FOTK Basic-Level CRL Amendment Proposal to Allow Seams at Shoulder and Sides

[TheRascalKing[TK]]

Hey all,

 

I wanted to get a discussion going around a proposal that I've heard being floated in various FOTK-building Facebook groups and see if there was support to warrant consideration of amending the current base-level CRLs. 

In short, I propose that the current text for the First Order Stormtrooper costume CRLs (TFA and TLJ) be amended to ALLOW for visible seams at the shoulder and sides of the barrel at the BASIC level ONLY.

 

Okay but...

 

 

I fully recognize that this would be an slight step backwards in terms of the overall accuracy of these CRLs. As seen in the films that these CRLs are based upon, the studio suits did not have visible seams in these areas. Correct. Acknowledged. I don't need to post screen shots to this point.

 

However, there is precedent that seams were present in these areas in SOME existing Star Wars canon, and I believe that the sacrifice in accuracy at the Basic level only would be worth allowing for greater acceptance and approval of these costumes.

 

In the Star Wars Resistance show (which again, I acknowledge would be a separate and distinct CRL overall, as there are substantive differences from the movie realistic costumes), it can be seen that a seam was INTENTIONALLY added at the shoulder and sides in the renderings for their First Order Stormtroopers. It would have been one less line to not do that, but it was done so purposefully and consistently.

 

 

The shoulder and side seams are often areas of significant stress and strain as the armor is flexed open to take it on/off - which is also why the Disney Parks have adopted a similar system to allow for greater comfort and ease of dressing for their Galaxy's Edge cast members, as seen below.

 

 

While again, these are not the same as production suits, at the Basic level, I think it makes sense from a practical and ergonomic standpoint. The movie suits that we are seeking to emulate were made of a thick and extremely durable and flexible (likely urethane) material that was formed with tooling and materials that far exceed what will likely be possible at the hobby/cosplay level any time soon, so I believe there should be some ability to make up for the limitations of the ABS suits we are trying to use to replicate. Concessions to accuracy are made in several existing Legion CRLs for comfort and to allow for a great range of body types, and I propose it be considered in this case as well.

 

To smooth these seams necessitates either the precise and arduous task of using ABS slurry to fill and blend the seams, then sanding and buffing back to an indistinguishable high gloss - a specialized skill that most new or even experienced builders have not mastered - or to use body filler and paint the area or entire set of armor, as was required with previous makers due to the type of construction. These suits shouldn't NEED to be painted, and these skills present a significant challenge to most builders, resulting in the FOTK being a rare site at troops in my Garrison and an extremely limited numbers of a submission for L2 and 3. 

 

 

At the end of the day, I guess my point is... is this really a big deal? I don't think it is. SHOULD those seams be filled? Yea, totally. But is it worth mentioning at the Basic level when it stands to be a potential blocker to membership for many new members, may help extend the service life of the armor for more troops, and overall doesn't make a significant difference to the appearance of the suit? Naw, I don't think so.

 

Most fans are going to the see the (Denuo Novo press photo) Stormtrooper below and just think "holy heck, a stormtrooper!" and never notice those seams. I'd like to give the opportunity to more members and fans alike to have that experience, instead of potentially furthering the image of elitism and snobbery that the Clubs unfortunately sometimes project due to our high standards. 

 

 

I would propose that the CRL text be amended, as below (or similar):

 

Back/Yoke

 

The back plate contains a “O II” design, and the O is black in color.
There are no visible seams on the back/yoke.
The yoke portion extends over the wearer's shoulders and curves under the armpits.

OPTIONAL Level two certification (if applicable):

There are no visible seams on the back/yoke.

OPTIONAL Level three certification (if applicable):
A support tab extending from the outside top arch of the yoke shall be present. The support tab should be of a sturdy material, white in color.

 

 

Abdomen Section

The abdomen section must wrap around the wearer's body without a visible seam.
The abdomen has 7 boxes attached that match the order and placement shown against the armor.
The large box has a small black recessed square on the lower left to the wearer.
The second box to the right of the wearer has a small black recessed rectangle near the top.

OPTIONAL Level two certification (if applicable):
The boxes should sit against the abdominal plate with minimal to no gaps.

The abdomen section must wrap around the wearer's body without a visible seam.

OPTIONAL Level three certification (if applicable):
The seams between the abdominal armor and the 7 boxes should not be filled.

 

 

I'm curious to hear feedback from our membership, though keep in mind that this change would largely not affect those of us who are regulars here on the forums, or any submissions to the DOs for L2 or L3. This would be a local Garrison/Outpost GML-level change that could potentially bolster our membership and make this costume significantly more accessible. 

 

Let me know your thoughts and thank you for reading!

Edited February 21, 2023 by TheRascalKing

[starsaber25[Admin]]

Here is my opinion. And again this is just my opinion. I feel that the CRL should not be modified. As mentioned it is clear that the seams do not exist in the movies. There have been many approved FOTK troopers that have built their armor to current basic standards.  We shouldn’t change things because this is how a vendor has decided to manufacture their costume. 
 

If someone wanted to build an animation version and a CRL is created using seams then that would be totally viable. 
 

I understand that many people are receiving this kit and it could bolster the FOTK ranks but they should still build it to current basic standards.  There are many costumes in the legion that could have some basic standards changed to make them easier to get approved but I just don’t believe it means we should. 

[Shiri]

Hey all,
 
I wanted to get a discussion going around a proposal that I've heard being floated in various FOTK-building Facebook groups and see if there was support to warrant consideration of amending the current base-level CRLs. 

In short, I propose that the current text for the First Order Stormtrooper costume CRLs (TFA and TLJ) be amended to ALLOW for visible seams at the shoulder and sides of the barrel at the BASIC level ONLY,
 
Okay but...
 

 
I fully recognize that this would be an slight step backwards in terms of the overall accuracy of these CRLs. As seen in the films that these CRLs are based upon, the studio suits did not have visible seams in these areas. Correct. Acknowledged. I don't need to post screen shots to this point.
 
However, there is precedent that seams were present in these areas in SOME existing Star Wars canon, and I believe that the sacrifice in accuracy at the Basic level only would be worth allowing for greater acceptance and approval of these costumes.
 
In the Star Wars Resistance show (which again, I acknowledge would be a separate and distinct CRL overall, as there are substantive differences from the movie realistic costumes), it can be seen that a seam was INTENTIONALLY added at the shoulder and sides in the renderings for their First Order Stormtroopers. It would have been one less line to not do that, but it was done so purposefully and consistently.
 


 
The shoulder and side seams are often areas of significant stress and strain as the armor is flexed open to take it on/off - which is also why the Disney Parks have adopted a similar system to allow for greater comfort and ease of dressing for their Galaxy's Edge cast members, as seen below.
 

 
While again, these are not the same as production suits, at the Basic level, I think it makes sense from a practical and ergonomic standpoint. The movie suits that we are seeking to emulate were made of a thick and extremely durable and flexible (likely urethane) material that was formed with tooling and materials that far exceed what will likely be possible at the hobby/cosplay level any time soon, so I believe there should be some ability to make up for the limitations of the ABS suits we are trying to use to replicate. Concessions to accuracy are made in several existing Legion CRLs for comfort and to allow for a great range of body types, and I propose it be considered in this case as well.
 
To smooth these seams necessitates either the precise and arduous task of using ABS slurry to fill and blend the seams, then sanding and buffing back to an indistinguishable high gloss - a specialized skill that most new or even experienced builders have not mastered - or to use body filler and paint the area or entire set of armor, as was required with previous makers due to the type of construction. These suits shouldn't NEED to be painted, and these skills present a significant challenge to most builders, resulting in the FOTK being a rare site at troops in my Garrison and an extremely limited numbers of a submission for L2 and 3. 
 
 
At the end of the day, I guess my point is... is this really a big deal? I don't think it is. SHOULD those seams be filled? Yea, totally. But is it worth mentioning at the Basic level when it stands to be a potential blocker to membership for many new members, may help extend the service life of the armor for more troops, and overall doesn't make a significant difference to the appearance of the suit? Naw, I don't think so.
 
Most fans are going to the see the (Denuo Novo press photo) Stormtrooper below and just think "holy heck, a stormtrooper!" and never notice those seams. I'd like to give the opportunity to more members and fans alike to have that experience, instead of potentially furthering the image of elitism and snobbery that the Clubs unfortunately sometimes project due to our high standards. 
 

 
I would propose that the CRL text be amended, as below (or similar):
 
Back/Yoke
 
The back plate contains a “O II” design, and the O is black in color.
There are no visible seams on the back/yoke.
The yoke portion extends over the wearer's shoulders and curves under the armpits.

OPTIONAL Level two certification (if applicable):
There are no visible seams on the back/yoke.

OPTIONAL Level three certification (if applicable):
A support tab extending from the outside top arch of the yoke shall be present. The support tab should be of a sturdy material, white in color.
 
 
Abdomen Section

The abdomen section must wrap around the wearer's body without a visible seam.
The abdomen has 7 boxes attached that match the order and placement shown against the armor.
The large box has a small black recessed square on the lower left to the wearer.
The second box to the right of the wearer has a small black recessed rectangle near the top.

OPTIONAL Level two certification (if applicable):
The boxes should sit against the abdominal plate with minimal to no gaps.
The abdomen section must wrap around the wearer's body without a visible seam.

OPTIONAL Level three certification (if applicable):
The seams between the abdominal armor and the 7 boxes should not be filled.
 
 
I'm curious to hear feedback from our membership, though keep in mind that this change would largely not affect those of us who are regulars here on the forums, or any submissions to the DOs for L2 or L3. This would be a local Garrison/Outpost GML-level change that could potentially bolster our membership and make this costume significantly more accessible. 
 
Let me know your thoughts and thank you for reading!

I agree with Justin.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sly11[Admin]]

Lets not confuse a cartoon TK with other CRL's.

If someone wishes to build that costume then we can create a CRL for it like we did for the animated Rebels program.

 

It looks vastly different in shape so elements from that design have no place in a as seen on screen live action costume. hence not the right comparison to make.

Looking at the helmet alone, we see a few differences, no clips, different shape peaked chin, plus smooth under suit just to name a few.

I'm sure someone can 3D design one that looks like the animated version so people can print it out and that should be a completely different discussion.

 

Disney Parks armour is still not as seen on screen nor screen used or accurate to the movies of which Legion bases the bulk of their CRL's on.

Again that could be a different CRL but would not fall under the main category of Saga like the movie based CRL's do.

 

 

[daryldoak[TK]]

I asked the same question here:

 

 

[TheRascalKing[TK]]

On 2/10/2023 at 6:25 PM, starsaber25 said:

Here is my opinion. And again this is just my opinion. I feel that the CRL should not be modified. As mentioned it is clear that the seams do not exist in the movies. There have been many approved FOTK troopers that have built their armor to current basic standards.  We shouldn’t change things because this is how a vendor has decided to manufacture their costume. 
 

If someone wanted to build an animation version and a CRL is created using seams then that would be totally viable. 
 

I understand that many people are receiving this kit and it could bolster the FOTK ranks but they should still build it to current basic standards.  There are many costumes in the legion that could have some basic standards changed to make them easier to get approved but I just don’t believe it means we should. 

 

I appreciate your opinion.

 

On 2/10/2023 at 6:46 PM, Sly11 said:

Lets not confuse a cartoon TK with other CRL's.

If someone wishes to build that costume then we can create a CRL for it like we did for the animated Rebels program.

 

It looks vastly different in shape so elements from that design have no place in a as seen on screen live action costume. hence not the right comparison to make.

Looking at the helmet alone, we see a few differences, no clips, different shape peaked chin, plus smooth under suit just to name a few.

I'm sure someone can 3D design one that looks like the animated version so people can print it out and that should be a completely different discussion.

 

Disney Parks armour is still not as seen on screen nor screen used or accurate to the movies of which Legion bases the bulk of their CRL's on.

Again that could be a different CRL but would not fall under the main category of Saga like the movie based CRL's do.

 

To be clear, as I said I am only using the Resistance FOTK as an example of a seam's existence within canon - I am clear that the Resistance FOTK would be a separate CRL discussion. That's not what I'm getting at here.

 

The topic at hand is if we are being too critical with our current CRL by specifically mentioning the seams at the shoulder and side of the FOTK armor and if this should perhaps instead be a requirement at L2 and above, in order to allow more troopers to build and troop in FOTK kits. 

 

I am of the opinion that this fixation on these specific details is not worth preventing new troopers from being approved at Basic. That's just my opinion, and if there is no additional support for it, that's fine - I was already certain that my proposal would not be well received by the current leadership staff, but rather than complain about it online, I figured I would try the proper course of action, which is to propose the change to the membership and gather their feedback. 

 

Thank you.

 

 

On 2/10/2023 at 7:19 PM, daryldoak said:

I asked the same question here:

 

 

Sort of, but not really - again, I am not proposing a new CRL for a Galaxy's Edge FOTK, nor would I support one, however I believe the presence of these seams on the Disney suits lends strength to my argument - if the official Disney Parks FOTKs and their new licensed vendor Denuo Novo don't care about these seams, why should we at the Basic level?

 

Much of the discussion around this topic is happening on Facebook/etc,, so I may try to direct some additional folks over here... but this is what it is. I prefer to have it on record that I am for inclusion and taking a step towards repairing our occasionally elitist image by following proper channels to propose this initiative, and that the question was asked of leadership, and answered. 

Edited February 21, 2023 by TheRascalKing

[Tezzie[TK]]

I agree, at just the basic level, it seems like an extremely minor thing that often lends itself to being a good functionality option.

[Hutt-trooper[TK]]

I agree with this proposal (for basic only).

 

Whilst one of the things I really like about the 501st and FISD is the uniformity of appearance that the CRLs create (I love it when I find it hard to indentify myself in a group photo!), I think this small change makes a lot of sense.

 

Allowances are already made in our CRLs for other costumes to support and promote inclusivity and accessibility.

 

For example - I dont recall seeing torso shims on OT TKs on the movie screen?? This is a perfectly logical and great way to support and accomodate all our members of different sizes. There are many members who never would have been able to build an approved costume without such considerations.

 

Small allowances for things like that have and should be important considerations for the basic levles of approval. In this instance it's not about body size or shape, but the practicalities of our materials.

 

I understand others have different views, and I wanted to share my support for the proposed changes (and again, only for the basic level of approval)

 

MTFBWYA

[gmrhodes13[Staff]]

I have to ask why should the CRL be made easier, what's the argument to change, what is so difficult now that hadn't been for the past 8 years, we have over 400 FOTKs currently approved in the legion (not counting Phasma) who have met these standards. Is it because DN now makes their costumes this way, well actually NO it shouldn't be, we've always had a seam on the side of the ab and a seam on the yoke that had to be filled since the Alpha/Beta/Charlie's, albeit DN's is in a different place on the yoke compared to Anovos.

 

So again why do we want to make the CRL easier now?  The fact is, it is actually easier NOW to build a FOTK if you compare the new DN armor to the old Anovos there's far less work to do and you don't even have to paint "praise the maker", we had to fill extra seams, add extra pieces and fully paint the armor with Anovos kits, but now with DN you only have to add some ABS paste in a few seams, sand/polish and done "hallelujah" sign me up (oh wait no funds), we've also seen this quite successfully achieved on our forum. 

 

Not trying to be a douche but I just can't see a valid argument.

 

What's next, it's too hot to troop, ok no more pants 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sly11[Admin]]

We have never dumbed down a CRL to suit one manufacturer, so to dumb down a CRL now because of one. Lets look at the optics on that, it could look like a spit in the eye for the 400 that came before, and I can't help but feel, that is not a great path to take.

Everyone has had to do some form of filling work on FOTK's and DN is for cos players in general, no where is it stated 501st approved.

Our CRL is what sets us apart from other costuming clubs who have a lesser standard than the Legion, start taking those elements away and we look the same. That indeed would be a shame for everyone that is already approved, took the time to make their costume fantastic and more accurate than the average punter. For us to then give a hall pass on a maker for their less than accurate cos play costume just seems like a drop in standards at the basic level.

Building any set of armour is a challenge, you go into it doing your research and there are no surprises.

 

As I mentioned earlier, ou want a CRL for Disney parks version and animated version, then we can certainly discuss how those would look, but they should not interfere with a CRL built around as seen on screen in the movies.

Those seems are only cannon to a cartoon and a Disney parks costume and in reality, should be separate to Saga based as we have done in the past.

[Redforce[TK]]

Just browsing the forum and caught this conversation/thread. 

 

I can literally agree with ALL points above. From the proposal to the reasons to not approve the proposal.

 

What I can say is from what I hear and see from troopers with the gear. (I don't have this suit personally but know a bunch of troopers with it locally) Is that the yoke section tends to crack in time and has to be fixed more often then not. Of course we OT troopers have to fix the wear and tear on the OT suits as well but the suits are actually made with points that are made for movement. 

 

A CRL for say a disney parks version is a good idea imo.

 

1. It helps the current troopers with the new kits get completed with better functionality movement is that area that will also help the wear and tear in the end.

2. For the troopers who have the current saga versions can have the option to change the sections (mainly that yoke section) to allow them to be more flexible AND to possibly extend the life of that section of the suit so it doesn't have to keep being repaired over and over. 

3. If I think of a third reason, I'll let you know lol

 

In the end it's about troopers helping troopers. Maybe a happy medium can be reached here. Even if a new CRL would have to be made. 

[dbetters]

I could. Or agree more that for basic approval the seams should not matter. There are plenty of instances of variations of armor both in the sequel trilogy and the OT. 
 

the idea behind our costumes is to look like we came off the set. Well, that is what these kits look like with or without the seams.

 

additionally, the seams require a level of care in making sure they don’t crack that make owning this particular set of armor a real nightmare. 
 

finally, building this kit with the seams and the clean look is very difficult, I would argue overly difficult for many builders. The seams can be hidden in such a way that they do not affect overall appearance. So why make builders paint an entire kit when all of our goals of looking like were from the galaxy and stepping off the set can be reached without filling the seams.

 

I would suggest that as long as the seam is hidden (such as the new Anovos kits), that we accept for basic approval those kits that are not filled. 

[Surfintrooper[TK]]

I do not think it should be changed for either parts of the crl. 
The back / yoke seam is completely different than the shoulder seam that you see in the Disney suits and in the cartoon. 
In fact the back/ yoke seam on the Disney suits is closed. 
Also the back / yoke seam is not a place of stress. In the 5 years I have owned and trooped in a beta anovos kit and a kb that part of the armor has not been a stress point as you say.
The shoulder area where the Disney parks kit has a seam is a place of stress while getting in and out of the armor. But it is easily reinforced with resin or epoxy, and if done at first build there is never been a problem on the several other kits I’ve built.  Also the Disney park kits are of a completely different construct materials, and under that shoulder seam especially as it can be completely flexed backwards for them to gain entry by different people sometimes multiple times daily. 
  But I will restate the back / yolk seam is not a stress point. 
  As for the side abdomen having a seam. I think it would be the same as letting there be a visible seam when people add shims to an original trilogy anh etc armor. It visually is different than screen armor. And also this isn’t a place of stress that needs a seam. When building a FO armor it can be easily sealed with abs paste or a bondo. And the construction of a FO armor allows for the back to be opened with either velcro w elastic or a zippered piece for those that need this to get into it. 
   First order kits to begin with, especially the first anovos and now the new denovo kits, don’t allow for a lot of deviance to the deigns. The way the pieces join have tapered grooved seams, so much of it is a one size fits unless you want to do a lot of mods which will require more abs paste or bondo anyway. 
   I say leave the crl as is. 

[JimmyRen[501st]]

Just my $0.02 as someone who is still building the new DN kit. TL;DR is: I like the accuracy and it should be recognized, but I am not going to get upset if we allow it.

I'm in the middle of building the DN kit now and have yet to get to joining that seam with ABS slurry, sanding, etc. While it would appear easier to allow for a seam, I planned on joining and reinforcing the shoulder anyway to make it seamless and more accurate. As well, there would still be a bit of work to do to attach 2 pieces at the proposed shoulder seam. I have worked with fixing or modifying armor in my TIE, and with my Kylo helmet mod. Speaking of Kylo, the Galaxy's Edge Kylo Ren looks like a bobble head and the Kylo community often make fun of GE Kylo. We understand that it's most likely to accomodate electronics and other practical factors, but I (and many fellow Kylos) would rather be caught dead than look like that dude, from the neck up. The point is, not all of the Disney Parks characters are the standard to look up to and accept.

I'd still support removing obstacles for new members to join the Legion. Would we advise them to join but not to do the FOTK at first without help? If FOTK is their absolute favorite perhaps it would not be too much to ask to make it accurate at the shoulder/sides? 

All that said, I'm not going to get upset if he allow the seam. To the public we will all look awesome, almost no one will notice the seam, and we may have a greater number FOTKs in the club. Also, if we do that we should also grandfather-in all seamless FOTKs into higher levels of certification. 

Thank you.

[themaninthesuitcase[Admin]]

I do not think we should change the CRL. However I am less against it than I was. 

 

As mentioned, a CRL has never been changed because of one maker making something a certain way, buyers have had to adjust to the standards at that time. They have been changed because general standards improved and old less accurate kits have been disallowed, this is not that.

 

All cleared FO Stormtroopers to date have had to fill a lot more, and do a lot more work to clear than the DN kit. Yes the placement of some of these seams on this kit is unfortunate but that's what DN have given people to work with.  

 

If this was the equivalent of side shims and wide cover strips I'd be far more open to it, but it's not. This is something else.  I don't like "dumbing down" as it's not, but it is a reduction of standards which is not really what we're here for.

 

FWIW I don't own a FO kit, but I am hoping to in the next year or so and it will probably be a DN one so I it almost affects me.

[Bulldog44[TK]]

I would agree with an additional Disney Park CRL than make a change to the current CRL standard. I will be building my DN kit at some point and as daunting as I feel about doing the should seams, it is in line with what we see on screen and looks correct. 

[Sean Hebein[TK]]

I commented this on your Facebook post. Reposting here per the instructions of your Facebook post:

 

I don’t have a dog in this fight really but I have seen the seams and it would seem (lol) that this is a relatively easy thing to solve with some ABS paste. Surely if you can assemble the rest of the costume the seams should be a relatively minor issue. At the same time, and I ask this to myself about aspects of other costumes (Boba Fett), is anyone outside of an extremely small group of nerds going to even notice? Is the absence or inclusion of an element going to break the illusion for the average person? I have to think that the average person wouldn’t notice seams on the shoulders of an FOTK or even realize there is an accuracy issue there.

[Chemi[Staff]]

hace 2 horas, Sean Hebein dijo:

I commented this on your Facebook post. Reposting here per the instructions of your Facebook post:

 

I don’t have a dog in this fight really but I have seen the seams and it would seem (lol) that this is a relatively easy thing to solve with some ABS paste. Surely if you can assemble the rest of the costume the seams should be a relatively minor issue. At the same time, and I ask this to myself about aspects of other costumes (Boba Fett), is anyone outside of an extremely small group of nerds going to even notice? Is the absence or inclusion of an element going to break the illusion for the average person? I have to think that the average person wouldn’t notice seams on the shoulders of an FOTK or even realize there is an accuracy issue there.

 

But then, let the helmets have more teeth, let the TD face upwards, black lenses.... These are things that not a lot of people would notice either...

 

Honestly, I respect all points of view, but I personally would not change this point of the CRL. A joint, of that size and in that location, is a very easy thing to do. A close-up is not requested when applying for the basic level (not even at higher levels),So it doesn't have to look like there was never any joint(remember that we are talking about level 1).  And it may be, because of where it sits, it will surely break from use, but just like OT armor shoulder straps (for example).

 

[Nairy[Staff]]

12 hours ago, Chemi said:

 

But then, let the helmets have more teeth, let the TD face upwards, black lenses.... These are things that not a lot of people would notice either...

 

Honestly, I respect all points of view, but I personally would not change this point of the CRL. A joint, of that size and in that location, is a very easy thing to do. A close-up is not requested when applying for the basic level (not even at higher levels),So it doesn't have to look like there was never any joint(remember that we are talking about level 1).  And it may be, because of where it sits, it will surely break from use, but just like OT armor shoulder straps (for example).

 

So people could use white duct tape for the gap for basic approval? 

[Chemi[Staff]]

hace 49 minutos, Nairy dijo:

So people could use white duct tape for the gap for basic approval? 

Of course not. 

[Nairy[Staff]]

4 minutes ago, Chemi said:

Of course not. 

Hehe ok good just wanted to make sure what level of detail we were talking about! Then again if that would slip through, then it would of course be catched if/when they apply for the higher levels!

[FN1313[TK]]

The thing here is comparing Disney Parks FOTKs to Screen accurate FOTKs, Even the Kylo at the parks isn’t fully Screen accurate.

The parks make their costumes to be wearable by many individuals and they don’t claim Screen accuracy as the 501st does. They just provide a fun atmosphere.

Yes it’s better for ease, I for sure understand the issues with the yoke being one piece, but the other thing to remember is most of the armor in movies recently is urethane for flexibility and mobility. This is why they can go no seam no problem.

That being said, I say no modifications to CRL just because vendors don’t meet the CRL standard. The accuracy is set forth by screen references that have been heavily scrutinized and as for now they stand as they are. Maybe some time in the future we get a new movie or show with a different version or so that will allow amendments to this, but for now the only arguments for the seam allowance are from a cartoon completely different character, a theme park, and a vendor. None of which are screen accurate or are a completely different screen version.

I wish the seam was on screen costumes, because that was the most crackable part of the armor and I hated the repairs, but knowing it wasn’t I knew that it was a requirement that I needed to maintain with my armor. Honestly it also gives me pride knowing the armor I had was higher quality in accuracy than even Disney’s.

The last thing I would also say is I don’t really see a true purpose to a “Disney Parks CRL” other than accommodating a single vendor style. The 501st aims for Screen Accuracy, not theme park accuracy, or some other type of accuracy. We aim for the source and that’s what makes our costumes really stand out. Sure seeing a Stormtrooper in general is cool, but there truly is a difference when the detail is accurate. I know we are talking about a seam, but if you give a mouse a cookie…


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[starsaber25[Admin]]

10 hours ago, FN1313 said:

The thing here is comparing Disney Parks FOTKs to Screen accurate FOTKs, Even the Kylo at the parks isn’t fully Screen accurate.

The parks make their costumes to be wearable by many individuals and they don’t claim Screen accuracy as the 501st does. They just provide a fun atmosphere.

Yes it’s better for ease, I for sure understand the issues with the yoke being one piece, but the other thing to remember is most of the armor in movies recently is urethane for flexibility and mobility. This is why they can go no seam no problem.

That being said, I say no modifications to CRL just because vendors don’t meet the CRL standard. The accuracy is set forth by screen references that have been heavily scrutinized and as for now they stand as they are. Maybe some time in the future we get a new movie or show with a different version or so that will allow amendments to this, but for now the only arguments for the seam allowance are from a cartoon completely different character, a theme park, and a vendor. None of which are screen accurate or are a completely different screen version.

I wish the seam was on screen costumes, because that was the most crackable part of the armor and I hated the repairs, but knowing it wasn’t I knew that it was a requirement that I needed to maintain with my armor. Honestly it also gives me pride knowing the armor I had was higher quality in accuracy than even Disney’s.

The last thing I would also say is I don’t really see a true purpose to a “Disney Parks CRL” other than accommodating a single vendor style. The 501st aims for Screen Accuracy, not theme park accuracy, or some other type of accuracy. We aim for the source and that’s what makes our costumes really stand out. Sure seeing a Stormtrooper in general is cool, but there truly is a difference when the detail is accurate. I know we are talking about a seam, but if you give a mouse a cookie…


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Everything you have said I cannot echo enough.  I am also not in favor of creating a Disney Parks CRL.  Until every detachment starts creating a Disney Park CRL for their costumes then we should not be the first.  Lets be real.  As you said those costumes are meant to fit a bunch of people and they are not "screen accurate."  Yes the park goers still just see a stormtrooper but they also saw a dancing Darth Vader at Star Tours too.  I doubt the SLD would create a CRL for Star Tours Dancing Darth Vader.  

 

If a person is actually building a FOTK then they would have the skills to mix some ABS pieces in with acetone, slap it on the seams and then sand it down.  The FOTK is no walk in the park to begin with.  Creating ABS paste should be small peanuts overall.  It just comes down to people not wanting to do it.   

[Sly11[Admin]]

3 hours ago, starsaber25 said:

 

  I doubt the SLD would create a CRL for Star Tours Dancing Darth Vader.  

 

Lol, or a disco Fett    good point.

[Tezzie[TK]]

On 3/5/2023 at 12:48 PM, starsaber25 said:

 

If a person is actually building a FOTK then they would have the skills to mix some ABS pieces in with acetone, slap it on the seams and then sand it down.  The FOTK is no walk in the park to begin with.  Creating ABS paste should be small peanuts overall.  It just comes down to people not wanting to do it.   

This is unfair, in my opinion . I've pasted over every other area and cleaned them up, and have reserve paste that I've actually been keeping tabs on this thread to determine if I need to past over my yoke-chest seam. Because I want to save 20 minutes on what has taken me quite a few hours to put together? No, of course not.

 

I would prefer not to do it simply because I view it as a change in direct contrast to functionality, that will inevitably lead to more upkeep problems than keeping it as 2 separate pieces. I understand there has to be a line drawn in any group with standards, but to address it like the only motive would be to save a very small amount of time at the tail end doesn't capture the driving viewpoints here I don't think.