Rich330

Thanks, chaps! I'm just a holster away from clearance and an EIB application thread.

Yeah, they're TK boots. They are really, really comfortable - super soft leather - and will do the trick all in all but, yes, the only slight downside is that they fit a little loose round the ankle. As a result, it takes some jiggling to get the back of your shins properly in place. And then they pop open a bit when you walk round. No big deal but I have been thinking about maybe taping up my ankles before I put the shin armour on.

Thanks! It's been fun.

I even shot a quick video to check whether I can actually move in my armour too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6T1JIzT48Y

I've been doing some more work on my armour, trying to perfect the fit. I trimmed more material from the sides of abdomen, made some adjustments to the back plate to raise it some more. It still could be a touch higher but in general I think the all-round fit is now much improved. I'm almost there ("stay on target!"). Took some photos with the helmet this time too ...

Allow me to be the first to congratulate you on yet another very cool costume ... and make the obligatory juvenile gag .... ... so, you have a dirty wife huh? I tried to resist, I really did!

Can't say I've worn the helmet for long periods yet but the lense material doesn't touch my nose anymore.

Helmet looks great. I fitted the lense material exactly the same and indeed cut out a big U-shape in the middle to make room for my big snout!

Stunning!

Progressing nicely! Looks like a good, tidy job too.

All three outfits spot on. Great stuff!

Escaping from 10 years in Germany before that!

Very, very cool!

3. Me! ESB is done, just waiting for my holster to arrive, then it's clearance and an EIB thread. Shortly after I'll be putting together my ANH helmet. My ANH belt is complete apart from the drop boxes and holster (all parts on their way).

I'm only discouraged because a lot of the discussion which followed me posting my photos was dreadfully misinformed and based solely on an extremely unreliable set of photos. I don't want to be the source of more misleading debate, and I'm afraid I didn't find much of it very constructive. Anybody who has not seen either the AP or the TM in the flesh could be forgiven for thinking that wearing AP is tantamount to dressing up as a Smurf ("pitufo" / "Schlumpf") and TM is banana-coloured! But, yeah, I agree that it was all very adult and civil and that aspect should be applauded.

I give up! Despite being the (very poor) photographer and saying myself that my pictures are of no use whatsover for colour comparisons, my post was being ignored and the nonsensical colour debate continued. I have therefore replaced the original photos with black and white versions. They are for a rough comparison of the size and shape of the parts, not colour. If anybody wants to compare the colour of 2010 TM with the colour 2010 AP, you're welcome to stop by when my wife and I are out trooping together.

I found the lack of trimming lines on the TM to be an advantage. It gives you quite a lot of leeway for trimming to size. There's quite a lot of allowance to trim outside the natural (invisible) line of the parts (for extra girth). Equally you can trim quite a way inside that same natural line to make slimmer-fitting parts. I found it a joy to work with.

And, after he's done all that ... 1. What will the weather be like on that day (with exact data on the light)? 2. What type of monitor do I have and how do I have it set? Not trying to be disrespectful here but the whole excercise is largely pointless.

This kind of "test" is probably the most reliable and valuable contribution to the colour discussion. You have relatively good controlled conditions because all the different types of armour are being viewed under the same light source with very few extra distorting factors (no cameras, no PC monitors etc.) You also have group of subjective perceptions and some kind of consensus.

EDIT(21.06.10): The comments below were largely being ignored. I have therefore now replaced the original colour photos with black and white versions. My photos are not for colour comparisons. Just to make something clear here ... There was a request for pictures of AP and TM parts side-by-side earlier in the thread. The purpose was to compare shape and size, i.e. not colour. I offered to post pictures as the owner of both types of armour. I would never post photos on an internet forum as any kind of accurate representation of colour. There are too many variables, e.g. Light conditions My camera and its settings, its settings and relative quality My image processing software, its settings and relative quality The monitors of other users, their settings and relative quality If you want to accurately compare colour, you have to do so under controlled conditions, i.e. put the parts in a light box with a standardised light source (TL84 (the light source used in Marks & Spencers stores), DL65 etc.) Even then, much is down to a subjective perception. PLEASE DO NOT USE MY PHOTOS AS A RELIABLE REPRODUCTION OF COLOUR I made this comment ... ... for identification purposes only, i.e. so it would be easier to pick out the respective parts in the photos. I also qualified the comment: What surprised me however, is that - despite all the above - Mark seems to be able to identify the plastic on my AP build as the old material from "a few years back".

Am I to understand that when I purchased AP armour in March of this year, I received parts made with outdated "blue tinge" plastic "from a few years back"?

Yes!

Oops! Sorry, Pablo. I initially thought you were joking and theat the two sets of stripes are identical. Looking at them again, it seems they're not. I have indeed now swapped them so they are as displayed on Mike's site. Good eye, P! Thus ...

OK, I've done that now and replaced all the photos with photos with the tube stripes on the correct sides.

I asked a Scottish friend on his opinion and he said it all comes down to one thing ... "Some armours look screen accurate but the Disney ..... disney (sic)"