PROPOSAL - MUDTROOPER CRL UPDATES (Complete)

[JAFO[TX]]

Whilst the Mudtrooper CRL is relatively young I would like to propose some updates for discussion.

Firstly I would recommend removal of Pantone 350U as a reference colour. Whilst we know it to be the actual base colour used during production it is a misleading reference for builders as it really needs the top layer of Pantone 433U to give the instantly recognisable Mudtrooper 'green'. The Pantone reference should be removed as OPTIONAL LVL TWO across the entire CRL. If a colour does need to be referenced elsewhere I would recommend Field Grey, or simply change text to "should appear a code match to the reference image".

For ease of review I will list the changes in order of the current CRL.

 

HELMET

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO remove reference to Pantone350U.

 

GOGGLES

Update image of the large Goggle strap buckle so it is in the correct orientation.

Under bullet point 5 change description sub bullet point three to “two black tri-glides on the right rear through which the 1.5in (40mm) elastic is threaded.

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO add “25mm webbing should be used to attached serrated buckle to goggles”

 

RESPIRATOR

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO remove bullet point four - reference to rubber trim.

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO remove reference to Pantone350U

UPDATE Third bullet point - “In the center of each tusk filter is a M4 hex socket cap screw.”

 

HOSES

No change

 

SCARF

No change

 

PONCHO

No change

 

TUNIC/JACKET

No change

 

CHEST ARMOUR

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO remove reference to Pantone350U

 

BACK ARMOUR

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO remove reference to Pantone350U

 

SHOULDER ARMOUR

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO remove reference to Pantone350U

 

BICEPS

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO remove reference to Pantone350U

 

GLOVES

No change

 

UPPER BELT

No change

 

LOWER BELT

ADD: “Lower belt is optional but is preferred for approval.”

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO remove reference to Pantone350U

 

PANTS

No change

 

SHINS

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO remove reference to Pantone350U

 

BOOTS

Under OPTIONAL LEVEL TWO remove reference of “Exact replicas of Soviet Officer Boots”

 

OPTIONAL ACCESSORIES

MEDIC BICEP

Update bullet point two to read “Right bicep is painted white with three heavily weathered yellow stripes on the cover strip”

OPTIONAL LVL TWO: Yellow stripes are painted in Montana Gold Yellow Cab

 

 

[merkava74[TX]]

Hi Darren, for the medic bicep, should there also be mention of the red insignia in addition to the 3 stripes? Seem to be missing. 

[JAFO[TX]]

1 minute ago, merkava74 said:

Hi Darren, for the medic bicep, should there also be mention of the red insignia in addition to the 3 stripes? Seem to be missing. 

Would make sense.

”Bicep includes red insignia which should match reference inage” ???

[merkava74[TX]]

1 minute ago, JAFO said:

”Bicep includes red insignia which should match reference inage” 

Sounds ok, except for the typo on image. Thanks! 

[GottMitUns205[501st]]

Shins should have top triangles as optional, they tended to fall off quite often during filming.

[Blackwatch[CMD-DCA]]

Thanks for the feedback guys. We are getting permissions set up to make CRL edits.  

I have already started to remove all Pantone references in Val's CRL.  I think its pretty clear from the WIPs, and from the Celebration photos that unless you have all your Pantone paint mixed at the same time and  applied by the same person its going to look vastly different. Thats just the nature of a paint.  Where in the hell do you get Pantone paint mixed???? I asked around and shops had no clue what I was talking about. 

 

[RAIDER[COTG]]

1 hour ago, GottMitUns205 said:

Shins should have top triangles as optional, they tended to fall off quite often during filming.

Wardrobe malfunctions (even if appearing in film) should not be considered optional.  LMO perspective (past and present) I recently discussed regarding a different costume is that the CRL should represent the majority and intended look of the costume as portrayed.

For example, I recently saw a Rogue 1 TK reference where the troopers kidney plate had come undone and was flipped over the butt plate.  It was in the film.  Optional look?  No of course not.  Simply being in the film, isn't necessarily sufficient for inclusion as an option.  Context of the scenes it's pulled from and the mainline Mudtrooper do have to be considered.  As another example, we have ANH TKs w/ duct tape among other unintended appearances/variants. They aren't accepted as options in the CRL for the same reasons.

Think bigger picture...if it's optional that means EVERY Mudtrooper could theoretically leave off the knee plates.  Would this represent the costume best?  I would argue it would not.

I'm in the Mudtrooper build group so I will also mention the absence of a respirator (I've seen one post-battle reference..context matters) since it will get mentioned at some point...are we ok with ALL Mudtroopers not having a respirator?  Does that represent the costume?  Again...take the context of where that reference was pulled from and think big picture.

[xAlpha[TX]]

If we're dropping references to specific Pantone colors (which I wholeheartedly support), we shouldn't also have references to a very specific, named yellow for the biceps, should we?

[areilly]

 

1 hour ago, xAlpha said:

If we're dropping references to specific Pantone colors (which I wholeheartedly support), we shouldn't also have references to a very specific, named yellow for the biceps, should we?

Then perhaps change it to "Similar to..." the named color? It seems a shame to discard the accurate color info since this is not a basic primary color like so many other kits.  Even if someone doesn't want to buy that specific paint, it still lets them google for an image and pick something close. For instance with the Yellow Cab color, I was able to pull it up on my phone, since I had a named color reference, and select a paint at my local craft store that was a very close match.  Granted, for most cases a standard red and standard yellow with weathering on top will end up pretty close.

Since we're fortunate enough to know the exact colors and layers used, it seems a shame to erase that information from the official record - many people who come across the CRL in the future may never know it otherwise.

And for the Pantone 350U/433U references, those are trickier, but maybe a similar wording change to "end result similar to 350U with a 433U topcoat" or "Most accurate color is similar to..."? I agree that we shouldn't require the specific Pantone colors - I know the expense and effort involved, and it's not reasonable to require that from everyone. As far as I know, I was the only one at celebration that attempted a Pantone paint match, and I also didn't get it quite right. I've already got a second batch of paint on the bench for a repaint - this time instead of some internet info, I got official color samples from Pantone to manually match the paint and I think i've finally got it after a slightly unreasonable amount of effort. My first batch had issues due to the matte finish appearing lighter and chalky in bright light - the fix was the rematch against reference samples, and a switch to satin/semi-gloss for a deeper color.

As an aside, the reason nearly all shops can't do anything with a Pantone code is two-fold: First off, PMS is a graphic design and print-focused color standard (hence the U for uncoated paper and C for glossy coated paper) and the CMYK and physical medium specs don't easily translate to paint. Also, I suspect there are licensing considerations with Pantone that most companies simply don't want to bother with. So far I know only one company (perfectcolor) that offers paint mixed to PMS codes without a manual match, and they are rather expensive.

[JAFO[TX]]

5 hours ago, xAlpha said:

If we're dropping references to specific Pantone colors (which I wholeheartedly support), we shouldn't also have references to a very specific, named yellow for the biceps, should we?

The colour of the yellow stripes and bicep red are very specific and do not require the interaction of another colour to look exact.

I’m comfortable that for LVL2 the exact paints are used.

[xAlpha[TX]]

Is a GML going to know the exact brand and color someone used? They're going to look at pictures and compare them, but all sorts of factors at play there.

[RAIDER[COTG]]

14 minutes ago, xAlpha said:

Is a GML going to know the exact brand and color someone used? They're going to look at pictures and compare them, but all sorts of factors at play there.

Correct.  A GML would not verify the color. They would go for “look” as they apply Level 1 standards.

At Level 2 though, our staff here at the detachment would do the review of a Specialist application and could ask for a picture verifying paint used.  It is intended to be a more rigorous review for higher standards.

I agree with @areilly.  If the paint is known I feel we should keep it and add “or similar” wording.  Likewise w/ the Pantone (which already states similar)...add in the additional color layerings with “or similar” type wording.  Or if the Pantones truly are that confusing, simply nail down the color “or similar” better for what the final look should be.

Again, thats a Level 2 requirement that shouldnt hold up an approval...but is reviewed here at the detachment more rigorously.

[xAlpha[TX]]

I like "or similar."

Given my background (I'm an historical reenactor), I'm going to do my damnedest to get it as accurate I can, so it doesn't matter to me personally in the long run. I just want us to be consistent. And obviously the red and yellow are way easier to match than a specific Pantone color.

[JAFO[TX]]

52 minutes ago, xAlpha said:

Is a GML going to know the exact brand and color someone used? They're going to look at pictures and compare them, but all sorts of factors at play there.

Submitting for LVL 2 you would be expected to share more detailed photos, incl. the paint used to complete the job, so the Detachment can sign off on it.

[RAIDER[COTG]]

@JAFO were specific paints ever nailed down for the armor or are we going w the same recommendations regarding the Pantone as Val?

[JAFO[TX]]

4 minutes ago, Raider said:

@JAFO were specific paints ever nailed down for the armor or are we going w the same recommendations regarding the Pantone as Val?

The armour is Colorite Technogrip 350U Matte Green layered with Colorite Technogrip 433U Grey. To complicate things the belt boxes were painted in Halford's Vauxhall Leaf Green, which ended up being the on-set touch up paint for the whole kit.

Whilst I feel specific colours are appropriate for the bicep and medic stripes Lvl 2 I feel the inclusion of the specific armour colours will be very limiting for all.

I suggest consistency in colour description across MT and Val.

[Bozzy[501st]]

Biggest one for me is making the lower belt optional as there is sufficient picture evidence of this. 

 

 

[RAIDER[COTG]]

That one I feel does have sufficient evidence...appears to have been a “mix it up”  option for combat-ready Mudroopers rather than a ”oops”.

That said, I will need the reference pictures in support of that posted here to add to our reference database for the costume.

[87ninefiveone[501st]]

While we’re on the topic of the lower belt, can we clarify the wording on the box requirements?

For reference, the CRL currently states:

The belt features six boxes.

• 1 x standard drop box on the right side of the belt.
• 2 x small and 2 x medium worn in he center of the belt.
• 1 x long drop box worn on the left of the belt.

What is a “standard” drop box? Who’s standard? From where, or what costume? I think these appear on the shoretrooper where they also annoyingly call them standard but haven’t seen them used elsewhere that I can think of off hand (*I’m not a CRL expert).

I think changing “standard” to “large box with drop box detail” or something similar and more generic would be helpful. The third requirement for a long drop box could then be changed to reference the long part being worn below the large belt mounted box.

 

[Bozzy[501st]]

Posting pics for optional lower belt. 

[RAIDER[COTG]]

Thanks @Bozzy I just created a Mud reference only post and will add any of these that are not already in there.  Thank you again!!!

[Blackwatch[CMD-DCA]]

On 5/12/2019 at 9:05 AM, 87ninefiveone said:

The belt features six boxes.

• 1 x standard drop box on the right side of the belt.
• 2 x small and 2 x medium worn in he center of the belt.
• 1 x long drop box worn on the left of the belt.

we can look at changing standard to larger. the long box is a one piece box on the belt, and is hinged for L2.

propose:

• 1 x large drop box on the right side of the belt.
• 2 x small and 2 x medium worn in he center of the belt.
• 1 x long drop box worn on the left of the belt. Drop box is longer than the large drop box on right of belt. 

[JAFO[TX]]

We need to add the DLT-19 to the optional weapons as well.

 

 

[quigontimm[TX]]

On 5/9/2019 at 8:52 AM, GottMitUns205 said:

Shins should have top triangles as optional, they tended to fall off quite often during filming.

I hadn't noticed that until getting the Solo MudTrooper six inch black series figure.  The right greave is missing the top plate.  

[quigontimm[TX]]

On 5/12/2019 at 10:05 AM, 87ninefiveone said:

While we’re on the topic of the lower belt, can we clarify the wording on the box requirements?

For reference, the CRL currently states:

The belt features six boxes.

• 1 x standard drop box on the right side of the belt.
• 2 x small and 2 x medium worn in he center of the belt.
• 1 x long drop box worn on the left of the belt.

What is a “standard” drop box? Who’s standard? From where, or what costume? I think these appear on the shoretrooper where they also annoyingly call them standard but haven’t seen them used elsewhere that I can think of off hand (*I’m not a CRL expert).

I think changing “standard” to “large box with drop box detail” or something similar and more generic would be helpful. The third requirement for a long drop box could then be changed to reference the long part being worn below the large belt mounted box.

 

Would it be appropriate to cite dimensions of each of the boxes?   Really, any of these descriptors are relative.  Dimensions would be the most definitive guidance.