Daetrin

Yes - you've hit the nail perfectly on the head there Rick. Kudos and I tip my glass to you

Apologies Mark, my comment was more rhetorical. To me the original vision of both EI and Centurion remain unchanged, but I like to understand how other people see it. Wish we could hang at a pub - using posts on a thread can be very limiting at times.

Understood John, but on screen caps we can also see gaffers tape too and I don't see the Legion allowing gaffers tape, large paint chips and bad paint jobs either. There is a point where we move into prop replication too far - as the intent is to recreate what is seen on screen, not what they looked like when not on film. If a detail is not visible on a screen cap, is that really the intent of this program? The screws on the undercut of the chest plate are of a similar ilk. People will look at our suits in detail from a few feet away, a requirement not needed on the original film aside from a few troopers.

Well, this is the crux of it. People may have proof but if they don't out it then what's the point? This thread is derailing again - unless someone posts proof of the accusation, all future posts will be deleted.

Well, it's original armor in that he made the current set of molds, so if you look at it that way he's not lying. In fact, every recaster can say the same thing along those lines. But, it makes one think he's offering replicas of the original suits. Replica and copy are not entirely synonymous.

Sounds reasonable. These days I'd like to think someone could sculpt on with a curve, and was it not Terry who did light scoring on the inside of the ammo pack that lended it easier to stay in shape? A good question is if someone could attach this easily without the need for a visible fastener, should we require a cosmetic fastener as unlike the others used in the movies, this is very hard to spot indeed, even looking at screen caps.

Nice! I used zip ties back in the day on my sandy - this looks much nicer.

Not quite. For Centurion we currently allow brads which are actually rivets. Also, we specifly split rivets (which have solid heads). I guess it's more a matter of is having a split rivet important, or the fact that it's a solid head? How about: "The thigh armor belt will be connected by two visible fasteners at either end. These may be brads, flat head rivets (including split rivets), or cosmetic covering that emulates the look of a brad/flat head rivet". I put in the last as what if someone actually does glue it or uses a pop rivet, but then glues on a cover that looks like a flat head rivet. Yes, may seem strange but I'm thinking about Gary, e.g. would we mandate that he has to remove the pop rivet and replace it with a brad/flat head rivet, or can he just glue on a cap that looks like a flat head was used?

Got it. The ANH Stunt allows both. Are you proposing an across the board ammendment to change "The thigh armor belt may be connected by brads/split rivets, but not by standard rivets." to "The thigh armor belt may be connected by two brads, split rivets, or solid capped head rivets, but not by standard rivets.

Update made.

Sounds good gents! I've removed the offending line off the Centurions then. Your eyes are far better than mine Is there a preference between a rivet or a brad, or should we not split that hair for now? Here are the screen caps I looked at on the Death Star: http://s767.photobucket.com/albums/xx316/flyinghome/ANH%20TK%20Caps/Death%20Star/ And Tantive IV http://s767.photobucket.com/albums/xx316/flyinghome/ANH%20TK%20Caps/Tantive%20IV/

Excellent point - should we just specify that the holes need to be cut out but not necessarily functional?

I thought it was two: * If rubber (or rubber like) gloves are worn, the hand plates will be affixed via an elastic strip over the palm. * If silk (or similar material) gloves are worn, the hand plates should be sewn on at five points equally spread out with 2 on the sides and 1 in the middle front. Thanks for the pointers Mark - we can always count on you to be the resident ESB Expert I've updated the requirements page to reflect the above - please lmk about that 3rd option and I'll update again if need be.

Whilst you can see it a wee bit in the promo pix if you zoom in, I went though well over 100 screen caps and if you look at them it's not visible at all, unlike the other fasterners on the kidney/ab plate and even the snaps on the butt plate. I guess it's like the screws that were used on the underside of the chest plate - they were there but can you really see them without a high-def screen cap and zooming in? Is there a difference between using a huge brad vs a small rivet that would be harder to see in terms of impression?

http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=15210

Sweet! Are you going to be the first then? I have to add brads to my suit and do the forearms too, may not get to it before you.

Poll approving the Centurion standard: http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=14988 Two polls, one approving brads and the other approving rivets http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=14989 The wording "ideally" means it's a "should have" and not a "must have" for Centurion. I'm open to an alternate wording to make it more clear that the lack of visible fasteners is a "should have" but not a requirement.

OK troops! This thread is to discuss the proposed Centurion standards for the ANH Hero stormtrooper. You can find them at http://www.whitearmor.net/home/crl-overview/crl-anh-hero.html I've updated this based on the recently passed ANH Stunt requirements here: http://www.whitearmor.net/home/crl-overview/crl-anh-stunt.html For the most part this is an ANH Stunt trooper with but with Hero detailing. Since the CRL is separate between ANH Stunt and Hero, I tried to make Centurion requirements between stunt and hero more at about the same level by trying to pick out details we see on the hero suits, or at least the hero suits we see most prominently. Some differences on the Hero that are worth considering: 1) Should we mandate that the neckseal have a bib on the front/back like Luke/Han had? If a grappling hook/comlink should be worn in lieu of a thermal detonator... 2) Should we mandate that if a grappling hook be used, how it's connected to the belt box, and that the belt box should have a switch on the top? 3) Should we mandate that the grappling hook/box be mounted on the right side of the back and the comlink on the left front? Currently we don't make this note. 4) I added a few comments about the detailing of the comlink, are these fine? Should we add any other distinctive items that are not called out already on the EI notes? Thoughts/questions?

OK troops! This thread is to discuss the proposed Centurion standards for HWT. You can find them at http://www.whitearmor.net/home/crl-overview/crl-hwt.html I've updated this based on the recently passed ANH Stunt requirements here: http://www.whitearmor.net/home/crl-overview/crl-anh-stunt.html For the most part this is an ANH Stunt trooper with accessories. Some questions I'd like to get people's opinions on are: 1) Should the bazooka/missle launcher be mandatory for Centurion (e.g. no other blasters/BFG's allowed)? 2) Should only orange pauldrons be acceptable for Centurion? I made the Centurion accessory (pack, weapons, pouches) otherwise match MEPD's SWAT as best I can as the standards should be indentical when the accessories are identical. Thoughts/questions?

OK troops! This thread is to discuss the proposed Centurion standards for ESB. You can find them at http://www.whitearmor.net/home/crl-overview/crl-esb.html I've updated this based on the recently passed ANH Stunt requirements here: http://www.whitearmor.net/home/crl-overview/crl-anh-stunt.html Some of the questions that seem to be are still open are: 1. Helmet Are there good reference shots of what the "hero" or six tooth helmet looks like, and should it be OK for Centurion? 2. Gloves a. Should silk gloves be allowed for EI & Centurion? b. Should having the hand plates be sewn on be mandatory for Centurion? All other armor details match the ANH stunt for now, excepting the holster placement/attachment.

You should do this for a living Mason - that's pretty intense and the details really make it pop! Hope you have a great time at your troop

FX and AM are fan sculpts, and as mentioned are really geared for larger troopers. You can certainly make them fit smaller/skinner folks though - it can be done! They are also designed to be relatively easy to put together, though the thighs (esp. the FX) do take some work. ATA is a TE derived make of armor. TE is essentially most of a ROTJ suit with other parts that has been modified to be more ANH in detailing. There are many makers of TE derived armor, each making slightly different suits in terms of parts used. Since the original armor was designed for a guy 5'10" and about 165lbs, it lends itself better to smaller folk. The downside is that they can be much harder to trim/build.

Many have started, and there are several with this information in their heads. It's been on a staff to-do list for over a year but we never seem to get around to doing it. :-p

Even if not 100%, it's certainly good enough to troop with. Looking great

Folks - a reminder that this thread is specifically about VT, not recasting in general. You're certainly free to create a recasting is evil thread elsewhere, but let's stay on target here.