm-10mm specific measurements. There is a big difference in this and having to paint a snap white or using coverstrips. We don't want to get to the point where Centurion requires every gap to be closed or every coverstrip to be exactly 20mm wide.

Any measurements for brow height were simply examples and an initial thought process. As previously stated, an exact measurement was not the intention - a visible gap between the eyes and the brow would allude more to the majority of screen used Stunts.

[mikidymac[TK]]

2 minutes ago, Daetrin said:

Well, by the numbers it can be argued that Centurion is too easy to achieve currently.   Nearly 33% of EI go Centurion, where you'd expect it to be under 25%, maybe even 10%.

I guess I don't understand this comment in that why would it be too easy? I thought the goal was for all of us to look the same and movie accurate. If the EI and Centurion percentage is high isn't that a good thing for the legion? Why should it be a super difficult and low number thing?

 

I would argue that because most EI plan to go Centurion and you are required to go EI before Centurion these higher percentages are not unexpected.

Edited January 3, 2019 by mikidymac

[Daetrin[Admin]]

I'm not saying it is, I'm saying that when one argues for minute details like angles of ears, etc. that this could be a reason why, e.g. are the Centurion requirements too easy to get.

[mikidymac[TK]]

Just now, Daetrin said:

I'm not saying it is, I'm saying that when one argues for minute details like angles of ears, etc. that this could be a reason why, e.g. are the Centurion requirements too easy to get.

I think I see what you are saying now.

Without derailing this thread further I guess my only suggestion would be to make sure we are not taking this so far to the smallest little detail that it becomes unreasonable. Centurion should be what we all strive for but if it becomes so detailed and narrow I think most people might not even bother and that would hurt all of us as a legion. It would be amazing if the majority were Centurion for the legion.

[StrmTRPR85[TK]]

Why not include brackets, and elastic shin hooks into the centurion discussion if we are going to debate brow height, and arm gaps.  Those alone would make attaing centurion a slight more challenge just to get the ftting correct.

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Just now, StrmTRPR85 said:

Why not include brackets, and elastic shin hooks into the centurion discussion if we are going to debate brow height, and arm gaps.  Those alone would make attaing centurion a slight more challenge just to get the ftting correct.

Because the CRLs in the 501st only detail what can be seen outside the costume, not now it is put together.  You could say people should see screw heads on the underside of the return edges for instance, but not that you can require brackets per se.

[StrmTRPR85[TK]]

Gotta add those screw heads 

[StrmTRPR85[TK]]

 Here's one that should be added...

 

Shoulder Bell swoops.  My kit has them and during my centeruion approval I was asked to swap the bells to the correct sides.  Currently the CRL states the bells may be worn interchangeably, but that is not true in my case

[TheSwede[TK]]

Would it be possible to include a ”screen accurate” program in the likes of master armorer program? A sort of award for building your suit as they did for the movies and to have it all functional. 

 

 

 

[Sly11[Admin]]

34 minutes ago, StrmTRPR85 said:

 Here's one that should be added...

 

Shoulder Bell swoops.  My kit has them and during my centeruion approval I was asked to swap the bells to the correct sides.  Currently the CRL states the bells may be worn interchangeably, but that is not true in my case

Now this is an interesting one, yes the Bells on screen have the swoops facing forward, but where it will confuse some is the fact not all the kits available actually have the swoops.

It would come under the "If present" statement. The other issue is some kits have duplicate parts so it would be impossible to show both swoops facing forward if left and right Bells were the same.

 

The same could also be said for the dimple count on each forearm as on screen one has 11 the other 12, but again, we have makers that have duplicate sides  AP for example, this however is already brought up while reviewing as it is easy to tell if forearms are on back to front.

So you see there are many things that aren't written specifically in the CRL's but it is our DO's job to guide applicants on the right path and help them look the best they can.

[Frank75139[501st]]

You mean an award just for you since you’re the only one doing this?

Sign me up! All in favor for a “Daniel Award”, say, “Aye!”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aye!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[StrmTRPR85[TK]]

4 minutes ago, Sly11 said:

Now this is an interesting one, yes the Bells on screen have the swoops facing forward, but where it will confuse some is the fact not all the kits available actually have the swoops.

It would come under the "If present" statement. The other issue is some kits have duplicate parts so it would be impossible to show both swoops facing forward if left and right Bells were the same.

I think an "if present" statement is perfect for this.  Now for duplicate parts I think this comes down to the DOs knowing the armor marker and which has the swoops.  Honestly I didn't know on mine until it got called out

[gmrhodes13[Staff]]

"Ideally, preferred, suggested, if present", are great terms to use when you have specific detail that some may be able to obtain but for those others which can't will still include them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TheSwede[TK]]

23 minutes ago, Bud Spaklur said:

You mean an award just for you since you’re the only one doing this?

Sign me up! All in favor for a “Daniel Award”, say, “Aye!”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

16 minutes ago, Frank75139 said:

 

 

Aye!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

 

 

 (You guys are so sweet) 

 

 

I’ll start a new thread on the subject as it’s not an actuall CRL change 

[ukswrath[Staff]]

lol 

[Harbinger[IPM]]

Vikings are Swedish now?

[starsaber25[Admin]]

3 hours ago, Bud Spaklur said:

Ok, but in the meantime, Daniel:

(Slapped that together on my iPhone real quick)

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I'm sorry but this helmet does not meet any of the CRL standards...

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Perhaps, but that is one sweet graphic ;-)

[CableGuy[TK]]

 
I'm sorry but this helmet does not meet any of the CRL standards...

But it does have a visible gap between the eyes and the brow. ;-)

[themaninthesuitcase[Admin]]

2 hours ago, Daetrin said:

Perhaps, but that is one sweet graphic ;-)

Not very historically accurate though, no horns on a viking helmet.  This is a CRL thread after all!

[The5thHorseman[501st]]

10 hours ago, TheSwede said:

Would it be possible to include a ”screen accurate” program in the likes of master armorer program? A sort of award for building your suit as they did for the movies and to have it all functional. 

 

The issue with this kind of program is: how far should it be taken? Because if you want to achieve true screen-accuracy the list of things to take in consideration is huge.

From a starter, armors eligible to that award would have to be restricted to a narrow few (RS, TM, and Anovos only). And even there, none of them can yeld absolute true lineage to a screen-used armor.

Glue would have to be stelmax 1985. Boots must be genuine Stuart's 1095. All snaps must be vintage Newey. Calf hooks must genuine Newey size 4. All elastic straps must have correct width and frayed ends, etc... Not to mention the blaster which would have to follow the same rules.

Difficult award to establish, difficult to follow for builders, difficult to review for the guy granting the ward. 

And if you start removing items from the list to make it easier, then your "screen-accurate" award doesn't represent much anymore. 

[TheSwede[TK]]

18 minutes ago, The5thHorseman said:

The issue with this kind of program is: how far should it be taken? Because if you want to achieve true screen-accuracy the list of things to take in consideration is huge.

From a starter, armors eligible to that award would have to be restricted to a narrow few (RS, TM, and Anovos only). And even there, none of them can yeld absolute true lineage to a screen-used armor.

Glue would have to be stelmax 1985. Boots must be genuine Stuart's 1095. All snaps must be vintage Newey. Calf hooks must genuine Newey size 4. All elastic straps must have correct width and frayed ends, etc... Not to mention the blaster which would have to follow the same rules.

Difficult award to establish, difficult to follow for builders, difficult to review for the guy granting the ward. 

And if you start removing items from the list to make it easier, then your "screen-accurate" award doesn't represent much anymore. 

I’ll start a new thread on this subject, I have a few ideas