It's all recast

[synaptyx]

Short answer: I'd love to know the facts 100%.

I know what you mean, though unfortunately that'll never happen.

[Star Wars Helmets]

I know what you mean, though unfortunately that'll never happen.

 

I agree with you both. Everyone seem to over-egg their involvement in it

 

Cheers

 

Jez

[sskunky]

Some very valid points there Jez, thanks.

@Jumpin jax. There are so many detail in this case that none of us are unfortunately gonna know or ever find out.

I believe AA also did the Tusken Raider although I try and varify that. But I seem to remember Andrew mentioning it a long time ago.

I think he is back in court within the next couple of weeks, so watch this space.

Also jumpin jax I have no beef with you and everyone has their own opinion but I think it is wrong to call people names when they are not members and cannot defend them selves.

[Star Wars Helmets]

Mark - he said the same thing to me many years ago, although my understanding is that it was Nick Pemberton who actually did the Tusken - not Andrew.

 

Pemberton is important in all this since he effectively "sub-contracted" the work John Mollo sent his way to Ainsworth, to the extent that the original delivery invoices for the work AA did had Nick Pembrton as the client, not Lucasfilm.

 

Cheers

 

Jez

[sskunky]

Jez,

now you mention it he might have even said it was Nick. That rings a bell. Did Nick not have something to do with the blasters too? I know baptys was the armourer but i'm sure nick had some thing to do with building them up? Or maybe I dreamt that up

[Star Wars Helmets]

I dont know anything about that. I think Nick did some cantina creatures but I dont know if they were used or not.

 

Cheers

 

Jez

[Jumpin Jax]

Also jumpin jax I have no beef with you and everyone has their own opinion but I think it is wrong to call people names when they are not members and cannot defend them selves.

He chose not to join and post here.

Stupid is as stupid does.

[TK4205]

He chose not to join and post here.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Allright Joey, don't go getting my thread locked

[manxtrooper]

Just a quick question, are the 501st rules that you can only produce armor legally if it's for personal use? Because that being the case, what that actually means and my interpretation of what's actually allowed and what everyone in the 501st conveniently ignores whilst slagging off certain recasters, is that you need to make your own costumes from scratch if you want to be legal. To make your own and then sell them is illegal, so is buying unlicensed products, although I believe the legality falls more on the seller than the buyer in this case.

 

So that puts everyone who hasn't been licensed or won a court case, out for legal issues in my book.

[vicsouders]

Just a quick question, are the 501st rules that you can only produce armor legally if it's for personal use? Because that being the case, what that actually means and my interpretation of what's actually allowed and what everyone in the 501st conveniently ignores whilst slagging off certain recasters, is that you need to make your own costumes from scratch if you want to be legal. To make your own and then sell them is illegal, so is buying unlicensed products, although I believe the legality falls more on the seller than the buyer in this case.

 

So that puts everyone who hasn't been licensed or won a court case, out for legal issues in my book.

 

FYI

 

http://www.501st.com/councilres.php

 

"Council Resolutions:

Policies that are not addressed in the 501st Legion Charter but which have been adopted by Legion Command are documented here for reference.

Council Resolution 1: Legion's Stance on Recasting

Vote completed on 03/13/2006: 35 Yes; 10 No; 3 Abstain

Reference Link

Resolution: The 501st Legion does not condone, support, or encourage re-casting. It is, however, outside of the scope of this club's mission, charter, authority, jurisdiction, and purview to consume our time and energies as a volunteer organization in efforts to prosecute those who, of their own volition, choose to engage in re-casting."

[TooMuchGarlic]

This is a dangerous section. I don't like it at all. Not the debate, but the fact its here. This is a trooping community, not a prop one, and at that one that is tentative to even be here. Leave it to the "propsafe" drum beaters.

The fact that the costuming community gets their stuff from the prop community makes it relevant.

 

Whatever it is IMO the laissez faire attutute in certain quarters has harmed the hobby as a whole. More stormtrooper helmets but less other helmets

Don't know if I agree with that. In the last 2 1/2 years we have seen several screen derived Vader helmets become available. Five years ago the GH as a top of the line Vader helmet, and now it's not that desirable unless it's from the master run. With the dawn of the DJ, the three TM versions, SL, and TD Vader helmets the bar has been raised incredibly high in Vader land and these highly sought helmets do come up for sale occasionally. If this is the results of the last 2 years of progress for Vader, which is the mountains peek of SW costuming, I still see a bright future ahead for the prop community as a whole.

And who is getting access to those? The whole community or only the few you hope you can trust?

 

With respect to the owners of those Vader castings, they are not original pieces. IMO there is a huge difference between casting a 2nd generation piece and an original. Huge.

May not be screen used, but no proof that they aren't first generation pieces directly from production molds. If you are privvy to some additional knowledge that I'm not aware of, I'd love to hear it.

 

The problem is that people that recast are committing copyright infringement, just like the original casters. Copyright infringement is not the same as stealing (basicly think of it like this, stealing is when you have an apple and some one takes that apple. copyright infringement is when you have an apple and some one else makes an apple (be it copying your apple or not), thus you do not lose your ability to sell your apple, it's just devalued.)

No. Sadly, the analogy doesn't work. Not even the same as this issue.

 

The original cast from screen used producers, molded and cast an original piece to offers to others to buy.

 

With your analogy, then the "recasters" would have molded and cast the same or another original to offer to others to buy.

 

If they did that - no one would have a problem with them selling their wares.

 

The problem arises with the fact that they didn't buy the original, wreck their brain with how to mold it without damaging it, molding it and risking damaging the piece, just so that their effort can be recast by some guy getting a copy of their work. They just took what the other guy had spent loads of money on and risked damaging to offer to the community, and recast it. So... why should the first guy waste any more time on copying the originals he buy to offer to the community if he's just getting recast left and right. No, he loses interest and we all lose out because some people are only interested in their own niche community and applaud recasters who provide them with what they want at cheap prices, with little to no regard on what it does to the rest of the community in terms of new stuff being made available. But trooper people are happy, 'cause they got their trooper armor, so to heck with everyone else, who'd want accurate biker scouts, royal guards, etc.

 

But I guess I'm barking up the wrong tree here... but since those who don't care and applaud recasters come piss up my tree and burn my chances of getting these things, I do get a little aggravated. Yeah, see, I'm selfish that way.

 

Those things are true, no doubt about it. But much like the hero status arguments about David Prowse's contribution, it is overstated to imply that the man who got the job was the only one that could DO the job.

Forming the suits was a manufacturing step in the process, like any particular job on an assembly line. The sculptors are the only people I'd give the status of being indispensable, not the guy that pushed the button. A different former would not increase or detract from the affection for the costume, which was stated in the post I responded to. If it hadn't been AA it would have been somebody else with the same molds and same shapes. If it hadn't been Muir and Moore, etc, that shape and end result would have been different; that's the step where the interest changes for us, not the last one. You don't thank steel workers for the lines of an Aston-Martin, you thank the guys with the pen and the clay.

If it hadn't been AA, perhaps we would have seen less wonky and different looking helmets in ANH. All speculation though, but the fact remains that AA did a piss-poor job to make the helmets vacced off the same molds look the same. all trooper producers working from the Brian R molds make Brian R helmets and those working from the Dave M molds make Dave M helmets - all pretty unique to those particular helmets. The fact that they can make nearly each one look the same... tells you a little bit about the crap-job AA did for the movie.

[Daetrin[Admin]]

Just a quick question, are the 501st rules that you can only produce armor legally if it's for personal use? Because that being the case, what that actually means and my interpretation of what's actually allowed and what everyone in the 501st conveniently ignores whilst slagging off certain recasters, is that you need to make your own costumes from scratch if you want to be legal. To make your own and then sell them is illegal, so is buying unlicensed products, although I believe the legality falls more on the seller than the buyer in this case.

 

So that puts everyone who hasn't been licensed or won a court case, out for legal issues in my book.

 

How I understood it from LFL was that the 501st may make costumes for their own personal use in return for the fact that we make no profit on our activities and do good deeds, etc.. It was not explicitly stated that everyone had to make their own costume from scratch - so there is some room for interpretation there and this is probably intentional as anyone with a legal background could explain.

 

For legality : LFL and the courts dictate what is legal vs. illegal in a pure sense with their copyrights, such as they have and are willing to assert (one can hold IP but not assert it, these are usually known as brokers). That said, the prop and costuming communities (not just SW, but others too) do seem to decide amongst themselves what is appropriate vs. inappropriate behavior and act accordingly regardless of any true legal standing. Perhaps it's best to use those terms, else one can get caught up "prior art" and it's definition, and all other kinds of fancy legalese that costs $500-$1000/hour if you would like it interpreted for you (the cost of an IP attorney).

 

So what is acceptable/unacceptable depends on the community in question and how it decides to police itself, for lack of a better term.

[Star Wars Helmets]

Hi Carsten

 

I'm trying to think back to the meat of the discussion, which was almost three months ago now. Basically IIRC my view is/was that because of the proliferation in recasting we're now seeing less "new" stuff hitting the hobby. I believe that its a case of "why bother to take the time and expense of copying an original item is some dumb fool is just going to replicate what I've done for a fraction of the cost (and risk)". The response to this was (sic) "thats not true - look at the recent deluge in quality Vader helmets".

 

However, I just dont think you can compare the cost and risk in copying a 2nd gen Vader helmet with a 1st generation screen-used original helmet. One is worth a few grand at best, the other probably more than a quarter of a million.

 

As far as the respective provenance of the various Vader helmets, Ive not yet seen any concrete evidence to suggest they are production made pieces (and surely its the responsibility to prove their provenance, not expect others to prove that they're not production pieces). Ive seen a lot of squiggly lines, but IMO nothing tangible that proves theyre 1st, 2nd, 3rd gen castings - albeit very very nice castings.

 

Cheers

 

Jez

[TooMuchGarlic]

I'm trying to think back to the meat of the discussion, which was almost three months ago now. Basically IIRC my view is/was that because of the proliferation in recasting we're now seeing less "new" stuff hitting the hobby. I believe that its a case of "why bother to take the time and expense of copying an original item is some dumb fool is just going to replicate what I've done for a fraction of the cost (and risk)". The response to this was (sic) "thats not true - look at the recent deluge in quality Vader helmets".

Yeah... but as I mentioned... that reply is flawed... as... those are not available for the masses. They could have been if there had been less acceptance of recasters and recasting here and other 501st boards, but because there isn't, there's no point in making things available, even to a select few. Which means we get less new stuff and just more of the same ol', same ol'.

 

I heard rumors for instance of two all complete original trooper suits that is simply not being made available to anyone because of all this acceptance of recasters from this group. Also other original pieces WILL NOT be made available to anyone and that pisses me off as because of this, I am missing out on stuff - we all are.

 

However, I just dont think you can compare the cost and risk in copying a 2nd gen Vader helmet with a 1st generation screen-used original helmet. One is worth a few grand at best, the other probably more than a quarter of a million.

Sadly, because of the LFL vs AA trial it has become even MORE difficult to find the truth about the origin of these helmets and the molds that made them. We are sorta stuck with the stories from the sellers and what little was possible to get confirmed or debunked. Sure, it is the job of the owner to prove that the story that accompanied the piece is true, but as long as it is not possibly to debunk or disprove that what they claimed is true, you have to go by their story as the proof and what was confirmed. Since we can't get the whole story about many of these items, that is sometimes all we have to go by.

 

We have to accept the history and story attached to a piece until we can fully confirm or deny it or aspects of it. Discounting it simply because it cannot be verified right this minute is a bit premature. You can speculate all you want, but so far, all you know about it is the story attached to it and what was managed to be confirmed and debunked and that's all you can really go by.

 

Nevertheless... they are indeed some cool pieces. They are not shown much so people would see all the cool things about them that simply ARE NOT on any other helmets... and they are only sold to select few, if sold at all. Again, because these leech recasters are accepted and can work freely here.

[Star Wars Helmets]

I dunno but I think we're in agreement on the first point. All I'm saying is that there are less new things about (and available to the "masses") because of recasting.

 

Regarding the second; the "value" of an original prop (say helmet) is reinforced by its provenance. When Ive been asked to authenticate original helmets and props there are a number of processes we can go through to ensure it is original. For the vast majority of cases we can be be pretty much 100% sure whether its original or not.

 

The problem with these Vader "castings" is that its incredibly difficult (if not impossible) to authenticate them with any where near the same degree of certainty, why?

1) Those Ive been made aware of have no real provenance attached to them. No reliable documentation placing them in production, no photos of them on-set (behind the scenes or otherwise). At best there's a statement like "this was owned by a Lady called Jane who worked on the production, probably"

2) Ive not yet heard of anyone carbon-dating a helmet (or whatever can be done to establish age). Nor has anyone been able to perform a chemical analysis of a helmet ALONGSIDE a known original

3) Authenticating vac-formed helmets is a lot easier than fiberglass as there are more constants.

 

Ultimately IN MY OPINION (and thats all it is) Ive never seen anything that provides any real certainty that these are in any way linked to the production. Clearly they are quality helmets, but I just dint think anyone can say that they are 1st, 2nd or 3rd generation - and I just see the protestations of provenance coming from people with a self-interest to "big up" their helmets.

 

Maybe there is some damning evidence and Ive not seen it. I'm certainly not adverse to understanding more about them.

 

Apology to the Stormtrooper fans that we went a bit OT onto the heathen Vader

 

Cheers

 

Jez

[keith]

I agree, i don't think there is much chance anymore of someone spending a lot of money, a lot of time and taking huge risks in offering replicas of original items when they know people will just rip them off by recasting it.

 

When something is offered, like the ROTJ trooper helmets, so much time and money will be put into making them as impossible to recast as possible, that it bumps the price up, reduces the number of helmets that can be offered due to the time needed for this procedure and spoils the replica in a way, as the interior can't be accurate. It has to be done though.

 

For well over a year now, i'm thinking of different things that can be done to prevent recasting...Adding pitting to the inside with a dremel and then Filling areas on the inside with resin like around the eyes, mic tip wells and vocoder. Using large washers on the mic tip bolts and where the cap and face are joined and gluing up the threads up with epoxy resin, as well as a final all over coating of epoxy resin on the full interior of the helmet. Lots of time and money.

 

As for things like Vader helmets, there is nothing you can do really to prevent recasting.

 

Keith.

[TooMuchGarlic]

It is being looked into in the model kit community to add something to the resin that hinders silicone to cure, but will allow the kit to be painted. And I'm sure that once that has been figured out, it will become available to the prop community to secure fiberglass casts as well.

 

It won't stop recasting, as they'd just switch to more expensive silicones or laser scanning, but at least it adds more burdens to the recasters than they'd probably wanna waste time with it. Their prices will go up, which means you might as well just buy the original piece.