Jump to content
sskunky

ROTJ CRL Dilemma.....What should I do?

Recommended Posts

I thought we were talking about Star Wars here and not the real world army? Just because members were in the forces shouldn't mean that the rules of the real world army apply in the Star Wars universe. <br>

I think we are diverting here and making excuses for mistakes made in the CRL. <br>

Also props of Star Wars were based on WWII and other historic costumes and weapons not modern day uniformity. <br>

In historic warfare soldiers pretty much used and wore what they could and many variations appeared. <br>

Just my 2c worth.

We are talking about Star Wars, but we have clearly and repeatedly stated that uniformity of the Stormtroopers across the globe is a strong factor in CRL development.

 

Again, I fall back on my earlier statement that our CRLs cannot by definition be wrong regardless of who disagrees with them, but they can be improved based on community input, using our established processes for making those changes.  It is not an excuse.  We cannot call up any intergalactic Army and ask them how they do things, so we extrapolate using the examples that we - and the people who will see us in public - have to base their expectations upon and that means modern Earth-bound armies.

 

Several key 501st Legion/FISD people have already said that oddities/one-offs will not become CRL approved Stormtroopers simply because variations appeared on screen so there is no point in mentioning historical armies.  You can't use the same examples to support your claims that you're saying that we cannot use.  Professional armies have uniforms, and that generally - there are exceptions to everything - means standardized appearances.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never used examples to support my claims. I was responding to the comments put up in this thread to support your claims. I started this thread because I was getting customers having a hard time getting approval because their costumes are too screen accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never used examples to support my claims. I was responding to the comments put up in this thread to support your claims. I started this thread because I was getting customers having a hard time getting approval because their costumes are too screen accurate.

"Also props of Star Wars were based on WWII and other historic costumes and weapons not modern day uniformity.  In historic warfare soldiers pretty much used and wore what they could and many variations appeared. There were certainly similarities in their uniforms but not identical by any means."

 

Maybe my definition of examples is different than yours Mark, but this is what I was talking about.  

 

We are working on assisting your customers at every opportunity that presents itself to us.  In order for that to happen, it must get beyond the GML, to us.  

 

We are also working on cleaning up the CRL so that language is more clearly understood and hopefully that will alleviate a lot of the GML issues that your customers are encountering.  Even though a proposal has not been done yet, I'd say that the rivets - which should only be an issue here at FISD, because of how the CRLs are written for higher level approvals - are well on their way to being addressed in the CRLs. That has the support of the key players at this point in time, in my opinion.

 

Again, too screen accurate is a problem for 501st Legion membership in some instances.  We are working - as I said above, and above that, and above that - to clarify that for the GMLs because that appears to be where the overwhelming bulk of the problem lies for your customers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My responses and examples were only in response to your claims not mine, that's what I meant. But anyway let's move on. It's not really important.

 

I think this just about sums it up and is what I find so frustrating.

 

Again, too screen accurate is a problem for 501st Legion membership in some instances. We are working - as I said above, and above that, and above that - to clarify that for the GMLs because that appears to be where the overwhelming bulk of the problem lies for your customers.

I've never understood why something that looks so original is a problem for a costume club if it's foundations are based on the very characters we are emulating.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would also ease things a lot if the tiers would be totally different - todays system offers tiers that not really resemble any tier "really more accurate" than others, just more prefered.

 

One tier for easy access, lowest possible standards  - allowing people to test if they like it enough to spend more money. Maybe limited to the first 2-3 years.

 

One tier for all what is standard now - the "standard trooper".

 

One tier for really screen accurate - if it is proven like on screen, it´s above any discussion. But then each detail has to fit to a certain trooper on screen, not one detail from one and other details from others, no matter if they were on screen, too. Pick one and make that.

 

 

The biggest grmblfx now is forcing peoples to build up to a certain standard by rules to become member, and after that happened, then accepting people changing stuff to their likings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Er, Michael, that is what we have. 3 tiers. They are fully explained elsewhere on these forums, and all over the Legion. I can explain them again if there is confusion.

 

Mark - there is a Venn between prop replicators and the 501st. While there is a lot of overlap, pure prop replication is not what the club strives for. We emulate the canonical costumes seen on screen, whereas prop replicators try to replicate what the prop actually was, even if it doesn't quite look that way on screen.

 

Star Trek original props look like crap for instance, and people doing Star Trek costumes today make much nicer props than what the TV show had. SW is no different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul - i am one of those propguys.  ;)

 

And there are many different level of us. Those who build it as the propmaker did on stage with all it´s flaws, those who build it as the propmaker did on stage without all it´s flaws, those who build it as the propmaker would have done it without any time or money limitations, those who build it as it would look as a real part of the SW universe - and a lot of shades in between. :D 

 

Regarding having 3 tiers already .... i know, but the way they divide from each other is something i would all put in the second tier i mentioned. Really screenused would be a completely seperate one - and i assume in low numbers, nothing that would really affect the overall appearance of the legion (and probably not stand out as much as the differencies now do). Having a beginner level would be nice, but maybe not as easy as having a screen accurate tier - but it should be doable, with some goodwill.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark - there is a Venn between prop replicators and the 501st. While there is a lot of overlap, pure prop replication is not what the club strives for. We emulate the canonical costumes seen on screen, whereas prop replicators try to replicate what the prop actually was, even if it doesn't quite look that way on screen.

 

Star Trek original props look like crap for instance, and people doing Star Trek costumes today make much nicer props than what the TV show had. SW is no different.

I understand that the 501st isn't about prop replication but I don't understand why we get penalised for replicating them. Surely that should be the highest level. As it stands if an original Stormtrooper walked of the Set of Endor he would be refused entry into the 501st because his costume is too screen accurate. This I find ridiculous. Because the 501st choose idealised over screen accurate. If the 501st refuse to see it on screen or simply can't see it on screen why should it matter in real life. The public really are not going to see it either but it's there and always was.

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are production photos accepted for the CRL of ANH armour but not for ROTJ? Sorry to hijack but CFO put these photos out into the public domain and they are being used to clarify the ANH CRL. Yet the production pics I'm showing are dismissed because they are not screen shots.

 

I'm referring to this post.

http://www.whitearmor.net/forum/topic/40073-shoulder-straps/#entry535867

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I went through all the scenes in ROTJ Blu-ray and didn't see any rivets on the shoulder straps at all. If you can see a screen grab where it's visible, I'm happy to be wrong here. Also, while there are a few that didn't have TD's, the majority did and the film goes by so fast you'd miss the ones that didn't. It's like in ANH there are 2 troopers that don't have TD's, but the rest of them all do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, it could be that they were indeed assembled with rivets on the shoulder straps, but if so they are not visible when I watch the movie on screen. Even with Blu-ray, maybe the resolution wasn't great? If you can show a screen grab, that would be awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they are visible on screen but that's how they were constructed. I've shown proof of before shooting and after of them being there. As I said I find it beyond belief that they were there before and after but not during. They are 4mm of white rivet on white plastic hidden under the helmet for the majority. The 6 foot rule applied back then as there was no HD or Bluray. If you couldn't see it from 6 foot it didn't matter. No matter how the film is remastered it will still only be as high res as the film it was originally filmed on. <br>

I'm not sure why this is so hard to believe. <br>

I've done all I can to prove this is the correct construction and quite frankly if I can't get it through then I'm not sure what else I can do. <br>

I will continue constructing my armour as it should be and give my customers the choice of screen accurate or 501st acceptable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, it could be that they were indeed assembled with rivets on the shoulder straps, but if so they are not visible when I watch the movie on screen.

 

Many of the details that are needed for approval are not visible on screen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ROTJRivet_zpsnoc6wl7p.jpg

 

That's the closest I got. As Paul says it all flys past pretty fast and theres not a single shot thats in focus/slow enough to have a sporting chance to get a clear view of the bit we need to see.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is surprising to me. I would have thought we could at least agree that the photos in the costume book should be used as a reference. Every photo shows rivets. But if we need a screen cap, I guess I'll try and frame by frame it when I get time. <br><br>

I agree about the TD's. The vast majority on Endor had them. Only the few that didn't were guys who were going to end up on their backs. <br><br>

When they knew they weren't filming a fight sequence, on Death Star, with Vader and Luke, every TK had a TD and holster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We also have visual confirmation from a FISD member that the screen-used ROTJ armor that was exposed at the EMP museum, during the "Power of Costumes" exposition, used rivets to secure the shoulder bridges. Even though what he described what even more complicated than rivets. What he described was a snap secured to the shoulder bridge with a rivet with an opposite snap secure to the chest. Member was "Toddo" if I recall correctly.

 

Edithttp://www.whitearmor.net/forum/topic/29913-emp-rotj-costume/#entry382045

 

c9f135b8-dd5d-4300-88e3-673f2cb59889_zps

Edited by The5thHorseman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toddo is in my garrison and I see him on a semi-regular basis. FYI guys I'm not disputing how they were constructed, however typically the 501st favors standards of what a person sees on screen. This is why any non-visible detail such as how they were put together on the inside, e.g. the strapping system (snappers/pops vs. brackets) will never be part of 501st standards. This is not just with TK's, this is on all 501st costumes (and there are scores of them). The Power of Costumes may have been at the EMP at one time, but most recently it was at the Pacific Science Center, fwiw.

 

Currently the 501st standard allows rivets already, so to be clear we are simply allowing them to also be visible on EI/Centurion. Making them allowable is a pretty easy fix. What wording would you supply?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question is are the permissible or mandatory?

 

EIB: No visible rivets are allowed. could become Visible rivets are permitted between the 3rd and 4th bar. Which works for both mandatory and permissible.

Cent: These are affixed in the front (no snaps, rivets or brads are visible).

  • Permited: These are affixed in the front (no snaps or brads are visible, though rivets are allowed between the 3rd and 4th bar).
  • Mandatory: These are affixed in the front with a rivet between the 3rd and 4th bar.
(Can some one check I can count, I wouldn't trust me).

 

The rear attachment would remain unchanged.

 

Edit: might be better phrased as "a single rivet between the 3rd and 4th bars" or some ones going to use 2+ on each.

 

Would also be a good time to change the image to an ROTJ build with rivets rather than an ANH one.

Edited by themaninthesuitcase
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would also be a good time to change the image to an ROTJ build with rivets rather than an ANH one.

 

Photographic corrections have been addressed by the Staff in the CRL update thread in the staff section.  There will be many photos to replace across our CRLs.  ROTJ is in major need of a photographic overhaul.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photographic corrections have been addressed by the Staff in the CRL update thread in the staff section. There will be many photos to replace across our CRLs. ROTJ is in major need of a photographic overhaul.

That works, just that one stood out a lot given I've looked at that section more than you normally would. If it's in hand I'll leave that part alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photographic corrections have been addressed by the Staff in the CRL update thread in the staff section.  There will be many photos to replace across our CRLs.  ROTJ is in major need of a photographic overhaul.

QFT. That said, it was the best we had a the time, as there were only a handful of ROTJ at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have proved they were there before filming and after filming. So it's down to the powers that be to decide if they were there during filming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your patience - we're done with elections and setting things up for the near year. I realize this has taken way longer than it should, but I'll ask for a few more days svp.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...