tipperaryred

Great start, and I always love to see a good spreadsheet! Looking forward to seeing your progress, and ask if you have any questions.

One more thing to consider Alex, it's not a cheap hobby so you're doing a great job asking these questions now. If you haven't already paid upfront to the supplier you're already talking to, you've got 3 options: 1) Go ahead and pay the extra $150 to get them to complete the full helmet to CRL standard. 2) Ask if the supplier can simply provide the helmet without any vocodor molded on. With some cheap rubber tubing and some glue, it would be very easy to create one yourself. 3) Shop around with other suppliers, and you may find one who already includes a separate vocoder as standard, which may work out cheaper for you.

Hi Alex! First up, great choice of costume ? Unfortunately, for even basic Level 1 clearance the CRL requires that the vocodor be a separate piece, not molded into the helmet. Ultimately however, this decision will lie solely with your Garrison GML. We ourselves would have no say in this unless your GML requests our advice. So while it should not be possible to clear anymore with a molded vocoder, it is at your GML's discretion. If you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask.

Yeah, I'd say see if the on set guys can shed any light on that before we spend time trying to figure that oddity out. Could easily just be a case of a lens breaking or falling out and them not having time to replace it before shooting. I mean, what sort of crazies would notice or discuss such a thing ? The draft text looks good, though I'll defer to our muddy brothers and sisters to catch anything subtle.

Great summation mate. I'd agree with simply stating that the helmet colour should match the armour for now. You're right that there's plenty more of the season still to come, where we might get clearer views and a chance to contrast with the Ferrix version. Are there any other helmet details still to agree on?

That's a good spot on the gloss around the white bar. Makes me wonder whether a decal was used with a gloss black border? It would make sense to me to treat it like that unless the guys from the set can say otherwise, rather than assuming there are different applications of matte and gloss paint on the hard armour.

I'd echo that the views of the guys who saw it on set should be paramount in making the final call. I'm no expert, but I do a fair amount of eyeball colour matching for miniature painting and in the most natural lighting I'm definitely seeing a dark green-grey tint. Kind of reminds me of a "German Grey" from Vallejo that I use a lot to create the impression of black, while still contrasting with matte or gloss blacks slightly. I'd be surprised if the real thing wasn't close to that - maybe just a shade or two darker.

Some great insight into the costume already, brilliant to see. Like Blackwatch suggests, if we work down the list one item at a time until we've covered everything. Makes it much easier to avoid missing details, plus if anyone ever needs to refer back to the thread then all the discussion regarding the helmet, boots, chest armour, etc is all clustered in the same place. It's important to keep everything transparent and easy to follow, especially if this initial CRL will be used to build other varients as Felix suggests. Can't wait to see this one get finished!

Fully agree that whatever decisions are made, those with existing IAT clearances need to be listened to above and beyond anyone or anything else. Certainly more so than considerations over how merch run allowances will be impacted, or other random elements I've read elsewhere. So it will be great to see the views of our cleared members, and I have no doubt our staff will stand ready to support our members with whatever they choose.

Good job. Yes, I'd agree there's a slight curve to it, but a little sanding might be all you need to achieve that effect. If you can also fill in the gaps at the side, I'd say that model will give you a close approximation of what we see in the references.

We could use some more reference images of Gar Saxon's jetpack I think. The only one we have in the thread is close to the file that you link to above. My one concern is whether the orange cross shape in the centre of the missile tube is formed in that shape, or whether it is a square shape with the cross painted on (as the Etsy file seems to show).

Disney+ BTS special on Kenobi

Brilliant to see another hugely detailed build thread up, thanks a million Brad. This will be a huge help for any necessary CRL revisions, and in inspiring other builders. I'll also be curious to see the evolution to the P2 Purge Trooper and see how your's and Chris' work informs that CRL. Looking forward to seeing the rest of it!

Love the level of detail in the build thread. It's one of the single biggest encouragements to new builders - too often the "obvious" steps are taken for granted. If you're building for the first time, or even just building a different kind of kit for the first time, it can be very off-putting. Keep up the great work!

Huge thanks Christopher, that's a fantastic and thorough introduction to this great kit for all of us. You've also saved me a job, as I was planning to screenshot a bunch of angles from the FO photo mode myself to help ? The introduction to the Clone armour types is also very handy, as this was one of the first things we looked at after the transfer was complete. We might look at a slight rewording of some of the terminology that was very obvious to clone builders, but might need to be slightly more descriptive now. Now that we have your primer above, that should make this task many times easier!

One thing to start on the helmet - in several references you can see a red glow at the back of the helmet, which at first I thought was just a glare from the base lighting. But in a couple of shots (such as above) it seems to be a replication of the white light above the red light seen on the sides of the helmet (see below). My instinct is still that it's just a glare, but I can't be 100%. Has anyone seen any clear detailing on the back of the helmet yet that would clear that up?

I suppose we could break it down this way, we've got three different audiences for this: 1) Members/builders - 99% of the time they're just going to have to trust their supplier when they tell them something matches a CRL. 2) Suppliers/tailors - it makes sense to give them an accurate example, because as David said, many will go with a cheaper and less accurate fabric every time if they can get away with it. If we say "heavy woven canvas" or "Oxford weave canvas" and a tailor advertises that they are using that, a builder can be confident that it's accurate. It's the same reason the CRLs insist all armour be made from fibreglass, HIPS or ABS, even though obviously none of these exist in the Star Wars universe either. 3) GMLs - I'd agree with Anton that it's only the "look" they're going to care about. With the quality of clearance photos they're often working with, the types of weave will often be virtually impossible to tell apart. What about: "made of a heavy woven fabric with visible texture, such as Oxford weave canvas"? It gives a bit of latitude, but at the same time gives tailors and suppliers the incentive to go with Oxford weave as it's the only one specifically named as looking accurate. If we find another similar fabric later, there's nothing stopping us adding that to the CRL as another example. Makes it simpler for everyone?

Good stuff. @TX-20113 are you ok with that proposed change Anton?

Go with it ?

Very fair point David. I was kind of forgetting that we're talking about a relatively small number of people actually making these suits at the end of the day. I agree that anything we can do towards pushing them towards greater accuracy should be a priority. The only potential headache would be GMLs scratching their heads over what is or is not Oxford weave. Michelle made the point that some suppliers don't even mention the weave in the product description, while others will call it one weave when it's actually something else entirely. Anton said that even Jim Tripon's suit (for which the material does seem accurate) was described as being Oxford/duckweave canvas - when the two are completely different. Only so much we can do ourselves though, so do we go with Oxford weave only and hope that influences enough makers that the GMLs don't get too bothered by it?

This is the diagram that Michelle sent on explaining the Oxford weave. To me, it looks like a good match to what we're looking for in texture:

I heard back from Michelle at NerDIY and she confirmed that her material is oxford weave canvas. Essentially, each little "square" is made up of two heavy horizontal threads side by side, which are then crossed over by two heavy vertical threads side by side. That's where the visible texture comes from. However, just as importantly, she notes that many manufacturers and retailers do not accurately label their textiles, so it can be a lottery what you receive. Michelle had to order in a lot of test samples before she found one that was suitable for this particular flight suit. So the bigger concern is that it looks right, not the name that any retailer, manufacturer or tailor chooses to give it! So yes, I'd agree with @TX-20113that we should go with: "should be made from an oxford weave canvas, or similarly textured material". Is there enough evidence available that we should make "oxford weave canvas" a requirement for L2?

I think we're getting close, but I'm still not 100% clear on the language translating to the images. As I look at the reference images, I don't see the channel "terminating" where the tubes meet the cheeks. What I see instead is that the channel then turns 90 degrees downwards (cutting through the tubes) and terminates near the bottom of the helmet? If I'm understanding this correctly, then what about: A recessed channel runs around the ears and continues above and across the lower tubes. When this channel meets the front of the cheek, it turns 90 degrees downwards and bisects the lower tubes. The channel then terminates near the base of the helmet. This recess is painted black. I agree about not trying to add in measurements if they vary that much. Any designer or sculptor would never rely just on CRL text for that level of detail anyway.

I'd definitely agree myself. Don't want to be going down the Boba/Cpt Rex detail on paintwork/weathering, at least for L1! As for the channels, maybe add in that they're painted black as before, and Mark's extra detail about where they terminate?